What happens if I do this? Freeze myself, eve online style

[Lazarus]

"low yield stable banks"

...

That's an interesting concept. I'd say it's similar to the notion that there might be "honest politicians" out there somewhere.

 

[silverleaf]

"low yield stable banks"

...

That's an interesting concept. I'd say it's similar to the notion that there might be "honest politicians" out there somewhere.

@Lazarus
Implying that all politicians are crooks? Most, yeah but wouldn't say all. Same as banks, there are stable ones that have been around since well... forever. Particularly the STATE BACKED ones. Interest may be horrible, but still enough to keep up with inflation.

5 oldest banks in the world
http://www.mint.com/blog/finance-core/the-five-oldest-banks-in-the-world/

 

[Durruck]

and it's a tad early for me to be pondering end of life questions. However if there is a way to double my life expectancy, I'd be a fool to say no.

Actually, no it's not. If it was too early for you to consider end-of-life questions, you would have no need to decide if you needed and accepted Jesus. If you're old enough to hear, it's time to start hearing about Jesus. Jesus even quoted Deuteronomy 6:

4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. [a] 5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. 7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. 8 Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. 9 Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.

Children as young as two start to mimic the people closest to them. They're already learning. Should they be learning how to pray, how to worship, how to tithe, how to love one another? Or should we just wait until they're 38 years old and hope they can make all the right changes?

@durruck
true, I get your point. Here Christianity is growing by the day and everything is as fine as can be. Granted I can see faith is pretty strong on this forum.

I'm thrilled to hear that it's growing rapidly where you are. And yes, this forum is a safe-haven, a Jesus-loving place. And so far, the internet is unregulated. But here in the US, there have been multiple attempts at legislation that starts regulating the net, as a whole. Like you, I generally see governmental regulation as a bad thing. Communities (such as this) that regulate themselves seem to be better off than government-sponsored counterparts.

I live in a multicultural place, most of us are *moderate*, confident in our salvation, do what we can, but I don't think many of my peers are willing to devote their entire life into the Gospel just yet. Sure there are some, but not most of us. However things seem to be going pretty well here, definitely not the persecution and dystopia you suggest. Is it that different where you are?

I would say the climate is much the same here, among believers. Generally speaking, the churches are kinda full of people that usually show up, maybe give a little in the offering, sometimes will help with a special project. Very few (based on percents) truly dedicate their lives to God.

And I'd like to add this: dedicating your life to God does not mean that you have to turn over 100% of your income, quit your job, and become a missionary or pastor. Only some are called to that level of commitment. But the majority can live our lives for God, doing local missions, helping to mow grass at the church every week, teaching a class once in a while, or helping with some other various projects that are in our field of specialty. But I can do as much good for the Gospel by staying in my current profession, finding people to reach out to that I would otherwise be unable to reach. Because of what I do, I go into people's home on the worst moments of their lives, and get to talk to them, get the details that they don't even share with their families, and get to give them whatever feedback I deem appropriate. There have been several times that my recommendations have included "talk to a priest or pastor - I can recommend one if you don't have one" ... to people that normally wouldn't consider church an option. If I leave my job, I lose that route.

But in the church, one of my most visible tasks is to help prepare the sanctuary for worship and clean up afterward. Nobody sees me do it, but they sure notice if I don't do it. *grin* It's not difficult, uses very little time, but it's a job that needs to be done. There are dozens of little jobs like this that need done every week.

I also happen to lead a youth group, teach a class, and plan church events, but those are things that I grew into as I saw a need. I didn't just take them up without serious consideration and prayer about my work schedule, school schedule, family time, etc.

As for the non-believing population, there are a few voices that are driving Christianity back underground. If you read on the life of Madalyn Murray O'Hair, you'll see she was a big part of removing public prayer, and the catalyst for removing the 10 Commandments and other Christian-based works from most public buildings.

The Supreme Court (the highest court in the US) has ruled against Christianity on several topics, even twisting the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment (it says that the government will not establish a national religion). However, the courts have used it to rule against Christian-specific agendas. Unfortunately, now that there have been cases settled using it, the unwritten applications become part of established case law in the US, and it takes the Supreme Court overturning their previous decisions to nullify it... so all the lower courts are forced to apply the rules the same way.

Now, if you are that dedicated to the Faith, wouldn't you like 200 more years to evangelize down here? It's not that I want immortality, but another few dozen years would be nice if I ever make it in life.

Nope, I wouldn't. Like the Apostle Paul, I believe that to live is Christ, to die is gain. (Read Philippians 1:15-26 for a better understanding). He wasn't suicidal, but he understood that there was no reason to try to do anything to prolong his life. He will preach as long as he's here, then move on to be with Christ. Why mess with a good thing?

 

[silverleaf]

Actually, no it's not. If it was too early for you to consider end-of-life questions, you would have no need to decide if you needed and accepted Jesus. If you're old enough to hear, it's time to start hearing about Jesus. Jesus even quoted Deuteronomy 6:

Because I may die in my sleep tonight, though since I was told 'it's free, no strings attached' I'd be a fool to decline.

I would say the climate is much the same here, among believers. Generally speaking, the churches are kinda full of people that usually show up, maybe give a little in the offering, sometimes will help with a special project. Very few (based on percents) truly dedicate their lives to God.

Well the population I see on this forum seems to be *much* more 'religious' than the average Christian, even though this is supposedly for gamers which I assume to be younger folk and usually younger = less religious.

Nope, I wouldn't. Like the Apostle Paul, I believe that to live is Christ, to die is gain. (Read Philippians 1:15-26 for a better understanding). He wasn't suicidal, but he understood that there was no reason to try to do anything to prolong his life. He will preach as long as he's here, then move on to be with Christ. Why mess with a good thing?

If you had a heart attack, would you want to be resuscitated? If not, you better put in a not for resuscitation order right now. You know you are unconscious before they start CPR, defib you and take you to the ICU? I think it is basically the same process, just that you are unconscious A LOT longer. And that is what I'm worried about, that I will be neither alive nor dead, trapped between two worlds. There has been reports of people passing out in the operating table and being able to see everything going on around them, only to wake up again. Weird thing is, they remember everything, and can even ask the surgeon 'what did you do X for'? And they had no idea how the patient could have known. I don't want to be stuck like that, unable to move in some 3rd person camera on my frozen body for 200 years. Rather die, thank you!

The Supreme Court (the highest court in the US) has ruled against Christianity on several topics, even twisting the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment (it says that the government will not establish a national religion). However, the courts have used it to rule against Christian-specific agendas. Unfortunately, now that there have been cases settled using it, the unwritten applications become part of established case law in the US, and it takes the Supreme Court overturning their previous decisions to nullify it... so all the lower courts are forced to apply the rules the same way.

Ain't got the 1st amendment here (wish we had), but laws here governing religion are pretty fair I believe, we're free to do whatever we want so long as no one gets hurt and we don't interfere with other religions, who are also free to do whatever they want without hurting anyone.

But here in the US, there have been multiple attempts at legislation that starts regulating the net, as a whole. Like you, I generally see governmental regulation as a bad thing.

Problem is stopping people from saying it doesn't make them stop doing it. We would be hurt as much, or even more, than the stuff we're campaigning to get blocked if the ISP level filters go up.


Thanks for your thoughts on this, think I'm NOT going to risk it. Being stuck on death cam for 200 years just isn't worth the risk. However not sure what I will do once I'm told I only have 6 months to live and get desperate though.

 

[DannyMeister]

OK, serious discussion aside...

Supposing cryogenics could really keep you "alive" frozen for hundreds of years, then supposing that a Left Behind style Rapture occurred, would the frozen bodies disappear like the fully alive people or stay in their tubes? Discuss! j/k

 

[silverleaf]

There is going to be a 'resurrection' but there is little mention in the bible itself about our earthly bodies being brought back to life. I always assumed it was a new body.
As for floating up to heaven like helium balloons, there is little mention about it. Taken up to heaven as in your soul, don't think it involves your body. Plus the possibility of rapture within 200 years is slim at best, as we have yet to have

For many will come in my name, saying, I am Christ, and will mislead many.

Sure we have some false prophets, the one or two mad men claiming to be the Christ, but have yet to deceive many.

And many false prophets will arise, and will mislead many.

Some of these have happened, with several cults, Islam, Mormons, you name it! Not going to elaborate as I don't wanna get killed. But not yet of an epic scale... though it has started.

And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

Unless you count minor skirmishes between chaotic places in the middle east and africa. And it seems to be dying down. People have been slaughtering each other since the beginning of time. Wars in Africa has only decreased in the past decade.

and there shall be famines.

We've halved world poverty in the past few years. Together, lets make poverty history. Sounds familiar? http://www.makepovertyhistory.com.au/
It's NGOs like these that I base my hopes of a better world when I am unfrozen on. And the Church, which supports them of course.

And pestilences, and earthquakes, in diverse places.

We haven't been having a lot of them lately, in fact the WHO is doing a great job keeping diseases controlled. Life expectancy is on the increase. However this is one thing not many can plan against, a new epidemic can rise up tonight from some hybrid multi drug resistant thing that causes you to explode.

MOST IMPORTANTLY:

All these are the beginning of sorrows

When these things happen, we still have some time. Though I wouldn't want to live in such a world.

So looks like it's going to take a while. Widespread persecution, global wars, a ton of false prophets, rampant cult conversion don't just happen overnight. Unless of course, you believe these teachings from some church/group that is saying the end is neigh: http://contenderministries.org/prophecy/endtimes.php

Oh yeah and the temple has to be rebuilt. If it means the temple where the Islamic Dome of the Rock thing is on it, NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Too many people protecting it. Can't just waltz in, demolish everything and start building. If it means the Church will get stronger, then that is up to debate, seem to have quite a lot of us now.

These things are unlikely to be able to happen so fast, going to be gradual. And it will take way longer than 200 years even if it starts RIGHT NOW. My concerns is if there is an earthquake in 100 years time and my tube is left underground till the end times, and I end up waiting 2000 years instead of 200.

It is from a church/community claiming that we're actually already in the end times.

Also, worried that I will be in 'death cam' view till I'm revived, like most descriptions of near death encounters. To be honest, that would really make my faith stronger as I would see what happens in the hereafter. Gotta experience it to be 100% doubtless.

 

[Lazarus]

Faith is the assurance of things not seen, silverleaf. >_>

 

[silverleaf]

Yep but while I have faith and am pretty confident, I don't think anyone can be 100% sure. Faith wavers at times. To hear His voice would be really convincing, instead of one sided conversations. But I'm not sure if I actually WANT a face to face dialog with Jesus. I may not survive the encounter.

 

[Durruck]

Well the population I see on this forum seems to be *much* more 'religious' than the average Christian, even though this is supposedly for gamers which I assume to be younger folk and usually younger = less religious.

Sorry, when I originally said "here," I meant middle of nowhere USA. I tried to notate places where I was talking about the forums more specifically. The forums is a different place for various reasons, but we are not an average cross-section of society.

I also disagree with your assumption about younger = less religious. Jesus even comments about how adults should have faith "like a child." I would say that the kids coming into my youth group (and hopefully, the ones that graduate on to the next level) seem to have "more faith" than the average adult in the church. But with time, a great number of them will get bitter, busy, and neglectful with their faith.

If you had a heart attack, would you want to be resuscitated?

Splitting hairs, but you were talking about sudden cardiac death or progression through lethal rhythms, not just a heart attack. Most people live through their heart attacks with little-to-moderate long-term effects.

But for my long-term plans, I have established my advanced directives with my family, advising them of exactly what I want in various scenarios. Most bad scenarios end with "pull the plug and let me die."

It is from a church/community claiming that we're actually already in the end times.

Be leery of anyone that says "This person is the Antichrist" or "This is the day that the world will end." It's all just speculation and wild guessing. No matter how much "proof" they think they have, Jesus tells us that only the Father knows when Jesus is coming back.

I don't think anyone can be 100% sure. Faith wavers at times.

Just because we change does not meant that God does. We have to realize that places where we rely upon our own understanding or strength are the places we are most likely to fail. That's the beauty of faith. It's okay to say "I don't know" or "I don't understand" and just leave it at that.

To hear His voice would be really convincing, instead of one sided conversations.

Perhaps. Most Christians go through life without needing to hear God speaking to have faith. They are the blessed, with the point being what Lazarus said. While I haven't had an encounter to rival Saul's conversion, God has spoken to me. I don't consider myself anyone because God spoke to me... but rather I'm a bit ashamed because I was so hard-headed that God needed to take extreme measures to get me to listen.

Now that I believe, I know to respond to the Spirit's urging, and am starting to recognize when God is leading me towards a goal.

 

[silverleaf]

On the last part,

You have seen and believed, blessed is the man who believes on faith alone

Believe Jesus was talking to Thomas or another of the 12

However, I'd say many Christians have experienced the grace of God that they can be sure it's from Him, or at least witnessed it done to someone else. My church (well don't really have a home base church but the one I've been frequenting), even published a book where people just share their experiences.

I also disagree with your assumption about younger = less religious. Jesus even comments about how adults should have faith "like a child." I would say that the kids coming into my youth group (and hopefully, the ones that graduate on to the next level) seem to have "more faith" than the average adult in the church. But with time, a great number of them will get bitter, busy, and neglectful with their faith.

That's because kids generally don't question what a figure of authority tells them. They are too young to really think for themselves, that's why we must be careful not to let them hear radical ideas. You know kids believe everything you say and will do anything for you if they trust you enough...

 

[Durruck]

You are correct. I was Thomas that Jesus was speaking at. Thomas needed to "see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side" to believe that Jesus was resurrected from the dead (John 20:25, NIV).

There are various things that Christians will tell you about why they believe. It's a little different for each of us, but the ones that don't need to see or hear God, but just feel His grace are the ones that are blessed for their faith.

That's because kids generally don't question what a figure of authority tells them.

You'd actually be surprised how much my teens ask questions, and make statements like "yeh, the teacher told us XYZ in school, but that just doesn't make sense to me."

They are comparing various information and deciding what to believe. I encourage my students to talk with their parents about what I teach. I encourage them to read the Bible and look up the Scripture that I teach - read it for themselves, and see if they think it means the same thing I told them.

I tell them to doubt me, because I am a fallible man. My wife will agree. *grin* But I tell them to double-check me. Most of them don't, but the ones that take their faith seriously - embrace it as their own...not just because their parents believe or I believe...but because they honestly believe and want to follow Christ - they do double check me, they do study the Bible with their families, they do work through devotionals.

that's why we must be careful not to let them hear radical ideas.

Which of these two is the more radical ideas:

1) There is a supernatural authority named "I AM" that created everything, allows us to sin against Him, but because He loves us, came down Himself to teach us the way and to save us from ourselves.

2) We're here by random chance and millions or billions of years. There was an explosion (or rapid decompression of stuff, that nobody can explain where the stuff came from, despite the fact that Newton's 2nd Law of Conservation of Matter says you can't just create something out of nothing). Over millions of years, some puddle of slime on a rock spontaneously erupted into life. From that point, we probably evolved from a single-celled organism, progressing through time (via mutation, which is actually the term used to describe losing data, rather than adding more specific structures), eventually becoming apes and later diverging again and becoming mankind.

Which is more radical?

Which is taught in schools?

 

[Grimbeorn]

You'd actually be surprised how much my teens ask questions, and make statements like "yeh, the teacher told us XYZ in school, but that just doesn't make sense to me."

Just one thing I want to throw out here: In Jewish society, childhood is considered to be over at 13. So when the Bible tells us to have faith like a child, it isn't telling us to have faith like a teenager. Teenagers are at the point in their lives where they are questioning everything and deciding for themselves what they are going to believe. Because of that, faith is not generally their strong point (though there are always exceptions). Younger children, however, will take most things for granted.

Now, the Bible also tells us to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12) and to be careful of false teachings. I take the combination of these to mean that we should accept any teaching found in the Bible without question, but any teaching received from man needs to be tested against Biblical teaching.

 

[silverleaf]

@Grimbeorn Jesus once referred to a girl of about 13 as 'child'. Guess she was in transition then.

@Durruck well sure, if they have been brought up to question. But kids under 12 usually don't think for themselves. I didn't. Just believed basically everything mom and dad told me, UNLESS I was presented with conflicting information then only I would seek it out.

By radical ideas, I meant extremest. Also I'm not going to discuss evolution here because it will probably blow up REAL fast. Suffice to say I believe it is the way God works, most of the drugs you use have accounted for evolution. To put it simply, there was this butterfly problem in UK. When smog comes, a lot of those with dark wings can blend in and survive to pass on their genes. When no smog, they die fast, and the tiny proportion of white ones that survive to pass on their genes dominate the species once more. Now if we had smog across several generations, soon the white winged ones will completely die out. Also, you believe that you resemble your parents, no?
Not nothing created something which will be come nothing though. God made nothing become something which He will make into something else.

Evolution does not deny or prove that there is a God

-David Attenborough

Evolution is the way God works

-some russian bishop

But I'm not 100% sure on this, and so I can't make a stand because I don't really know what I'm taking about.

 

[Durruck]

You're referencing two different ideas.

Micro evolution is scientifically sound, proven, and repeatable. That is change within a species - your butterfly example is this kind of evolution. This process neither confirms nor denies the existence or interaction by a Creator. The Bible is not supported or refuted by this process. It is quite possible that God gave us the process of adaptation to sustain us.

Macro evolution is the idea that cats can become dogs with enough time and mutation (which again, removes data from genetic coding). The problem is that 2nd grade science contradicts this idea. Any two animals of the same species can breed and reproduce. So your friendly little puppy can mate with a wolf and make another dog. Your little kitty can mate with a puma, lion, or tiger and make another batch of nasty kitties. But your cat and your dog cannot cross-breed at all. Apes and humans cannot breed to make anything. Cows and goats, sheep and pigs, giraffes and bears....

But all dogs are close enough genetically to breed with any other canine. The point that it becomes an illogical jump is the point that the first cat became a dog. You need two of them at the same time to have the same genetic mutation (which any two animals in the same litter will not generally have the same mutations, so even within a litter the chance of being able to reproduce is minuscule, at best). This process is directly contradicted by the Bible (God created everything and Adam named all the types - Genesis 2). This process potentially removes the possibility of a Creator. Plus, it doesn't logically follow. If apes mutated into humans, why do we still have apes? Weren't they genetically inferior to start the mutation?

There is no science to suggest that macro evolution is feasible or possible. There are no fossil records to confirm it has happened. Yet the theory of evolution remains the only system taught in public schools.

Genetic mutation via drug-resistance is still removing code from the original pathogen. A friend of mine is a genetic biologist that spent a great deal of time studying pathogen replication patterns. Usually we have antibiotics to kill diseases. They work by interrupting various points of the replication. The problem is when the diseases mutate, they essentially become "more basic" and so the drugs that stopped a specific point in the process no longer work, but it's not because the bug is "smarter" - quite the opposite in fact. It just forgets to respond to varying stimuli. I don't do the explanation justice, but you can research it and probably get a clearer idea.


tl;dr: there are two types of evolution - don't get them confused. One is scientifically sound, the other is not.

 

[silverleaf]

Actually lets start from the very beginning.

This also does not contradict the Bible. I believe it wasn't as random as it appears, and at every diceroll, God was being God and manipulating the outcome.

Unless of course you're from the camp that says the world was created in 7x24 hours but in my place 7 acts is a common belief, so please don't hammer me if it's 'radical', I'll just shut up if you arn't comfortable. I really didn't want to open this can of worms, and I wasn't the one who brought up evolution lol but anyways can't keep quiet against that. Note that animals DO NOT MATE ACROSS SPECIES, that wasn't accurate and no one said it happened. In fact, that animals cannot mate across species and produce fertile offspring (the mule is infertile, a cross between horse and donkey) is a very important point in the evolution of that species. At that point, there is officially 2 different species, a new species is created.

SO YEAH HERE GOES

More organisms are produced than can survive because of limited resources.

Organisms struggle for the necessities of life; there is competition for resources.

Individuals within a population vary in their traits; some of these traits are heritable -- passed on to offspring.

Some variants are better adapted to survive and reproduce under local conditions than others.

Better-adapted individuals (the "fit enough") are more likely to survive and reproduce, thereby passing on copies of their genes to the next generation.

Species whose individuals are best adapted survive; others become extinct.

Now, if it was TRULY RANDOM, do you really think we would be where we are? Obviously, some superior being is pulling the strings. God was manipulating every dice roll. With these points, over 100 million years, mountain ranges came up, rivers divided the herd. Group A will continue as they are. Group B (of the same species), now trapped behind the mountain wall facing starvation, undergoes a population bottleneck. Those least fit to these new conditions die, and this continues for several generations so only the elite survive. The changes that make it possible for them to BEAT the others and get the last scrap of food, say longer, more powerful hands, gets passed on. From now on, all these animals have long and powerful hands. Later, the process repeats, but this time, half of them live underground. We continue to have creatures with long, powerful hands (species B). However, those living underground now need more powerful noses to survive! (species C) So only those with the keenest sense of smell survive. Now, because they have been isolated for hundreds of thousands of years, species B can't breed with species A, and species C can't breed with species A. However because it has only been a short time that they were isolated (Few thousand years), species C is essentially still species B, just with very keen noses. So B and C can breed.

Over millions of years genetic mutations allow for extra limbs, smaller statue...


//BACKONTOPIC
Right I really didn't want to do that lol. It's something I don't really believe in, neither do I think it matters, because it concerns me not, neither was it relevant to this topic but since you asked, that's my belief. Feel free to disagree, even I don't know the truth, and I don't really care.

 

[Durruck]

I fall in the group of literal creationists. The ancient Hebrews have ways of expressing long periods of time, yet they specifically wrote the word "yom" in Genesis. Yom is a period of 24-hours. God told Moses to write that it was a day for a reason.

So the idea of millions of years required to make a change still doesn't make sense. There still are no fossil records to support those ideas.

And the mule is still a perfect point against macro evolution. If the mules could mate between themselves, then sure, they'd have made a new, viable species. But the fact is, they can't. in over 500 years, they can't make another mule from two mules. Even with all the genetic manipulation that we're capable of today, science can't force macro evolution to happen.

7 Acts? I'm not familiar with the term or what it implies. Can you expand on this?

 

[silverleaf]

Well yeah the evidence isn't there, but I also find it hard to believe that the universe hasn't been around for millions of years when we have evidence to point that there was life millions of years before mankind. But I could be wrong, the most important thing is I believe God is behind it all, and I don't need to know. Wouldn't benefit me even if I did.
I believe the 'day' thing was more symbolic than anything, to give us a 7 day week so we could set ourselves on that, our day was 24 hours, so it is something we can relate to. Think prehistoric times. Would you explain molecular biology to a civilization who haven't even discovered the scientific method? Now why God didn't create us in our present state, I have no idea. Would save us all the trouble of having to research.

 

[Durruck]

There are plenty of scientific models that accommodate a young Earth theory. Some of them even say that it is completely possible for the Earth to be 6,000 to 10,000 years old - perfectly lining up with the Genesis account.

They're just not popular because they force scientists to agree with creationists...and they generally don't like doing that.

Interesting scientific points that suggest the Earth isn't billions of years old is that the moon and earth move apart from each other by ~38mm/yr. Current scientific estimates say that the earth is 4.5 to 4.6 billion years old.

That means that 4.5 billion years ago, the earth was (4,500,000,000 * 38mm) = 171 billion mm, or 171,000 km closer than it is today. Currently, the Earth and Moon are separated by an average of 384,403 km - it's closest point in the moon's elliptical path is 363,104 km. Even at the constant of 38mm/yr, that still means that 4.5 Billion years ago, the Earth and Moon had an "average" separation of only ~213,403 km, or a mere 58% of the current distance.

Interestingly enough, while researching distances etc, I found variances of upto 25,000 km at the "average" distance. It seems that astronomers can't even agree on the distance from here to there.

Additionally, because gravity is effected by distance, it is likely that there is a threshold at which the moon would have actually been pulled towards the earth, rather than slipping slowly away. But the mathematics required for me to give you that kind of a number is far beyond my comprehension. I imagine that it results in a very pretty curve on a chart that points to the moon being inside the earth long before the end of the proposed 4.5 billion-year timeline.

There is also some interesting documentation about the decreasing salinity of the Atlantic ocean, and reversing the curve would make the Atlantic Ocean solid salt in too few years to support a 4.5 B earth.

But ultimately, I think you hit it on the head. It really doesn't matter when God created the earth. Even if I'm wrong and it was 100 billion years ago, it doesn't change the fact that God did it. Science ultimately attempts to answer the how and when. Faith answers the who.

 

[Odale]

...Interesting scientific points that suggest the Earth isn't billions of years old is that the moon and earth move apart from each other by ~38mm/yr. Current scientific estimates say that the earth is 4.5 to 4.6 billion years old.

That means that 4.5 billion years ago, the earth [I believe you mean the moon?] was (4,500,000,000 * 38mm) = 171 billion mm, or 171,000 km closer than it is today. Currently, the Earth and Moon are separated by an average of 384,403 km - it's closest point in the moon's elliptical path is 363,104 km. Even at the constant of 38mm/yr, that still means that 4.5 Billion years ago, the Earth and Moon had an "average" separation of only ~213,403 km, or a mere 58% of the current distance.

...

Additionally, because gravity is effected by distance, it is likely that there is a threshold at which the moon would have actually been pulled towards the earth, rather than slipping slowly away. But the mathematics required for me to give you that kind of a number is far beyond my comprehension. I imagine that it results in a very pretty curve on a chart that points to the moon being inside the earth long before the end of the proposed 4.5 billion-year timeline.

Are you accounting for where the moon formed in Earth's orbit? I've seen the History channel explain it... "A Mars-sized object collides with Molten Earth and the two fuse together - the debris fused into the moon."

The Earth didn't give birth to the moon at 0km away from each other, hehe.

Additionally, since the debris was ejected from Earth, it had kinetic energy to propel it away from Earth. So it does make sense that the moon moves away from Earth when you take kinetic energy into account and the mass of the moon as well.

...But ultimately, I think you hit it on the head. It really doesn't matter when God created the earth. Even if I'm wrong and it was 100 billion years ago, it doesn't change the fact that God did it. Science ultimately attempts to answer the how and when. Faith answers the who.

QFT.