Answering Ken Ham on Distant Starlight

Answering Ken Ham on Distant Starlight · And No, I am STILL Not a Flat Earther · Ken Ham Still Prefers Debunking Flat Earth and Only Obliquely Hinting Against Geocentrism?

How Could Light from Distant Stars Reach Earth in 6,000 Years?
Ken Ham | 23 May 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgEdn2LxdAU

You are aware that the very simplest answer is, fix stars are not all that far away. Right?

If the 0.76 arc seconds of alpha Centauri depend on Earth moving 2 Astronomic Units back and forth, than one can triangulate 0.76 arc seconds (known angle implying two more known angles, since the triangle is a very narrow one) and 2 Astronomic Units, and one can get 4 light years.

If on the other hand, both the "annual aberration" (c. 20 arc seconds back and forth) and the "parallax" are aspects of how angelic beings dans with the stars they carry, in time with the Sun (whom a psalm compares to a hero), to the glory of God, then no such triangulation is possible, we have only one (or if you like three) angles but the 2 AU of the Sun, per year, are not necessarily the trajectory of the star, and therefore no known distance enters the triangle.

As far as I am concerned, stars were ready on day 4 to give a light arriving on day 5 when certain birds and fish were created, and obviously their light was arriving normally on day 6 as well, so Adam and Eve could see the stars in the evening.

0:38 From the Bible we do know, there is a city up in Heaven.

It makes more sense if the stars (what used to be called fix stars) are a shell (a bit like modern astronomers imagine the Oort cloud) that this city is above this shell.

We, obviously, also know the universe was not created 13.8 billion years ago.

3:29 And there are times when my granny (if she had been Christian) could have said "only God knows where I put my glasses" and she had them lifted up on the forehead.

If "the furthest star" is actually only one light day away, that is up, then it took only one day for its light to reach earth. With normal speed of light as per one way speed of light extrapolatable from the two way speed of light.

graeme ross

@graemeross6970

Don't you mean interpolation?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@graemeross6970 No, interpolation is when a footnote erroneously is copied as part of the actual text. It's manipulated INTO where it originally wasn't.

Extrapolation is seeing a pattern in one set of data and applying it OUTSIDE those data.

Sometimes a somewhat "safe bet" but check if there is no contrary evidence. And here, I think it's a safe bet.

3:49 There is also nothing in observational science that contradicts Geocentrism.

You can't go out to observe Sun and Earth from Tatooine or from Syrte-the-Magnificent, capital of the Empire of a Thousand Planets. We won't meet a Shingouz any more than a Tusken Raider.

Unlike microscopy, the object of investigation is basically observable only from one point of observation, not from different angles.

When certain men (presumably) were on the Moon, they didn't even prove that Earth turns around, since according to Geocentrism, the Moon goes around the Earth in approximately 25 hours (the stellar month is Moon going around the Zodiac, not around Earth). They were observing Earth from a moving point of observation. Circle in a chopper around the Eiffel tower (if French police allows), you will see the Eiffel tower turn around as well.