Hubble's Law Disproves Young Earth Creationism

OK, sure. I'll say that it doesn't completely rule out a young universe. But all I said was: And I do still think it is one of the larger pieces of evidence, if not totally conclusive.Maybe it was the title? How I said it disproves YAC. I still haven't seen a good argument against what I said in the op however.Edited by Calvin, : No reason given.

Fair enough.
And I agree

If you are going to address Young Earth Creationism it would be a good idea to learn just how absurd the Cult can be. Stop and first look at what the YECs present as support for their fantasy and then see if you can match an old Earth evidence against a specific YEC assertion.But remember, it will be very much like poking needles into jello. Pull the needle out and the hole gets healed and no sign of any damage done.

I think that the idea you're attempting to convey includes a lot more than the words you wrote in your OP (original/opening post) imply if those words are taken standing alone.I think that you are absolutely correct about the idea you are attempting to convey... that Hubbles Constant, coupled with the evidence behind the Big Bang Theory and all wrapped inside the current knowledge of astrophysics... all completely destroys and leaves no other possible conclusion than "YEC is false."However, we've been around these arguments a while
And we understand that you're not likely to get much YEC-response to your post. Possibly because of lack-of-ability to properly deal with your argument, or possibly because of lack-of-YEC-believers-willingness-to-participate at all (maybe even simply because there's not many of them left!)So, in knowing what your argument was, and also knowing that you weren't likely going to get much of a debate with any actual YECs... we've turned to the next best thing. Dissecting your argument for various reasons...
-out of boredom (with few YECs around, we don't have much else to do... )
-out of a willingness to help you form clear and concise arguments in the future
-out of a desire to point out arguments that contain flaws regardless of them coming from a YEC or "someone we agree with"
-out of knowledge that dealing-with-YECs is not generally a dealing-with-facts sort of argument... therefore, if you're going to use facts, you need to have them "air-tight."
-probably a bunch of other reasons I can't think ofAgain, I think that the idea you had in mind certainly does do what you claim it does.
Folks are just pointing out that the words-you-used-to-describe-your-idea didn't include all-the-necessary-parts-of-your-idea in order to form all the connections to the conclusion-you've-claimed.Granted... perhaps in order to include all-the-necessary-parts-of-your-idea you may need a lot of data and words, and it can seem overwhelming if not generalized and truncated correctly to begin with. But, well, that's all part of forming a good argument that, to me, is best learned by experience.Anyway... try not to take any of this personally, we can also be a bunch of tools Have fun!

Not strong enough in my opinion. The number of folks who
1. Accept Creationism
2. Are not utterly clueless with respect to science knowledge
3. Willing to argue about it on the InternetHas to be a vanishingly small percentage of YEC folk. Most of the folks who could be convinced are not YEC anymore. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Fixed that for you!

Hi. Here is a little equation saying the Hubble Constant (Ho) can only reveal the Hubble Horizon Distance, which is NOT the age of the universe.Hubble Constant (Ho) Hubble Horizon Distance light years calculated from Ho of 70.9449 k/s/Mpc.oneMpc X C, divided by Ho, and then divided by one billion = 13.7758 billion light YearsIn this equation, directly input the values below:-oneMpc is 3260000 light yearsC (local) is 299792.458 k/sHo is 70.9449 k/s/Mpcone billion is 1,000,000,000 used to give the answer in convenient units of
billions of light years.Note:- This Hubble Horizon Distance equation prevents falsifying the terminology of
declaring light years as years only.

I can't follow the maths, but does that mean that light-years are calculated incorrectly?

Phat. There is a secular conspiracy to falsify the Hubble Horizon Distance which is in light years units, and claim it to be as years only. "They" do this by "fiddling" the Ho reciprocal equation by cancelling the distance units, leaving only years.

It must be a very small and ineffectual conspiracy if I’ve never heard of the idea they are pushing.

Do you know the age of the universe? Does any human?Here at EvC, most of us are non-believers. (I am a believer, however)The existence of GOD--Creator of all seen and unseen is an article of faith made possible by His Son (His character).Many here do not believe that the Son ever existed. They only see evidence of thousands of gods described by millions of humans. Math won't impress them unless you can prove the data sound and somehow link it up with God's existence.

According to the data (which is how science answers any question), the universe is 13.7 billion years old.--Percy

OK. What steps did it take to extrapolate the data into an age? Is that the closest educated approximation that humans have? Does it assume that light is a constant throughout time? Where does the starting point start, and when does it start?I have never been a YEC nor even a "Creationist" for that matter. In a sense I define myself only as a Cosmological Creationist in that I believe that matter and creation itself originated from a Creator rather than simply eternally being inert matter compressed into a "beginning". (Singularity).Quick joke that I just made up:Whats the difference between a singularity and a Creator?A: A singularity has no Son.

You actually asked a complicated question, or at least one that involves a lot of detail. If someone took the trouble to describe it all at a layperson level, is what you'd do with that information worth someone going to all the time and effort, especially as there would invariably be a degree of back and forth? Why would I give you our 2nd best or 3rd best answer? This is a truly complicated question, but one part of the answer is that the speed of light can be derived from Maxwell's equations: The "where" is 13.7 billion light years away. Interestingly, no matter where you are in the universe, the starting point will always be 13.7 billion light years away. The "when" is 13.7 billion years ago.--Percy

HiPercy, you are correct saying the 13.778 billion light years number starts from anywhere. It the "Hubble Horizon Distance in light yearsin any direction from the observer.