Re: [asa] Yes -- the YECs are still winning

From: Iain Strachan <>
Date: Mon Mar 30 2009 - 15:15:39 EDT

On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:03 PM, wjp <> wrote:
> I have no idea what someone means by the "appearance of age."
> All our knowledge of what is called the natural world is
> completely founded upon appearances.

Let's make it simple. We know light travels at 300000 Km/s. The
stars were created on day four, Adam was created on day 6, 4004 BC.
Presumably he can see the stars that were created. Stellar parallax
allows us to determine the distances of stars, apparently up to 2000
Ly. The belt of Orion (mentioned in Job 38:31) consists of three
stars that are respectively 900, 1300 and 800 light years distant.
Since Adam could see them (presumably) the light from the middle star
would have had to start its journey to earth in the year 5304 BC. But
it was created in 4004 BC. Hence "appearance of age". A stream of
photons illustrating events (e.g. variations in brightness, proper
motions of the star), would have to be created apparently depicting
events that took place 1300 years before creation.

Unless you are prepared to tell me that Adam never saw the middle star
of Orion's belt because it only appeared in the sky 370 years after he

A friend of mine who's a pretty competent astronomer and is a YEC as
well has stated that there are NO current viable solutions to the
distant starlight problem & he concedes that there has to be some form
of "appearance of age". I do not understand you you can say you have
no idea what "appearance of age" means. It's the only way a YEC
viewpoint can retain any credibility at all.

So in a nutshell: Could Adam see Mintaka (the middle star of Orion's
belt) & if so how old did it appear to be?


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Mar 30 15:17:03 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 30 2009 - 15:17:03 EDT