For Fundies and Creationists: Happy 6009th birthday for the universe

[Walt Starr]

Bishop James Ussher Sets the Date for Creation
by Doug Linder (2004)

When Clarence Darrow prepared his famous examination of William Jennings Bryan in the Scopes trial, he chose to focus primarily on a chronology of Biblical events prepared by a seventeenth-century Irish bishop, James Ussher. American fundamentalists in 1925 found—and generally accepted as accurate—Ussher’s careful calculation of dates, going all the way back to Creation, in the margins of their family Bibles. (In fact, until the 1970s, the Bibles placed in nearly every hotel room by the Gideon Society carried his chronology.) The King James Version of the Bible introduced into evidence by the prosecution in Dayton contained Ussher’s famous chronology, and Bryan more than once would be forced to resort to the bishop’s dates as he tried to respond to Darrow’s questions.

The chronology first appeared in The Annals of the Old Testament, a monumental work first published in London in the summer of 1650. In 1654, Ussher added a part two which took his history through Rome’s destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D. The project, which produced 2,000 pages in Latin, occupied twenty years of Ussher’s life.


Ussher lived through momentous times, having been born during the reign of Elizabeth and dying, in 1656, under Cromwell. He was a talented fast-track scholar who entered Trinity College in Dublin at the early age of thirteen, became an ordained priest by the age of twenty, and a professor at Trinity by twenty-seven. In 1625, Ussher became the head of the Anglo-Irish Church in Ireland.

<snip>

The date forever tied to Bishop Ussher appears in the first paragraph of the first page of The Annals. Ussher wrote: “In the beginning, God created heaven and earth, which beginning of time, according to this chronology, occurred at the beginning of the night which preceded the 23rd of October in the year 710 of the Julian period.” In the right margin of the page, Ussher computes the date in “Christian” time as 4004 B.C.

<snip>

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/ussher.html

That makes the entire universe 6009 years old today.

Pretty amazing when we're looking at light from galaxies more than 18 billion light years distant from the earth!

[sarcasmo]

1. WWFSMD, brother and sister Pastafarians when is our birthday.

[NoPasaran]

2. 6009?

It doesn't look a day over 5500!

[noahmijo]

6. lol good Daily Show style joke there

:)

[Solly Mack]

3. Well, I think we should go by 4702 since everything in America

is made in China. :)

[sarcasmo]

4. You can't leave out Taiwan.

[Solly Mack]

7. True

[GreenPartyVoter]

9. *lol*

[Solly Mack]

11. I think it makes the most sense

it combines consumerism with religion - both sacred cows.

and it would fit into the war on terror

Terror!!! OMG!!! Go shopping!!

[ret5hd]

5. that god is quite a trickster, isn't he...

putting all those photons in just the right places to trick us, putting all those fossils in just the right places to trick us, putting all that similar dna in just the right places to trick us...

AND THEN, when we fall for it...WE GET SENT TO HELL!!! And ya' know why? Cause he LOVES US!

Boy, that god is quite a card, isn't he? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Solly Mack]

8. We prefer to call it "gotcha" religion

a lot like "gotcha" politics but with a burning bush instead.

[unpossibles]

10. it's what I call "Devilution" :) n/t

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[leeroysphitz]

13. Proven? Oh boy, here we go again... n/t

[Walt Starr]

15. Damn, I missed my own thread being trolled

:shrug:

It happens. Just wish I knew what he said.

[Ladyhawk]

14. Assertions and wild speculation are NOT proof!

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[Walt Starr]

16. What did he say?

I missed it.

[karlrschneider]

17. Drat, I did too.

;-)

[Ladyhawk]

20. Something asinine about how evolutionists deny proof of creationism.

He just made some assertions with no backup. :shrug: SSDD

[Warren DeMontague]

21. Did he look like THIS guy?

http://www.answersingenesis.org/museum/

(The funniest thing about the "answers in genesis" construction worker pictured above, by the way, is his Dr. Zaius Facial Hair.)

[Jose Diablo]

18. 6009? Are you sure?

I have carefully counted the begats and knew his wife's and I come up with the first day as being on Monday, March 22, 4024BC. Let me see, this is October 23, 2005AD so this means the universe is, hmmm 2005 +4024 -1(no zero year)=6028 years, plus some days. Of course I didn't add leap year days and didn't account for the 13 days lost to adjust the calendar in the middle ages, but it's still older by at least 17 years.

Can you redo your calculations to confirm this 6009 figure?

Truth is, I'd think the observations of second generation stars we see in the night skies and their spectral signatures indicating the presence of elements heavier than iron would indicate we will need those 17 years, and then some. The evidence of elements heavier than iron surely point to stars exploding. How else can they exist unless we are on the second generation stars?

As you are well aware, nuclear fusion results in releasing energy. This goes on, up and up into the heavier elements until Iron fuses with Iron, the results of that fusion does not produce energy, it takes more energy than it releases. Thus at that point the nuclear fire in the star goes out and the star collapses under gravitation and then explodes as the gravity pressure cannot compress the material further and matter bounces against itself. We've seen this with our own eyes. So how can we explain the presence of elements heavier than iron, without the explosions? We cannot. Yes, we need those 17 years, to be sure.

But the 6009 age is clearly a little low, even if we go 'by the book'.

[Walt Starr]

19. Bishop Ussher dedicated two decades of careful study to this

and came up with that date.

How long did you study?

[Jose Diablo]

22. Well, as for Bishop Ussher, I don't want to insult the dead

But as for your snarky "How long did you study?", I believe I can answer that well enough.

I don't think you read very well. You seem to take a joke and try to turn your answer to a joke, into an insult. Or maybe you do read well, and prefer to return insults were no insult was offered.

In many of your other posts, I've noticed you take stands I find repellent. I HOPE you find my posts as repellent, because you see, I don't like you very much at all. Never have actually. We are very far apart.

Being from the left, I consider you an intruder with what you call 'moderate' ideas that in the end will burn this party bad, but time will tell on that score.

Only 25 years ago, those so called 'moderate' ideas, would have been called Republican ideas. Oh no, I'm not calling YOU a Republican, after all, it is a big tent. And over time the media, and corporate money, has managed to change this party, moving the 'center' way to the right. So technically, in words only, those of the corporate arm of this party are still Democrats, for now anyway. But ideologically, there should not be anything corporate to this party. Remember the phrase, the party of the people? I wonder where that phrase comes from. Will corporations somehow become people and vote?

So Walt, why don't you sit on a feather and have a nice day, also.

Oh, here is a smiley for you also. Must never insult one on this board and we really need to keep it friendly, right?

Here, have 2. BTW, any relation to Brenda?

:) :)

[Walt Starr]

23. Fine

I don't give a shit how you feel. I answered your snarky response in kind.

And no, no relation.