UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 12 to Meditation 20
A statement of fact, not a forecast.

by: JT

To give your own opinion on this exchange of views, please sign in to the discussion forum below, or alternatively, use the contact page to provide your comments for publication. Ths discussion has been continued.

In commenting on Graham Kent's article, I'll just limit myself to addressing an apparent misinterpretation of a point made in the initial Meditation. I did not forecast a 70% error. I pointed out that those who claim a date of creation of 10,000 years ago are implicitly stating that there exists an overall error of approximately 70% in Ussher's work. That's not a forecast, it's a statement of fact.*

But Mr. Kent is right that I have no idea why there is this 70% error. However and more importantly, those that claim a date of creation of 10,000 years ago also have no idea why their guesstimate is so wildly different from Ussher's calculation. Those that make such a claim have the responsibility to justify it. I can quite reasonably limit myself to pointing out that there is a problem while rejecting both numbers.

I'll stand by my suggestion made earlier that "10,000 years ago" remains "a number plucked out of thin air because Ussher's number is so patently indefensible in spite of being based on the bible"

MEDITATION 20 >

Note:

* 4,000 (the approximate difference between Ussher's calculation and "10,000 years ago") divided by 5650 (approximately Ussher's age of the universe at the time he made his calculation) equals 0.708 or approximately 70%.

Please take a moment to share your thoughts, pro and con, on this discussion.

comments powered by Disqus