Shortstack said:
lamar said:
Dear Shortstack;
According to what we know, gravity DOES exist throughout the universe, therefore that should not be an issue.
Next, you don't REALLY believe that hammer is genuine, do you?
Your friend;
LAMAR
Yes. I certainly do.
lamar said:
Dear group;
There happens to be a LOT wrong with that particular *artifact*. First, the clam shell that fits over the hammer is definitely a modern clam. Next, the rock in which the hammer is embedded in is not part of the local matrix for London Texas. It would seem that someone took a fairly modern hammer and embedded it in a dissolved mineral solution, which was then permitted to harden.
Your friend;
LAMAR
My, my, Mr. lamar, you certainly assumed an awful LOT from just a few pictures. This is EXACTLY the type of scientific evaluation used by Bangers and Old Earthers. You have met my expectations FULLY.
Mr. gallileo, you said,"
If anything over the years Gravity should increase..(Ever so slightly) Also Gravity is dependent upon density, so the size of the Moon, and the Earth are not the important things, (They do enter into it tho) but the density of Each.....Saturn is less dense than the Earth, And IF it were the same size as the Earth it would have less gravity than the Earth...Hope that clears up my position on this.....
Gravity should increase over time? If Saturn were the same size as the Earth......well, you see, THAT carries us back to what the Bangers tell us about the formation of this solar system. Those itty, bitty specs of mysterious gravity something just popped up out of...........something. Then started to attract bits of that great big old dust / gas cloud and brought together
nine planets with
nine different compositions in
nine different sizes. Now, here's where things get REALLY confusing. If gravity is just a free rangeing "frabrical" force throughout the universe, just WHAT caused the planets to begin forming? I mean, you and lamar keep talking about a planet's MASS generating a gravity force......or SOMETHING. Just what was the MASSIVE piece of whatever that began to bring all of that nasty old dust to clump up?
So folks, what came first, the chicken or the egg? What came first, nine none existant masses that brought about nine different planets or..............WHAT? What caused those nine different wrinkles in the fabric of gravity?
And finally. Let's not have any "IF's" If Grandpa had wheels he'd be a wagon. How about some FACTS.........not suppositions.
Dear Shortstack;
No, my friend, I've actually been to the London, Texas site as I am originally from that neck o' the woods and I can state that the original creekbed with the fossilized prints has become so contaminated that's very difficult to ascertain ANYTHING at this point.
The facts are this. Mass attracts mass, my friend. It's simply how things work. Our Sun was formed from a cloud of hydrogen and helium gases. Now, it doesn't matter one tiny bit if that gas cloud is ten billion miles across or one thousand miles across, because the mass has the same gravitational force. Because of the mass of the gas cloud, the gravitational force caused it collapse upon itself.
Finally, it had compressed itself to the point where nuclear fusion was possible and it is because of this that the Sun is no collapsing and it is now in a relatively stable state. Eventually our Sun will have consumed itself and it will no longer give off heat and light. We KNOW this WILL happen, my friend. The wonderful thing about our Universe is the fact that it is so vast. Because our Universe is so vast, nothing occurs simultaniously and we are able to observe the remnants of dying and dead Suns elsewhere. We are able to observe nebulas (my favorite night time objects, besides our solar planets, by the way) and all sorts of wonderful and beautiful sights.
Now, when our Sun was still a gas cloud, even though it was spread out over a very large distance, it still had mass and because of this, it had attracted particulate matter. This particulate matter started orbiting about the cloud and as the cloud shrank in size, likewise did the debris field travel inwards at the same rate. The debris field also has mass and because of this, objects started appearing out of the debris field orbiting the now shrinking gas cloud.
We know that two objects in space of equal mass will have mutual attraction and as such, they will be drawn to each other until they are close enough that they start to orbit each other. Eventually will they collide with each other and form a single particle of matter which now has double the mass of the former two smaller particles. This composite particle will either then be attracted to an even larger particle, or it will attract a smaller one. In all actuality, both states can occurs at the same time, and this is most likely what happens.
These particles are what formed our planets my friend. We can see that the larger gas giants were formed from remnants of the cloud which formed our Sun, only with solid matter cores. We can also state that the formation of our planets is a valid theory because of how our planets are arranged in orbit around the Sun. Mercury, the closest planet to the Sun, is small in mass for a very good reason, my friend.
The reason why is because MOST of the matter in the debris field closest to the Sun became part of the Sun with only a small amount having been formed which is now Mercury. Next, Venus is almost the same size as the Earth and the reason for this is because we share almost identical orbitial planes. We can now look at Mars, which is beyond Earths' orbitial path and we can see that it's roughly half the size of the Earth. The reason for this is because poor Mars got the leftovers that were not attracted to Earth's and Vensus' gravities
Beyond Mars we now have Jupiter, the largest of our gas giants. Astronomers have long surmised that Jupiter is a failed sun and this may very well be true, because it has the mass to have been a sun, had the initial conditions during formation been correct. Next is Saturn, the second largest gas giant and it's own highly visible planetary debris field orbiting it.
Now, we may ask ourselves, "If the theory of mass attracting mass is true, then why isn't the debris field around Saturn forming moons?" Well, the truth is that the debris field orbiting Saturn IS forming moons, however this does not happen overnight, my friend. It takes hundreds of thousands of years for this to happen and because it takes so long, it's difficult to observe using visual methods alone.
And this is where the young earth theory crumbles into dust. It's simply NOT possible for the earth to have been formed 10,000 years ago, 100,000 years ago or even 1 MILLION years ago, because if this were so, then our planet would still be UNINHABITABLE! The theory itself defies even the most basis tenants of physics, my friend.
Next we have Uranus and Neptune, which are the last two gas giants in our solar system and wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy out there, we have tiny little Pluto. Now, because of the WAY in which the planets were formed, astronomers now have a very good idea of how typical solar systems may POSSIBLY be formed in other systems as well.
Now, I am not stating that traditional physics and sciences have all the answers, when the very opposite is true. There exists so much which we do not know, and furthermore, there are things which we will most likely never be able to conclude with any degree of certainty, yet this should not give us cause to cease searching for the answers, or that we should be quick to embrace the fast and easy answers.
The main difference between the young earth theory and the old earth theory is that a great deal of practical physics in the young earth is ignored. Now, detractors of the old earth theory may state the same about the earth being old, when the truth is there does not exist any conflicting or contradictory information, rather there only exists unknowns, and an unknown quantity is very different from a contradictory one.
Your friend;
LAMAR
What we ALL have to remember is that "theories" LATER proven WRONG, were CORRECT, for their "time period", "era", etc. I DO NOT think there is a "wrongness" about SOME things; just make sure info/"theories" are as "updated" as possible. At ONE time... the EARTH was flat... you would sail off the edge of the ocean... the EARTH was the center of the universe... etc, etc. 
So be it. 
All I asked you to do was simply present the evidence & argument for an Old Earth rather than posting ridicule and insults. 
Sheesh. I don't know what I said that you are taking as persecution, but I hope you understand that no offense was intended. You are among friends here, believe it or not, even though some disagree with you. 
