GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs

Author Topic: Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn  (Read 750 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Trumpeter

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3093
  • Manna: 262
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn
« on: Tue Dec 04, 2012 - 09:37:42 »
Gary and Tom Horn have gone where few men have gone before! G.H. Pember set tongues-a-wagging in the late 1800s with his book, Earth's Earliest Ages. Pember believed the final sign of the Lord's return would be the return of the Nephilim! Even better—Pember, Scofield and Larkin were all believers in the "Gap Theory!" True or False?
Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn Small | Large

Christian Forums and Message Board

Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn
« on: Tue Dec 04, 2012 - 09:37:42 »

Offline Bro Sam

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
  • Manna: 2
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
    • View Profile
Re: Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn
« Reply #1 on: Sat Dec 15, 2012 - 09:46:06 »
Exposure to the Cardiff giant maybe? What a hoot. Another goof-ball that doesn't believe the Bible.  There is no gap.

Gen 1:3 let there be light......And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Gen 1:3-5 (KJV)
And: And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:14-15 (KJV)
Lucifer was cast to the earth - it was here.  The cataclysmic events happened on days 2 & 3

Science backs this up:
The B I B L E; now, that's the book for me. Our book of instructions has always been correct and science (although maybe a little slow), always supports God's Word. All these thousands of years go by and the Bible stands as God's word without error or mistake. "The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, 0 Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Psalm 12:6-7

Here are a dozen natural phenomena which conflict with the evolutionary idea that the universe is billions of years old. The numbers I list below in bold print (often millions of years) are maximum possible ages set by each process, not the actual ages. The numbers in italics are the ages required by evolutionary theory for each item. The point is that the maximum possible ages are always much less that the required evolutionary ages, while the biblical age (6,000–10,000 years) always fits comfortably within the maximum possible ages. Thus the following items are evidence against the evolutionary time-scale and for the biblical time-scale. Much more young-world evidence exists. Some of the items on this list can be reconciled with an old universe only by making a series of improbable and unproved assumptions; others can fit in only with a young universe. The list starts with distant astronomic phenomena and works its way down to Earth, ending with everyday facts.

1. Galaxies wind themselves up too fast.
The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of its present spiral shape. Yet our galaxy is supposed to be at least 10 billion years old. Evolutionists call this 'the winding-up dilemma', which they have known about for 50 years. They have devised many theories to try to explain it, each one failing after a brief period of popularity. The same 'winding-up' dilemma also applies to other galaxies. For the past few decades the favored attempt to resolve the dilemma has been a complex theory called 'density waves'. The theory has conceptual problems, has to be arbitrarily and very finely tuned, and lately has been called into serious question by the Hubble Space Telescope's discovery of very detailed spiral structure in the central hub of the 'Whirlpool' galaxy, M51.

2. Comets disintegrate too quickly.
According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical maximum ages (on this basis) of 10,000 years. Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical 'Oort cloud' well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed. So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations. Lately, there has been much talk of the 'Kuiper Belt', a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Even if some bodies of ice exist in that location, they would not really solve the evolutionists' problem, since according to evolutionary theory the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Ort cloud to supply it.

3. Not enough mud on the sea floor.
Each year, water and winds erode about 25 billion tons of dirt and rock from the continents and deposit it in the ocean. This material accumulates as loose sediment (i.e. mud) on the hard basaltic (lava-formed) rock of the ocean floor. The average depth of all the mud in the whole ocean, including the continental shelves, is less than 400 meters. The main way currently known to remove the mud from the ocean floor is by plate tectonic subduction. That is, sea floor slides slowly (a few cm/year) beneath the continents, taking some sediment with it. According to secular scientific literature, that process presently removes only one billion tons per year. As far as anyone knows, the other 25 billion tons per year simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present amount of sediment in less than 12 million years. Yet according to evolutionary theory, erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have existed, an alleged three billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply that the oceans would be massively choked with mud dozens of kilometers deep. An alternative (creationist) explanation is that erosion from the waters of the Genesis Flood running off the continents deposited the present amount of mud within a short time about 5000 years ago.

4. Not enough sodium in the sea.
Every year, rivers and other sources9 dump over 450 million tons of sodium into the ocean. Only 27% of this sodium manages to get back out of the sea each year. As far as anyone knows, the remainder simply accumulates in the ocean. If the sea had no sodium to start with, it would have accumulated its present amount in less than 42 million years at today's input and output rates. This is much less than the evolutionary age of the ocean, three billion years. The usual reply to this discrepancy is that past sodium inputs must have been less and outputs greater. However, calculations which are as generous as possible to evolutionary scenarios still give a maximum age of only 62 million years. Calculations for many other sea water elements give much younger ages for the ocean.

5. Earth's magnetic field is decaying too fast.
The total energy stored in the Earth's magnetic field has steadily decreased by a factor of 2.7 over the past 1,000 years. Evolutionary theories explaining this rapid decrease, as well as how the Earth could have maintained its magnetic field for billions of years, are very complex and inadequate. A much better creationist theory exists. It is straightforward, based on sound physics, and explains many features of the field: its creation, rapid reversals during the Genesis Flood, surface intensity decreases and increases until the time of Christ, and a steady decay since then. This theory matches paleomagnetic, historic, and present data. The main result is that the field's total energy (not surface intensity) has always decayed at least as fast as now. At that rate the field could not be more than 10,000 years old.

6. Many strata are too tightly bent.
In many mountainous areas, strata thousands of feet thick are bent and folded into hairpin shapes. The conventional geologic time-scale says these formations were deeply buried and solidified for hundreds of millions of years before they were bent. Yet the folding occurred without cracking, with radii so small that the entire formation had to be still wet and unsolidified when the bending occurred. This implies that the folding occurred less than thousands of years after deposition.

7. Injected sandstone shortens geologic 'ages'.
Strong geologic evidence exists that the Cambrian Sawatch sandstone — formed an alleged 500 million years ago — of the Ute Pass Fault west of Colorado Springs was still unsolidified when it was extruded up to the surface during the uplift of the Rocky Mountains, allegedly 70 million years ago. It is very unlikely that the sandstone would not solidify during the supposed 430 million years it was underground. Instead, it is likely that the two geologic events were less than hundreds of years apart, thus greatly shortening the geologic time-scale.

8. Fossil radioactivity shortens geologic 'ages' to a few years.
Radiohalos are rings of color formed around microscopic bits of radioactive minerals in rock crystals. They are fossil evidence of radioactive decay. 'Squashed' Polonium-210 radiohalos indicate that Jurassic, Triassic, and Eocene formations in the Colorado plateau were deposited within months of one another, not hundreds of millions of years apart as required by the conventional time-scale. 'Orphan' Polonium-218 radiohalos, having no evidence of their mother elements, imply either instant creation or drastic changes in radioactivity decay rates.

9. Helium in the wrong places.
All naturally occurring families of radioactive elements generate helium as they decay. If such decay took place for billions of years, as alleged by evolutionists, much helium should have found its way into the Earth's atmosphere. The rate of loss of helium from the atmosphere into space is calculable and small. Taking that loss into account, the atmosphere today has only 0.05% of the amount of helium it would have accumulated in five billion years. This means the atmosphere is much younger than the alleged evolutionary age. A study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research shows that helium produced by radioactive decay in deep, hot rocks has not had time to escape. Though the rocks are supposed to be over one billion years old, their large helium retention suggests an age of only thousands of years.

10. Not enough Stone Age skeletons.
Evolutionary anthropologists say that the Stone Age lasted for at least 100,000 years, during which time the world population of Neanderthal and Cro-magnon men was roughly constant, between one and 10 million. All that time they were burying their dead with artifacts. By this scenario, they would have buried at least four billion bodies. If the evolutionary time-scale is correct, buried bones should be able to last for much longer than 100,000 years, so many of the supposed four billion Stone Age skeletons should still be around (and certainly the buried artifacts). Yet only a few thousand have been found. This implies that the Stone Age was much shorter than evolutionists think, a few hundred years in many areas.

11. Agriculture is too recent.
The usual evolutionary picture has men existing as hunters and gatherers for 100,000 years during the Stone Age before discovering agriculture less than 10,000 years ago. Yet the archaeological evidence shows that Stone Age men were as intelligent as we are. It is very improbable that none of the four billion people mentioned in item 10 should discover that plants grow from seeds. It is more likely that men were without agriculture less than a few hundred years after the Flood, if at all.

12. History is too short.
According to evolutionists, Stone Age man existed for 100,000 years before beginning to make written records about 4,000–5,000 years ago. Prehistoric man built megalithic monuments, made beautiful cave paintings, and kept records of lunar phases. Why would he wait a thousand centuries before using the same skills to record history? The biblical time-scale is much more likely.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn
« Reply #1 on: Sat Dec 15, 2012 - 09:46:06 »

Offline Bro Sam

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
  • Manna: 2
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
    • View Profile
Re: Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn
« Reply #2 on: Sat Dec 15, 2012 - 09:50:46 »
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/cardiff.htm                 The giant is still on display; one of the biggest hoaxes in America. Even PT Barum got in on the act.

Offline gbzone

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2484
  • Manna: 53
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn
« Reply #3 on: Tue Dec 18, 2012 - 06:01:31 »
By faith we understand God created the world.

Thats not blind faith  but with the eyes of the understanding see that which cannot be seen.

Paul spoke about "so called science"
It has a long way to go to catch up with God.
But even this science has been compeled forced made to confess that ALL things started from one point.
In the end  every knee shall bow and every tounge shall confess that |jesus Christ is Lord.
They still resist the truth  and put in ist place a big bang where God should be.

The Japanese masters of the miniturisation though they are .
Are nothing when you consider a money spider  or a pigmy chameleon.
Those masters of packaging have a lot to learn  from  the master who packages a rose  or the seed of an orange.

If the scientists are in harmony with scripture they speak the truth .When they are not they do not.

Wether you believe in a gap  or not between gen 1:1 .
The fact is that all modern  versiosn  save one  have translated gen1:1 has heavenS.
The only other version that does not is the KJV.

All versions have translated gen2;1 as heavenS.
If you have heavenS in chapter 1 and 2 you are misled to think they are talking about the same thing.

But consider this  and judge.

IN the beginning God created the HEAVEN  .................... and ........... the ....................................EARTH.

and the EARTH was without form and void.

NOT heaven.
For heaven has no need for sun or moon for God is the light thereof.
 It was not HEVEN then that was in darkness .
But the EARTH.

It could also be said  that it was not God who was in darkness but man .(for God is light)
and even as God commanded the light to shine on the EARTH .
So also he commanded the light to shine in the darkness of our own hearts.

From gen1:2 onwards then  the scripture is not speaking about ... HEAVEN .....................but the EARTH.

He divides light from darkness.(the light was good by the way .What then was darkness?)

The earth from the water .

The the waters that were above the firmiment  and the watwers that were below it.
and the firmement he" called ..................................... HEAVEN."

But hold on....
If all from gen1;2 was about the EARTH .

What heaven then is this?


For there are three.

The first one of gen1:1 that speaks of the place where Gods throne is.

The second  where the stars are "He made the stars also" and where the lesser and greater light sit.

The third where the birds fly and in which man lives and moves and has thier being.

Now gen 2:1 then is speaking about the gernarations of the EARTHLY heavenS the two that beloing to earth.

But when you have gen1:1 as heavenS  then there is confusion  of face.
The result is other versions like "The student bible" and others  that have gen1:1 as..

In the beginning God created the SKY and the earth.
If you have gen1:1 as heavenS that then is a reasonable  rendition.

But clearly to any who has any spiritual understanding that is a  absurd.

Thy will be done on eath as it is in SKY?

Our father who art in sky?

I think not.

Thus it should be heaveN in gen1:1 both  by the logic of scripture and much less so by the errors of others.

If two men who are seeking and aiming for the moon start at the same place  but one a degree off.(or less)
For a long while they will seem to be going to the same place.
But in time thier paths will diverge .
The one who started started in the right place and going in the right direction will hit the moon.
The other will miss it.
I should add .Im not talking about being BORNagain  and going to heaveN .
But the BRIDE of Christ.

in Christ
« Last Edit: Tue Dec 18, 2012 - 06:05:08 by gbzone »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Earth's Earliest Ages with Tom Horn
« Reply #3 on: Tue Dec 18, 2012 - 06:01:31 »