Pages:
Author

Topic: How old is earth - page 13. (Read 12902 times)

legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
July 10, 2016, 04:32:05 PM
#30
How old do you think Earth is? Why?

Consensus among scientists from different fields of studies says that the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years.
But it's not that I "think", you cannot "guess" the age of the world. You need evidence. it's the result of measures done by hundreds of scientists, with hundreds of experiments. And they are all consistent with each other (minus the margin of error stated before).

The scientific model is based on the idea that certain things in the universe have been going on throughout all time, similarly as they are going on today. Take carbon dating, for example.

Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years. But nobody knows that this is the fact. If the amount of C-14 forming, has been increasing very slowly over the years - so slowly that nobody could see or measure the increase -  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years. And this kind of mistaken thinking is the same kind that permeates virtually all of the scientific thinking on the dating subject.

The furthest science can go back with any accuracy at all is about 4,500 years. And even this is shaky. It is based on dating pottery and buildings from the distant past. Comparing the writings of ancient peoples and nations from beyond 3,000 years ago shows discrepancies in the writings that indicate that we don't know how to read dead languages correctly, or else the people of those days wrote historical fiction like we write science fiction today.

On the other hand, Moses lived and wrote 3,500 to 3,600 years ago. He had been a prince of Egypt, with access to whatever writings this great nation had back then. We can trust his writings because of the stubbornness of ancient Israel. This stubbornness is born out in the writings of the scribes of Israel. Bible books from the Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago, are essentially the same as they are in our modern Bibles.

This means that we can place faith in the things that Moses wrote for us in the first 5 books of the Bible, way more than we can place faith in the writings of today's scientists. In fact, today's scientists tell us right in their writings that they are actually guessing as to the age of things.

The point is, the earth and universe are less than 7,000 years old, and probably only 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm for how this is calculated out in the Bible. If the universe is much older than 6,200 years, the age cannot be calculated, because time and the space-time continuum operated differently before that time.

Cool

You are saying like carbon is the only dating technique. There are many kinds of dating techniques available.  Like Potasium argon dating that can be use to date up to billions of years.

Depends. If potassium argon provides strong evidence parts of the bible are complete nonsense it must then be completely disregarded, no questions asked. On the other hand if potassium argon backed up the bible it would regarded as a gift from god and 100% correct.

The young earthling lot are a strange bunch.



All of these kinds of dating concepts have the same flaw. You have to know what things were like in the past to date them. And the only way you can know is to go back in time, or to find some ancient scientifically advanced race that kept scientific records like we do.

The farthest we can go back with any kind of certainty at all is about 4,500 years. Why. Because that is when the Great Flood covered the earth. Things were different before that time. At best, we simply don't know.

Cool

As mentioned earlier, heat dissipation is the biggest thorn in your side anyway so arguing the accuracy of dating methods doesn't help your cause.

I don't know too much about the great flood. Wasn't that myth debunked years ago?



When you don't know the amount of heat in the first place, heat dissipation doesn't have any meaning. When you are unaware of the various kinds of heat sinks that may have existed in the past, there is no way to tell about heat dissipation. However, one thing is certain. Entropy.

Cool

The evidence that the earth has been bombarded with meteors in the past is simply too great to pretend they didn't happen. Mathematicians can quite accurately calculate the heat output from a given size and speed of meteor smashing into earth.
A few of the bigger ones would of literally boiled off the earths oceans.

That unthinkable amount of heat would take hundreds of thousands of years to dissipate.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
July 10, 2016, 04:05:56 PM
#29
How old do you think Earth is? Why?

Consensus among scientists from different fields of studies says that the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years.
But it's not that I "think", you cannot "guess" the age of the world. You need evidence. it's the result of measures done by hundreds of scientists, with hundreds of experiments. And they are all consistent with each other (minus the margin of error stated before).

The scientific model is based on the idea that certain things in the universe have been going on throughout all time, similarly as they are going on today. Take carbon dating, for example.

Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years. But nobody knows that this is the fact. If the amount of C-14 forming, has been increasing very slowly over the years - so slowly that nobody could see or measure the increase -  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years. And this kind of mistaken thinking is the same kind that permeates virtually all of the scientific thinking on the dating subject.

The furthest science can go back with any accuracy at all is about 4,500 years. And even this is shaky. It is based on dating pottery and buildings from the distant past. Comparing the writings of ancient peoples and nations from beyond 3,000 years ago shows discrepancies in the writings that indicate that we don't know how to read dead languages correctly, or else the people of those days wrote historical fiction like we write science fiction today.

On the other hand, Moses lived and wrote 3,500 to 3,600 years ago. He had been a prince of Egypt, with access to whatever writings this great nation had back then. We can trust his writings because of the stubbornness of ancient Israel. This stubbornness is born out in the writings of the scribes of Israel. Bible books from the Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago, are essentially the same as they are in our modern Bibles.

This means that we can place faith in the things that Moses wrote for us in the first 5 books of the Bible, way more than we can place faith in the writings of today's scientists. In fact, today's scientists tell us right in their writings that they are actually guessing as to the age of things.

The point is, the earth and universe are less than 7,000 years old, and probably only 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm for how this is calculated out in the Bible. If the universe is much older than 6,200 years, the age cannot be calculated, because time and the space-time continuum operated differently before that time.

Cool

You are saying like carbon is the only dating technique. There are many kinds of dating techniques available.  Like Potasium argon dating that can be use to date up to billions of years.

Depends. If potassium argon provides strong evidence parts of the bible are complete nonsense it must then be completely disregarded, no questions asked. On the other hand if potassium argon backed up the bible it would regarded as a gift from god and 100% correct.

The young earthling lot are a strange bunch.



All of these kinds of dating concepts have the same flaw. You have to know what things were like in the past to date them. And the only way you can know is to go back in time, or to find some ancient scientifically advanced race that kept scientific records like we do.

The farthest we can go back with any kind of certainty at all is about 4,500 years. Why. Because that is when the Great Flood covered the earth. Things were different before that time. At best, we simply don't know.

Cool

As mentioned earlier, heat dissipation is the biggest thorn in your side anyway so arguing the accuracy of dating methods doesn't help your cause.

I don't know too much about the great flood. Wasn't that myth debunked years ago?



When you don't know the amount of heat in the first place, heat dissipation doesn't have any meaning. When you are unaware of the various kinds of heat sinks that may have existed in the past, there is no way to tell about heat dissipation. However, one thing is certain. Entropy.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
July 10, 2016, 03:54:07 PM
#28
How old do you think Earth is? Why?

Consensus among scientists from different fields of studies says that the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years.
But it's not that I "think", you cannot "guess" the age of the world. You need evidence. it's the result of measures done by hundreds of scientists, with hundreds of experiments. And they are all consistent with each other (minus the margin of error stated before).

The scientific model is based on the idea that certain things in the universe have been going on throughout all time, similarly as they are going on today. Take carbon dating, for example.

Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years. But nobody knows that this is the fact. If the amount of C-14 forming, has been increasing very slowly over the years - so slowly that nobody could see or measure the increase -  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years. And this kind of mistaken thinking is the same kind that permeates virtually all of the scientific thinking on the dating subject.

The furthest science can go back with any accuracy at all is about 4,500 years. And even this is shaky. It is based on dating pottery and buildings from the distant past. Comparing the writings of ancient peoples and nations from beyond 3,000 years ago shows discrepancies in the writings that indicate that we don't know how to read dead languages correctly, or else the people of those days wrote historical fiction like we write science fiction today.

On the other hand, Moses lived and wrote 3,500 to 3,600 years ago. He had been a prince of Egypt, with access to whatever writings this great nation had back then. We can trust his writings because of the stubbornness of ancient Israel. This stubbornness is born out in the writings of the scribes of Israel. Bible books from the Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago, are essentially the same as they are in our modern Bibles.

This means that we can place faith in the things that Moses wrote for us in the first 5 books of the Bible, way more than we can place faith in the writings of today's scientists. In fact, today's scientists tell us right in their writings that they are actually guessing as to the age of things.

The point is, the earth and universe are less than 7,000 years old, and probably only 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm for how this is calculated out in the Bible. If the universe is much older than 6,200 years, the age cannot be calculated, because time and the space-time continuum operated differently before that time.

Cool

You are saying like carbon is the only dating technique. There are many kinds of dating techniques available.  Like Potasium argon dating that can be use to date up to billions of years.

Depends. If potassium argon provides strong evidence parts of the bible are complete nonsense it must then be completely disregarded, no questions asked. On the other hand if potassium argon backed up the bible it would regarded as a gift from god and 100% correct.

The young earthling lot are a strange bunch.



All of these kinds of dating concepts have the same flaw. You have to know what things were like in the past to date them. And the only way you can know is to go back in time, or to find some ancient scientifically advanced race that kept scientific records like we do.

The farthest we can go back with any kind of certainty at all is about 4,500 years. Why. Because that is when the Great Flood covered the earth. Things were different before that time. At best, we simply don't know.

Cool

As mentioned earlier, heat dissipation is the biggest thorn in your side anyway so arguing the accuracy of dating methods doesn't help your cause.

I don't know too much about the great flood. Wasn't that myth debunked years ago?

legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
July 10, 2016, 03:20:50 PM
#27
How old do you think Earth is? Why?

Consensus among scientists from different fields of studies says that the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years.
But it's not that I "think", you cannot "guess" the age of the world. You need evidence. it's the result of measures done by hundreds of scientists, with hundreds of experiments. And they are all consistent with each other (minus the margin of error stated before).

The scientific model is based on the idea that certain things in the universe have been going on throughout all time, similarly as they are going on today. Take carbon dating, for example.

Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years. But nobody knows that this is the fact. If the amount of C-14 forming, has been increasing very slowly over the years - so slowly that nobody could see or measure the increase -  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years. And this kind of mistaken thinking is the same kind that permeates virtually all of the scientific thinking on the dating subject.

The furthest science can go back with any accuracy at all is about 4,500 years. And even this is shaky. It is based on dating pottery and buildings from the distant past. Comparing the writings of ancient peoples and nations from beyond 3,000 years ago shows discrepancies in the writings that indicate that we don't know how to read dead languages correctly, or else the people of those days wrote historical fiction like we write science fiction today.

On the other hand, Moses lived and wrote 3,500 to 3,600 years ago. He had been a prince of Egypt, with access to whatever writings this great nation had back then. We can trust his writings because of the stubbornness of ancient Israel. This stubbornness is born out in the writings of the scribes of Israel. Bible books from the Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago, are essentially the same as they are in our modern Bibles.

This means that we can place faith in the things that Moses wrote for us in the first 5 books of the Bible, way more than we can place faith in the writings of today's scientists. In fact, today's scientists tell us right in their writings that they are actually guessing as to the age of things.

The point is, the earth and universe are less than 7,000 years old, and probably only 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm for how this is calculated out in the Bible. If the universe is much older than 6,200 years, the age cannot be calculated, because time and the space-time continuum operated differently before that time.

Cool

You are saying like carbon is the only dating technique. There are many kinds of dating techniques available.  Like Potasium argon dating that can be use to date up to billions of years.

Depends. If potassium argon provides strong evidence parts of the bible are complete nonsense it must then be completely disregarded, no questions asked. On the other hand if potassium argon backed up the bible it would regarded as a gift from god and 100% correct.

The young earthling lot are a strange bunch.



All of these kinds of dating concepts have the same flaw. You have to know what things were like in the past to date them. And the only way you can know is to go back in time, or to find some ancient scientifically advanced race that kept scientific records like we do.

The farthest we can go back with any kind of certainty at all is about 4,500 years. Why. Because that is when the Great Flood covered the earth. Things were different before that time. At best, we simply don't know.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
July 10, 2016, 01:30:33 PM
#26
How old do you think Earth is? Why?

Consensus among scientists from different fields of studies says that the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years.
But it's not that I "think", you cannot "guess" the age of the world. You need evidence. it's the result of measures done by hundreds of scientists, with hundreds of experiments. And they are all consistent with each other (minus the margin of error stated before).

The scientific model is based on the idea that certain things in the universe have been going on throughout all time, similarly as they are going on today. Take carbon dating, for example.

Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years. But nobody knows that this is the fact. If the amount of C-14 forming, has been increasing very slowly over the years - so slowly that nobody could see or measure the increase -  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years. And this kind of mistaken thinking is the same kind that permeates virtually all of the scientific thinking on the dating subject.

The furthest science can go back with any accuracy at all is about 4,500 years. And even this is shaky. It is based on dating pottery and buildings from the distant past. Comparing the writings of ancient peoples and nations from beyond 3,000 years ago shows discrepancies in the writings that indicate that we don't know how to read dead languages correctly, or else the people of those days wrote historical fiction like we write science fiction today.

On the other hand, Moses lived and wrote 3,500 to 3,600 years ago. He had been a prince of Egypt, with access to whatever writings this great nation had back then. We can trust his writings because of the stubbornness of ancient Israel. This stubbornness is born out in the writings of the scribes of Israel. Bible books from the Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago, are essentially the same as they are in our modern Bibles.

This means that we can place faith in the things that Moses wrote for us in the first 5 books of the Bible, way more than we can place faith in the writings of today's scientists. In fact, today's scientists tell us right in their writings that they are actually guessing as to the age of things.

The point is, the earth and universe are less than 7,000 years old, and probably only 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm for how this is calculated out in the Bible. If the universe is much older than 6,200 years, the age cannot be calculated, because time and the space-time continuum operated differently before that time.

Cool

You are saying like carbon is the only dating technique. There are many kinds of dating techniques available.  Like Potasium argon dating that can be use to date up to billions of years.

Depends. If potassium argon provides strong evidence parts of the bible are complete nonsense it must then be completely disregarded, no questions asked. On the other hand if potassium argon backed up the bible it would regarded as a gift from god and 100% correct.

The young earthling lot are a strange bunch.

member
Activity: 163
Merit: 10
The revolutionary trading ecosystem
July 10, 2016, 11:51:57 AM
#25
How old do you think Earth is? Why?

Consensus among scientists from different fields of studies says that the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years.
But it's not that I "think", you cannot "guess" the age of the world. You need evidence. it's the result of measures done by hundreds of scientists, with hundreds of experiments. And they are all consistent with each other (minus the margin of error stated before).

The scientific model is based on the idea that certain things in the universe have been going on throughout all time, similarly as they are going on today. Take carbon dating, for example.

Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years. But nobody knows that this is the fact. If the amount of C-14 forming, has been increasing very slowly over the years - so slowly that nobody could see or measure the increase -  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years. And this kind of mistaken thinking is the same kind that permeates virtually all of the scientific thinking on the dating subject.

The furthest science can go back with any accuracy at all is about 4,500 years. And even this is shaky. It is based on dating pottery and buildings from the distant past. Comparing the writings of ancient peoples and nations from beyond 3,000 years ago shows discrepancies in the writings that indicate that we don't know how to read dead languages correctly, or else the people of those days wrote historical fiction like we write science fiction today.

On the other hand, Moses lived and wrote 3,500 to 3,600 years ago. He had been a prince of Egypt, with access to whatever writings this great nation had back then. We can trust his writings because of the stubbornness of ancient Israel. This stubbornness is born out in the writings of the scribes of Israel. Bible books from the Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago, are essentially the same as they are in our modern Bibles.

This means that we can place faith in the things that Moses wrote for us in the first 5 books of the Bible, way more than we can place faith in the writings of today's scientists. In fact, today's scientists tell us right in their writings that they are actually guessing as to the age of things.

The point is, the earth and universe are less than 7,000 years old, and probably only 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm for how this is calculated out in the Bible. If the universe is much older than 6,200 years, the age cannot be calculated, because time and the space-time continuum operated differently before that time.

Cool

You are saying like carbon is the only dating technique. There are many kinds of dating techniques available.  Like Potasium argon dating that can be use to date up to billions of years.
newbie
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
July 10, 2016, 11:34:54 AM
#24
The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years. Based on evidence from radiometric age dating of meteorite material, this estimate is also consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.
legendary
Activity: 3906
Merit: 1373
July 10, 2016, 10:39:46 AM
#23
Go back to the original scientific documents on which the age of the earth is based. You will find them filled with wording that indicates that the scientists don't really know, and that the ages they use are arbitrary.

Further, the fact that scientists can't agree on what kind of a universe the so-called Big Bang produced, shows that the whole Big Bang idea is flawed. We're just learning, they say. What they are doing is writing science fiction.

Further, if there was no C-14 beyond 5,000 years ago, it would absolutely make all of carbon dating false, and especially anything dated to be more than 5,000 years old. Nobody knows what the C-14 content of the atmosphere was back then. So why even use carbon dating? It shows nothing to be factual, and is certainly deceptive.

Scared to believe the truth? Look it up. The whole C-14 and other dating is based on the whims of scientists and university leaders.

Cool
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
July 10, 2016, 04:56:59 AM
#22
No one can say exactly what's the exact age of earth now. By dating the rocks in the ever-changing crust, as well as neighbors such as the moon and visiting meteorites, scientists have calculated that Earth is 4.54 billion years old, with an error range of 50 million years according to the site below.
www.space.com/24854-how-old-is-earth.html
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1016
July 10, 2016, 03:28:19 AM
#21
-  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years.
Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14C to be measurable.
Quote
Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years
This is also a false claim. Scientist well know about environmental variations.
Quote
Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago
Age of this document is calibrated at 35-324 BC and 202-107 BC thanks to method you claiming is false...

and so on, not a single info of you post is true, stop spreading BS.

Yeah, there's always an amusing love-hate relationship between BADlogic and carbon dating. He just cherrypicks when it works and when it doesn't, desperately trying to patch up his untenable beliefs.

Young earth oddballs try desperately to instill doubt in carbon dating, yet if they paid a little more attention to what was going on they would discover, to their horror, that heat is their downfall.

Earth could not of possibly cooled down quickly enough in their absurd timeframe. Heat we are talking about here is enough to easily boil all earths oceans to steam.

Amusing. Smiley
legendary
Activity: 1868
Merit: 5722
Neighborhood Shenanigans Dispenser
July 10, 2016, 02:28:06 AM
#20
The point is, the earth and universe are less than 7,000 years old, and probably only 6,200 years old. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm for how this is calculated out in the Bible. If the universe is much older than 6,200 years, the age cannot be calculated, because time and the space-time continuum operated differently before that time.
Cool

That look when you're not sure if someone is trolling or not...
legendary
Activity: 1134
Merit: 1598
July 10, 2016, 03:18:15 AM
#20
I don't think anybody will ever find the answer to this question. Even with the most complex theories & equations. We just can't.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
July 10, 2016, 03:11:32 AM
#19
the age of earth, nobody knows  how old the earth is, scientist research is only the resulting of not exact years and time, in the bible , only God knows that .
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1000
July 10, 2016, 02:17:43 AM
#18
Can't say I've ever really pondered that question at least not seriously, the past (and the future) doesn't really exist as far as I'm concerned. There is the here and the now and that's about it. Ultimately, time is an expression of the deterioration of your physical body. If man was immortal, it is likely the concept of time wouldn't even be acknowledged, instead it would be seen as the natural succession of events.
To answer your question, I have absolutely no idea how old the earth is. Answers provided by both religion and science require faith in a particular doctrine and are based entirely on speculations/assumptions. The real question is, should it matter how old the earth is?
full member
Activity: 210
Merit: 100
narrowpathnetwork.com
July 10, 2016, 02:02:43 AM
#17
hero member
Activity: 1638
Merit: 756
Bobby Fischer was right
July 10, 2016, 01:28:46 AM
#16
-  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years.
Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14C to be measurable.
Quote
Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years
This is also a false claim. Scientist well know about environmental variations.
Quote
Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago
Age of this document is calibrated at 35-324 BC and 202-107 BC thanks to method you claiming is false...

and so on, not a single info of you post is true, stop spreading BS.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
July 10, 2016, 12:33:02 AM
#15
We can't say how old the earth was. It says the universe was created in 6 stages over long periods of time. It also says that all life on earth originated from water.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
July 09, 2016, 11:27:41 PM
#14
How old do you think Earth is? Why?

How old are you?  Three?



hero member
Activity: 574
Merit: 500
July 09, 2016, 10:08:25 PM
#13
How old do you think Earth is? Why?
Hmm,why do you ask actually?
im just curious about what is your reason to ask here,not just looking in a google
It is pretty easy to find https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
legendary
Activity: 1868
Merit: 5722
Neighborhood Shenanigans Dispenser
July 09, 2016, 08:58:43 PM
#12
3-4 billion years-ish.
Pages:
Jump to: