Age of the earth

[Tuto]

This is something that has been bothering me. Not too long ago i was having a conversation with a guy i know about Christianity. He is a fundamental Christian i guess, and we started talking about evolution etc. At one point the subject of the age of the earth came up. I learned in school that the earth is like 4-5 billion years old. He on the other hand insisted that the earth was 6000 years old. He said that he could give an internet address to a site that proves this. Since neither of us have any expertise in this subject we decided to leave it at that.

I know that there are many people on these forums that believe that the earth is 6000 years old and probably can give me a link to a site that claims that it can prove it. Since i don't have a single clue about the science that is behind measuring the age of the earth, it wouldn't do me much good.

Later i started thinking about the fact that we can artificially make diamonds. As i understand it diamonds are supposed to be really old, like billions of years old, so wouldn't it be completely ridiculous if we could make diamonds yet we were billions of year wrong about their age?

When you start to think like this, where does it end? We know about DNA, nuclear energy, viruses, space etc. yet we would be totally wrong about evolution, The big bang etc?

I mean how do you deal with this? If i would become a believer i would have to rationalize everything thing i just wrote and a ton more to fully believe what the bible says is true.

[ConservChrist]

Well a few things to that:
I don't have a link, sorry. not at the moment anyway. BUT I would say that yes I agree, the earth is around, 6,000 years old, at a maximum of 10,000 years old.
Now you said,

When you start to think like this, where does it end? We know about DNA, nuclear energy, viruses, space etc. yet we would be totally wrong about evolution, The big bang etc?

but look at it. You stated things we KNOW, then compared it with evolution...something no one knows. The Big Bang theory is what? Theory. Merely an idea. Nothing more. Same with Evolution. it is a theory, an idea. nothing more. and False and completely a lie altogether.
There is more support in the bible and in the world that support that the world is not that old, that we as humans lived with dinosaurs, and Adam and Eve were, indeed, the very first AND only humans created.

Also, with carbon dating...it isn't fact nor accurate. I read in a book somewhere, (sadly I can not quote nor refer) that said that scienctists tested carbon dating on a pair of shoes. THey got results saying the shoes were thousands of years old. I'm sure with some research I could find this and refer you to it to see for yourself, but as I mentioned, I don't have that information at the moment.

As for people living with dinosaurs. In the bible, in several instances, a monster, or large animal is discribed. Sadly, people try and say that these creatures' discriptions are for creatures of today, such as hippos or gators. but this is not true. For some are discribed as tall, huge, with thunderous tails. Doesn't sound like a hippo to me.

[HisLeast]

Hey Tuto

I know that there are many people on these forums that believe that the earth is 6000 years old and probably can give me a link to a site that claims that it can prove it. Since i don't have a single clue about the science that is behind measuring the age of the earth, it wouldn't do me much good.

This is a question that never goes away because there's lots of interesting evidence and hypotheses on all sides of the debate. Personally, I'm undecided but lean towards an old earth. I'm science minded, but have no specific natural science training. What I find most compelling is that multiple, non-dependant schools draw roughly the same conclusions about the earth's age. I DO keep my mind open though, and try not to be dogmatic about it.

Later i started thinking about the fact that we can artificially make diamonds. As i understand it diamonds are supposed to be really old, like billions of years old, so wouldn't it be completely ridiculous if we could make diamonds yet we were billions of year wrong about their age?

The trick is, we make diamonds synthetically. If we were to leave diamond production to nature, how long would it take to do the same thing? Most geologists would say "a really really long time".

When you start to think like this, where does it end? We know about DNA, nuclear energy, viruses, space etc. yet we would be totally wrong about evolution, The big bang etc?

Yes. Seems like we know too much to be wrong sometimes, right? Well, consider that before Einstein developed the theory of relativity (and turned the physics world on its head), academia of the day figured mankind pretty much knew all there was to know. Not to say earlier theories were "stupid", they just encompassed all the observed data as best as it could at the time.

I mean how do you deal with this? If i would become a believer i would have to rationalize everything thing i just wrote and a ton more to fully believe what the bible says is true.

Here's an interesting question: what do you believe the bible says?
There's basically two schools of thought on the creation story.
1) Its literal: God tells Moses exactly how it was all done, in literal detail. The word "day" means "24 hours"
2) Its figurative: God shows Moses "generally" how it was done. References to "day" are figurative and could mean "age".
These two ideas are contested passionately in Christianity. Some are adamant that the truth is (1), sore are adamant that the truth is (2), and some (like me) can't decide.

You and I are alike in that we like to have things figured out before we commit to them. Its gotta make sense before we take it into our hearts and say "Yes, this is truth!". So lets leave the exact age of earth out of the equation for a moment, and apply that need for "sense" in the opposite direction.

Does evolution make sense of the human experience?
How is that we seem to know what's "fair" and "right" and "wrong" and "unfair" even as little children?
If we're all no more than a freakish cosmic accident, who says anything we believe is right and wrong?
If all we have is about 60 years on this rock and then *poof*, nothingness, why on earth should we be bound by honor, fairness, law, and good?
If someone killed your family tomorrow, and you were alone, would the empty cosmic void care about the injustice?

When I asked myself these questions, I realized that there's good reason to believe in God. Once I made that determination, my next question was "did this God reveal him/herself specifically to creation".

I'm glad you're asking questions and carefully considering the answers. You don't have to give up reason to find the answers and be satisfied.
Hope to see more of your questions in the future.



Rob.

[Tuto]

Well a few things to that:
I don't have a link, sorry. not at the moment anyway. BUT I would say that yes I agree, the earth is around, 6,000 years old, at a maximum of 10,000 years old.
Now you said,

but look at it. You stated things we KNOW, then compared it with evolution...something no one knows. The Big Bang theory is what? Theory. Merely an idea. Nothing more. Same with Evolution. it is a theory, an idea. nothing more. and False and completely a lie altogether.
There is more support in the bible and in the world that support that the world is not that old, that we as humans lived with dinosaurs, and Adam and Eve were, indeed, the very first AND only humans created.

Also, with carbon dating...it isn't fact nor accurate. I read in a book somewhere, (sadly I can not quote nor refer) that said that scienctists tested carbon dating on a pair of shoes. THey got results saying the shoes were thousands of years old. I'm sure with some research I could find this and refer you to it to see for yourself, but as I mentioned, I don't have that information at the moment.

As for people living with dinosaurs. In the bible, in several instances, a monster, or large animal is discribed. Sadly, people try and say that these creatures' discriptions are for creatures of today, such as hippos or gators. but this is not true. For some are discribed as tall, huge, with thunderous tails. Doesn't sound like a hippo to me.

I don't want to insult you, but the fact that your referred the theory of evolution and the big bang theory as just ideas takes a lot of credibility away from your post. I mean i am no expert but even i know that there is a huge difference between a scientific theory and what your average person would call a theory.

I cant give an opinion about the accuracy of carbon dating, because i don't know anything about the science that goes behind it. No book or internet link will change that, because without a doubt understanding it requires advanced knowledge in many different fields. But the thing is that the people that actually know about the science seem to think that its accurate. Who am i to argue with that?

Then we come to the dinosaur part. Even though it would be nice to believe that dinosaur lived here with humans, there are still a lot of scientist working on the field of evolution and billions of dollars invested in the research. It just feels impossible to believe in something so simple.

[ConservChrist]

Well theories are ideas. and most scientific theories are foolish. Being foolish, sadly, they throw away a lot of money. Either way, the contrast is Truth and theory. People choose which to follow. I choose to follow the Truth. You say the Truth may sound simple..honestly, it is. The bible is straight forward, direct, blunt, simple, and true. It is people, religion, and theories people come up with, using their faulty scientific methods, that make the Truth difficult.

But perhaps, I I don't know what a theory is. I thought, it was an idea. A hypthothesis. A prediction.

[Tuto]

Hey Tuto




You and I are alike in that we like to have things figured out before we commit to them. Its gotta make sense before we take it into our hearts and say "Yes, this is truth!". So lets leave the exact age of earth out of the equation for a moment, and apply that need for "sense" in the opposite direction.

Does evolution make sense of the human experience?
How is that we seem to know what's "fair" and "right" and "wrong" and "unfair" even as little children?
If we're all no more than a freakish cosmic accident, who says anything we believe is right and wrong?
If all we have is about 60 years on this rock and then *poof*, nothingness, why on earth should we be bound by honor, fairness, law, and good?
If someone killed your family tomorrow, and you were alone, would the empty cosmic void care about the injustice?

When I asked myself these questions, I realized that there's good reason to believe in God. Once I made that determination, my next question was "did this God reveal him/herself specifically to creation".

I'm glad you're asking questions and carefully considering the answers. You don't have to give up reason to find the answers and be satisfied.
Hope to see more of your questions in the future.



Rob.

Thanks for your answer. I am a bit out of my league when questioning the validity of evolution etc. and the points you just now presented are probably more important.
If we look back at history i think you and i can both agree that the concept of right and wrong seem to vary greatly between societies. There has been slavery, war, genocide, and many other horrible things done in different societies, some of them Christian. It seems that the current concept of right and wrong has been around for a very short while and it seems to be constantly developing.

About the children part. I once saw a nature show where child monkeys played with others of their kind. They didn't want to kill each other and neither did the adults. Obviously they understood the importance of their pact. Couldn't the human behavior you described be explained the same way?

I have to say that the thing that draws me to these forums is probably the fact that I don't want to believe that after i die there is nothing left. But that alone isn't enough the believe in something, even though its tempting.

[Tuto]

Well theories are ideas. and most scientific theories are foolish. Being foolish, sadly, they throw away a lot of money. Either way, the contrast is Truth and theory. People choose which to follow. I choose to follow the Truth. You say the Truth may sound simple..honestly, it is. The bible is straight forward, direct, blunt, simple, and true. It is people, religion, and theories people come up with, using their faulty scientific methods, that make the Truth difficult.

But perhaps, I I don't know what a theory is. I thought, it was an idea. A hypthothesis. A prediction.

Science

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by rigorous observations in the natural world, or by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations, and is predictive, logical, and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections, inclusion in a yet wider theory, or succession. Commonly, many more specific hypotheses may be logically bound together by just one or two theories. As a rule for use of the term, theories tend to deal with much broader sets of universals than do hypotheses, which ordinarily deal with much more specific sets of phenomena or specific applications of a theory.
Of several competing theories, one theory may be superior to another in terms of its approximation of reality. Scientific tests of the quality of a theory include its conformity to known facts and its ability to generate hypotheses with outcomes that would predict further testable facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory#Science

[markinro]

This is something that has been bothering me. Not too long ago i was having a conversation with a guy i know about Christianity. He is a fundamental Christian i guess, and we started talking about evolution etc. At one point the subject of the age of the earth came up. I learned in school that the earth is like 4-5 billion years old. He on the other hand insisted that the earth was 6000 years old. He said that he could give an internet address to a site that proves this. Since neither of us have any expertise in this subject we decided to leave it at that.

I know that there are many people on these forums that believe that the earth is 6000 years old and probably can give me a link to a site that claims that it can prove it. Since i don't have a single clue about the science that is behind measuring the age of the earth, it wouldn't do me much good.

Later i started thinking about the fact that we can artificially make diamonds. As i understand it diamonds are supposed to be really old, like billions of years old, so wouldn't it be completely ridiculous if we could make diamonds yet we were billions of year wrong about their age?

When you start to think like this, where does it end? We know about DNA, nuclear energy, viruses, space etc. yet we would be totally wrong about evolution, The big bang etc?

I mean how do you deal with this? If i would become a believer i would have to rationalize everything thing i just wrote and a ton more to fully believe what the bible says is true.

What's the problem with the earth's age being only a fraction of what evolutionists claim ? Look at the advances we have made in just 100 years. You have to remember, the planet wasn't anything like it was during the time of Adam/Eve. Adam was given dominion over God's creative work. He named ALL the animals - which had to take a VERY long time. The judgements came - not when Eve disobeyed but when Adam messed up. The judgements affected the WHOLE of creation but God had a backup plan - Jesus - the 2nd Adam.

I recorded the ages/births of everyone in Genesis - those that I could. If I recall, 2000 years passed up until Joseph. So, here we have hard documentation of the earth in its infancy. What do evolutionists have ? GUESSES - ASSUMPTIONS - BASELESS THEORIES - all geared towards one goal - removing God from the equation. In other words, to take the place of God. Hmmm..who was the last turkey who tried this ???

Personally, I don't think evolution nor creation should be taught in the public schools.

[HisLeast]

Thanks for your answer. I am a bit out of my league when questioning the validity of evolution etc. and the points you just now presented are probably more important.

Yeah. Its a bit like asking why physicists haven't unified the field theories when you're barely out of high school math. The best you can do is research the theory's claims, research its critiques, and ask questions as best you can.

For example... my questions stand as...
1) Do we have concrete examples of organisms gaining genetic information via mutation? Or more plainly: is there such thing as a beneficial mutation, since every mutation we know of tends to make the host less sexually dominant and less suited to environment.
2) How does step-wise evolution account for complex organs, when such organs are utterly useless when not whole. In other words, how is an "almost eye" useful? How is an "almost lung" useful? How is a flipper-hoof hybrid equal to a hoof or as a flipper? Some things just don't work unless they're whole.
3) If spontaneous generation is pretty universally disdained, how does abiogenesis occur?

If we look back at history i think you and i can both agree that the concept of right and wrong seem to vary greatly between societies. There has been slavery, war, genocide, and many other horrible things done in different societies, some of them Christian. It seems that the current concept of right and wrong has been around for a very short while and it seems to be constantly developing.

I'd agree that history sometimes (not all the time) favors the victor, but it has not been as morally flexible as you might think. Do you think African slaves felt their ordeal to be just? In a Godless universe it wouldn't matter what they thought. I think the slavery, war, genocide and other horrible things were just as horrible then as they were now... you just need to find the group of people who were the victims and they'd tell you straight up.

About the children part. I once saw a nature show where child monkeys played with others of their kind. They didn't want to kill each other and neither did the adults. Obviously they understood the importance of their pact. Couldn't the human behavior you described be explained the same way?

Yeah... there's a case for pack mentality, but to me pack/herd mentality doesn't cut it. If I'm ultimately accountable to no-one, what do I care about someone not in my pack? If my pack/herd is stronger, why not lay waste to the another and take their stuff? Why is rape, theft, molestation, and deceit so universally felt as unjust? Many people would say its because it interferes with someone else's right to living their life. What right? In a Godless universe, who gave them such rights and why should those rights supersede my strength to impose my own survival, comfort, and pleasure?

I have to say that the thing that draws me to these forums is probably the fact that I don't want to believe that after i die there is nothing left. But that alone isn't enough the believe in something, even though its tempting.

"Is this all there is"?
Its as good a place to start as any. Its good to have you here.

[tango]

Thanks for your answer. I am a bit out of my league when questioning the validity of evolution etc. and the points you just now presented are probably more important.

HisLeast already gave you some good examples of almost-organs.

I'd also urge you to consider systems where multiple life-forms interact with each other. Take something simple like insects pollinating flowers. With no insects, why would a flower develop, and how long would it last if it was never pollinated? On the other hand, how long would an insect last if there were no flowers from which to draw food?

In the absence of an insect the flower would not survive. In the absence of a flower the insect would not survive. To me it seems the chances of both developing, purely by chance, at a sufficiently similar time to take advantage of each other, are so low as to require more faith than it takes to believe that God created everything.

[Tanya~]

Later i started thinking about the fact that we can artificially make diamonds. As i understand it diamonds are supposed to be really old, like billions of years old, so wouldn't it be completely ridiculous if we could make diamonds yet we were billions of year wrong about their age?

There is a bit of confusion here. The question is not about how old a diamond is, but how long it takes to make a diamond. The creation of a diamond is not dependent on a long time. You need the right materials and the right conditions, and you can make a diamond or any other kind of gemstone for that matter, in a laboratory. These "created" gemstones as they are called are not synthetic because they are the real thing. The fact that they can be made in the laboratory proves that it doesn't take millions of years for a diamond to form.

It can also be demonstrated that various things can be fossilized in a very short period of time. What is needed to make a fossil is not a long period of time but rather, the right conditions and the right materials. Here you can see a picture of a miner's hat that is completely fossilized.

When you start to think like this, where does it end? We know about DNA, nuclear energy, viruses, space etc. yet we would be totally wrong about evolution, The big bang etc?

I'm not sure what the conflict is here. The answer is YES we can be totally wrong about the Big Bang. As more and more information comes in it is becoming evident that much of what has been believed about astronomy is not correct. When this stuff piles up and gets to a critical point, it will have to be acknowledged that much of what is believed and taught today is WRONG. This article on what is called "Surprise Effects" should be easy to read as it is written in layman's terms. It explains some of the "surprises" that are coming to light as we learn more about what is out there in space. Science has a long history of being wrong about a lot of things. That's why it keeps changing.

Those things that are solidly known and do not change are not in conflict with what the Bible teaches. For example you know that if you plant an apple seed, you will get an apple tree, and that apple tree will produce apples. This is scientific fact, and is in keeping with Scripture which says that each plant will reproduce after its own kind. Those things that are in conflict with the plain and straight-forward teaching of Scripture have not been proven, and are subject to change in the future.

I mean how do you deal with this? If i would become a believer i would have to rationalize everything thing i just wrote and a ton more to fully believe what the bible says is true.

If you are willing to do just a little bit of investigating on your own you will find that the Creationist viewpoint is really not as outlandish and ridiculous as you have been led to believe. Both links I provided for you above have much more on those websites that can answer the questions you may have about origins. Consider it with an open mind. You might be surprised.

[Tuto]

Yeah. Its a bit like asking why physicists haven't unified the field theories when you're barely out of high school math. The best you can do is research the theory's claims, research its critiques, and ask questions as best you can.

For example... my questions stand as...
1) Do we have concrete examples of organisms gaining genetic information via mutation? Or more plainly: is there such thing as a beneficial mutation, since every mutation we know of tends to make the host less sexually dominant and less suited to environment.
2) How does step-wise evolution account for complex organs, when such organs are utterly useless when not whole. In other words, how is an "almost eye" useful? How is an "almost lung" useful? How is a flipper-hoof hybrid equal to a hoof or as a flipper? Some things just don't work unless they're whole.
3) If spontaneous generation is pretty universally disdained, how does abiogenesis occur?


I'd agree that history sometimes (not all the time) favors the victor, but it has not been as morally flexible as you might think. Do you think African slaves felt their ordeal to be just? In a Godless universe it wouldn't matter what they thought. I think the slavery, war, genocide and other horrible things were just as horrible then as they were now... you just need to find the group of people who were the victims and they'd tell you straight up.


Yeah... there's a case for pack mentality, but to me pack/herd mentality doesn't cut it. If I'm ultimately accountable to no-one, what do I care about someone not in my pack? If my pack/herd is stronger, why not lay waste to the another and take their stuff? Why is rape, theft, molestation, and deceit so universally felt as unjust? Many people would say its because it interferes with someone else's right to living their life. What right? In a Godless universe, who gave them such rights and why should those rights supersede my strength to impose my own survival, comfort, and pleasure?


"Is this all there is"?
Its as good a place to start as any. Its good to have you here.

Tell you the truth i don't think i can form an opinion about the validity of evolution. It would probably be the same as if somebody handed me a blue print of a nuclear reactor and asked me to explain how does it work?

The African slaves them selfs also had slaves from neighboring villages. They also practiced genocide, war etc. long before the white man turned them into slaves.
One of the cardinal mistake of looking at history is to judge or look at it from modern worlds perspective. For example today Genghis Khan would be thought as a monster because his wars killed millions of people, but back then everything was different and he was probably thought to be a great leader, because he had the qualities that were valued during that time. Societies where completely different from ours, the way people made a living or got food was different and the way people thought was different. Thats why you cant take a historical event and judge it by the values we currently have.

Who are the monkeys accountably to? Like i said my knowledge of evolutions is very limited but i think it could be argued that humans like other animals through natural selection have developed mechanisms that are meant to ensure the success of our species.

[apothanein kerdos]

The Bible never says the Earth is 6,000 years old. Instead, people look to the genealogies in order to date the Earth. The problem is the Ancient Hebrews don't do genealogies like we do. If you look at some of them throughout the Bible, some are missing names that others have. This isn't a contradiction - it's just that ANE (ancient near eastern) people traced lineage back via well known people, not every name.

In other words, the Bible is really silent on how old the Earth truly is. That, however, is why some people believe it to be that young.

[The Preacher]

Young Earther's site that justifies their position:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/

Old Earther's site that offers a rebuttal to most of Ken Ham's claims

http://www.answersincreation.org/


I met Ken Ham and Gary Parker at a seminar thay gave on young earth theory about 10 years ago. They posed some interesting questions about old earth theory and the inaccuracy of the uranium to lead and pottasium to argon dating methods. Carbon dating systems are invalid for dating objects in the millions of years. There were however questions they couldn't answer. Such as the distances that can be shown with light years by observing distance galaxies. These distances are are observed using Doppler/red shift,gravitational lenses and other methods. The only explantion they could give was that God created the universe with an appearance of age and countered with a question on how many rings did I think the first tree had. While such sophmoric rhetoric may suffice for most Christians it seems to be akin to most scientists to the flat earth theory that the catholic church clung too for many years,despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Read the above links and decide for yourself.

[ConservChrist]

Well a few things to that:
I don't have a link, sorry. not at the moment anyway. BUT I would say that yes I agree, the earth is around, 6,000 years old, at a maximum of 10,000 years old.
Now you said,

but look at it. You stated things we KNOW, then compared it with evolution...something no one knows. The Big Bang theory is what? Theory. Merely an idea. Nothing more. Same with Evolution. it is a theory, an idea. nothing more. and False and completely a lie altogether.
There is more support in the bible and in the world that support that the world is not that old, that we as humans lived with dinosaurs, and Adam and Eve were, indeed, the very first AND only humans created.

Also, with carbon dating...it isn't fact nor accurate. I read in a book somewhere, (sadly I can not quote nor refer) that said that scienctists tested carbon dating on a pair of shoes. THey got results saying the shoes were thousands of years old. I'm sure with some research I could find this and refer you to it to see for yourself, but as I mentioned, I don't have that information at the moment.

As for people living with dinosaurs. In the bible, in several instances, a monster, or large animal is discribed. Sadly, people try and say that these creatures' discriptions are for creatures of today, such as hippos or gators. but this is not true. For some are discribed as tall, huge, with thunderous tails. Doesn't sound like a hippo to me.

It has been a while since I read the book about the dating of rocks and whatnot. I might have gotten it messed up with something else when I mentioned the shoes. But the link below has an article explaining in full the different types of dating methods and their fallibility.

http://answersingenesis.org/articles...c-dating-prove