ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

The Speed Of Light

How do you explain how we see light from stars that are millons of light years away when you believe the universe to be around 6,200 years old?

Moderator - You assume the speed of light was always at today's estimated speed. You also assume the speed of light is a set constant. However, both assumptions are incorrect.

Join Our Free Penpals and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---anonymousss on 5/18/07
     Helpful Blog Vote (6)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog

Very simple: the stars were placed in their present position when they were created.
---Gary_L on 6/22/07

MikeM: Bunk! Polonium in granite is worldwide - not "some granites." How do you explain the lack of transport trails? Granite was instantaneously created - it was not formed from cooling magma. If you melt granite and then let it cool, you get bassalt - not granite! It was also not formed by atomic replacement of minerals in solution as you suggest. Go back to school. You didn't learn enough.
---jerry6593 on 5/26/07

The fundamentalist 'premise' is wrong about the necessity for granites to form from magma where Po-halos are found, then the whole assumptive thesis is wrong. The refutation; Not all granites must be formed by crystallization from melts and granites that contain Po halos do not require instantaneous formation. They can be formed by replacement conditions that allow millions of years for their production and in purely natural environments.
---MikeM on 5/25/07

Some granites form at temperatures below melting conditions by chemical replacement processes. Thus is not just theoretical (assuptions) but has field, microscopic, and experimental support, like all of real science.
---MikeM on 5/25/07

Mike M: "Polonium halos debunked?" What pseudoscientific hogwash. The idea that you could "wash in" Polonium, with its 3.5 minute half-life, into all the solid granite foundation world wide without leaving any transport trails is utterly preposterous. It is Mike M that has been debunked!
---jerry6593 on 5/24/07

TS: "Nothing frivilous about it."

Are you telling me that debating something that divides Christians or cannot be proven will get you into heaven? People are important - not if dinosours ruled the world, nor about the different theories of creation, nor about endtime events, nor about the pre-, mid-, or post trib rapture. It's about glorifying God and it's about loving people. It's doing the two commandments that Jesus spoke of. Your truthful answer determines your eternal life.
---Steveng on 5/23/07

MikeM you always duck off onto new subjects unwilling to answer questions. A hit & run debater.

I don't believe the polonium halo idea has been disproved. Name your scientific source please.

I don't believe this to be a frivolous debate as people are defending the abslolute truth of God's Word & showing the flaws in the reasoning of others who insist Scripture is flawed. Jesus said defend me before man & I will defend you before the Father. There is no division between Jesus & His Word.
---Warwick on 5/23/07

Polonium halos argument has been disproved. Halos thought to be from polonium, a short-lived element produced decay of uranium, have been found in rocks. These were not produced by an initial concentration of the radioactive element. Rather water seeped through cracks in the minerals, a chemical change caused newly-formed polonium to drop out of solution at and almost immediately decay there. A halo would build up over a long period of time.
---MikeM on 5/23/07

SteveG: Nothing frivilous about it. Its not a debate but rather a discussion putting the pieces revealed in Scripture together in a methodic fashion. Why do you have a problem with it. Keep what is good and ignore the rest. We might learn something new here.
---TS on 5/23/07

I don't see Steveng has "blown a gasket".
Evebn if you disagree witgh his view, he has written reasonably without condemning other views.
And it really doesn't matter
---alan_of_UK on 5/23/07

"This is a frivolous debate", the favorite words of Steveng, as he rambles on and blows a gasket.
---SimonSays on 5/22/07

This is a frivolous debate. Different Christians have different answers. The subject is subjective, you cannot prove one way or another.

Besides, it's not our past that we need to concern ourselves, but the here and now that will determine our future. Debating what happened in the past will not get you into heaven. People today spend too much time on this subject when we are suppose to be concerned about the here and now, the decisions that will get us into heaven.
---Steveng on 5/22/07


"One does not need to be a scientist to gain scientific knolwedge"

Well as a scientist would say: "give us the proof of the pudding" then.
---Ed on 5/22/07

jerry: Earth was "formless and void" I think formless existed for ages being called into existence, which creates the Polonium Halos in an instant. Its the "Form" that was Created in genesis account of 6days. I think Heaven refers to the atmosphere and near earth solar objects. God created before this because of time for "War to break out in heaven" prior to Eden. Heb1:2 Speaks of Worlds. Greek indicates inhabited worlds. God will surely tell us when we get there :)
---TS on 5/22/07

TS & John: I don't think that God was indebted to pre-existent matter in the creation of the earth. Remember the Polonium halos, and the fact that "He spoke and it stood fast." As for when the universe was created, what do you make of:

Exo 20:11 For in SIX DAYS the LORD made HEAVEN and earth
---jerry6593 on 5/22/07

Ed: "how do you know? Are you a scientist?"

Does a doctor need to have cancer in order to treat a patient that has cancer? Any person having basic research skills can find any piece of information about anything. Or find a person who has the knowledge. One does not need to be a scientist to gain scientific knolwedge.
---Steveng on 5/21/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


As a Roman Catholic i have to say don't the mistakes the Catholic Church made about Galileo and others about the nature of the universe.
The important thing is surely, that God was behind creation. Science is a friend of religion. It has shown just how majestic and glorious creation really is - far more effectively than any theoligian can.

The important focus we should have as Christians, issues that never change are: the nature of God, the teachings of Christ, etc..
---Ed on 5/21/07

john: Seems something existed before earth became filled. Afterall, war was in Heaven, Devil cast down ended up in Eden to demonstrate his rule if it were allowed to go unchecked

Earth was formless & void. For how long we're not told. We know God is from everlasting to everlasting. Its possible the earth is old & the "forms" added are 6000 yrs. Recorded History starts where the Bible says after the flood. Surely men were not dumb for millions of years only to write 4000 years ago?
---TS on 5/21/07

You are also assuming that the universe is only 6,000 years old. I never heard that one before. I have heard it said that the earth is that old, but that doesn't make sense to me either.
I would have to guess that the universe is so old that it's age is inconceivable to us.
---John on 5/21/07

E=MC2 according to Einstein. Even he said it was the best approximation we have for now

The C is the speed of light in a vaccum. That C has never been fully determined because a perfect vaccuum devoid of anything has never been created.

Even the most complete vaccum known; Space has an Ocean of small particles Neutrinos flowing thorugh it. The earth and everything on it has these particles passing thorugh as if we do not exist. So what is C? 186Kmiles/Sec or 1,000,000miles/Sec?
---TS on 5/21/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol

"Moderator - You assume the speed of light was always at today's estimated speed. You also assume the speed of light is a set constant. However, both assumptions are incorrect"

- how do you know? Are you a scientist?
---Ed on 5/21/07


You would need to ask that to the unbelievers and liberal Christians as that is to whom the response was directed. Of course creationism scientist articles are just as good, but that group of people don't accept them.
---Moderator on 5/21/07

I am the original blog creator.Thank you all. I understand now. In fact I am a believer, I only worded the question as though I was an athiest so I could get more statistical responses. So I have an answer for an athiest friend of mine. Because recently we have been consulting topics such as this one
---Jon_NPV on 5/20/07

Moderator- why are 'creationism' articles written by qualified scientists different & apparently less acceptable than other scientific articles upon any subject?

I would like an answer.
---Warwick on 5/20/07

Shop For Church Pews

Our minds cannot conceive God's mind. We could never conceive what God does either. The speed of light is one topic that confounds the minds of men as mentioned in Scripture. How do we know that God created light to reach all parts of the universe at the time He created it 6,200 years ago.(I thought about these same questions as an amateur astronomer becoming president of the Monterey Park Astronomical Society for three years in the late 1970s. Now taken over by the Los Angeles Astronomical Society)
---Steveng on 5/20/07

In 1738: 303,320 +/- 310 km/second
In 1861: 300,050 +/- 60 km/second
In 1877: 299,921 +/- 13 km/second
In 2004: 299,792 km/second (accepted constant)

Setterfield and Norman, SRI, July 1987
---jerry6593 on 5/20/07

there are at least four other major observed anomalies consistent with a slowing speed of light:

quantized red-shift observations from other galaxies,

measured changes in atomic masses over time,

measured changes in Planck's Constant over time,

and differences between time as measured by the atomic clock, and time as measured by the orbits of the planets in our solar system.
---jerry6593 on 5/20/07

Recent observations of the signals received from the aging satellites Galileo, Ulysses and Pioneer are also in the category of speed of light anomalies. An unexplained Doppler frequency shift has been detected from all of these satellites. NASA scientists have attempted with little success to attribute the anomalies to an unknown acceleration. Setterfield suggests that equally plausible explanations are variations in c.
---jerry6593 on 5/20/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


We don't post websites, journals, books, etc. on ChristiaNet which is why all I can do is point everyone in the correct direction. One could use the search engines on is the speed of light constant and then view various science journals not creationism articles.
---Moderator on 5/19/07

Something to keep in mind is that a "light-year" is a measurement of DISTANCE, not TIME. It is the distance light travels, at its current speed, in one year. If light traveled faster it would cover the same distance in less time.
---Anthony on 5/19/07

** Jack and MikeM, I have already pointed the bloggers in the correct direction.**

I see nothing in this blog where you have said any such thing.

No harm would come in summarizing here, if what you have said is factual.
---Jack on 5/19/07

1. The argument that light slowed enough to 'fit' a 10,000 year old universe is delusional. Light does curve. I read a Creationist who argued decreased a millionfold, and faraway objects are being seen in very, very slow motion. Astronomical objects pulsate at known frequencies - specifically, pulsars and Cepheid variable stars. The frequencies of these objects are known to be independent of distance. Cepheids near us in the Milky Way run at the same speed as Cepheids in other galaxies.
---MikeM on 5/19/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion

2.The scientific community ignores fundamentalist claims because the constancy of physical law is much studied and fundamentalist 'models' fly against all laws of artronomy. Ex Nihilio is what most fundamentalist retreat to when pressed on this issue.

It is curious, of all the physical sciences, more Astronomers are found believing in the creator than from any other science. (according to Richard Dawkins)
---MikeM on 5/19/07

its called the miracle of creation, God sets CONSTANTS ASIDE.DID YOU KNOW THAT?
---tom2 on 5/19/07

Moderator: You are absolutely correct. The speed of light has consistently slowed since it was first accurately measured by Olaf Roemer in the late 17th century. I found a good summary article posted July 31, 2004 on WorldNetDaily. It has slowed an astonishing 7% since the first measurements. (Compare that to all the golbal warming hype over 0.6 deg/100 yrs.) The slowing is not linear, but rather exponential, and one author's model shows it going infinite 6000 years ago. Fancy that!
---jerry6593 on 5/19/07

Interesting thoughts. Who can answer such things? Heres one. God says that He is Truth and outside of Truth/Him there is NOTHING. That sure puts our notion of infinity to shame if outside of God/Truth NOTHING EXISTS. How can a human concieve of the existence of nothing existing beyond God and the concept of our actual world within our sphere of God's creation as finite? Unusual thought. Right? Goes along with pondering our belly buttons. ha But, it is from the Bible.
---jody on 5/19/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause

Jack and MikeM, I have already pointed the bloggers in the correct direction. For more information, please research the science journals as they can best answer whatever questions you may have.
---Moderator on 5/19/07

Moderator, can you give us the date when the speed of light changed and either accelerated or decelerated from what to what?

Thank you.
---Jack on 5/19/07

The speed of light is constant, this is objective reality. One cannot truncate the timeline based on a subjective belief-if you claim to then you have replaced science with belief. The speed of light is no assumption, if so then the atom was never split. The equation is a a set constant.
---MikeM on 5/19/07

Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.