how old is the earth?

[Pneumothorax]

These are the birds you are to regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle,[a] the vulture, the black vulture, 14 the red kite, any kind of black kite, 15 any kind of raven, 16 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, 17 the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, 18 the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, 19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

 

To be fair if you look at what was being told in that book, basically, hygiene and don't eat animals that are infested with salmonella and ecoli, like no pork, no fowl.  People back then didn't understand/couldn't understand the idea of cooking things fully, washing plates, washing hands.  But they could understand when God told them just don't eat the shit and make sure you rinse your silverware in water before using them.  A good example is that they are encouraged to eat lamb and lamb can basically be eaten raw if one so desired, as well as fish, but if you eat birds raw your ass gonna probably get really sick or die or both.

[The Abdominal Snoman]

Well, they aren't scientist either. They calculated that by the age of complete fictional characters, and that add up to be 6000 years. On the other hand, there is findings, for example a tools which humans was using more than 10 000 years ago, so this religious nonsense can't be true. Earliest humans, meaning homo sapiens, were living here 250 000 years a go, and earliest upright standing ancestor of ours(homo erectus) was here 1.8 million years ago. Oldest fossils are 3.5 billion years old, so the earth has to be somewhat older. Depending the source age of the earth is 3.8 to - 4.5 billion years. And how in the name of hell they know that? "The best estimate for Earth's age is based on radiometric dating of fragments from the Canyon Diablo iron meteorite. From the fragments, scientists calculated the relative abundances of elements that formed as radioactive uranium decayed over billions of years."- Wikipedia.

lol at you now using wikipedia. When CTer's use it, you laugh and make fun of them .lmao You're all over the fucking place dude.

[muscularny]

Guys, as I exposed this guys ties to Radical Islam in Canada and his sites and apps that he builds to promote Islam he is getting more and more enraged. It started with him making a threat to me for no good reason. I will not stop exposing him and will use all legal means to tell his Islamic neighbors about his sex related activity online as well as contact all his clients including various Muslim organizations to tell them who he really is. I already reported him to many groups that monitor radical Islamic terrorists.

This guy is an ISIS sympathizer openly here on getbig and other places.

If the forum rules were different, I would post openly exactly what I have on him, SO FAR.

[Yamcha]

do people even know what a "year" is?

[mr.turbo]

Sounds about right. The Earth was formed though accretion in the solar nebula, and so were all the other planets in out solar system. Our own sun was also formed via the dense compaction of solar dust. The sun is mostly hydrogen and releases its energy through the conversion of hydrogen to helium in nuclear reactions going off constantly. It will run out of hydrogen near the end of its life and then start fusing helium into carbon. Eventually helium will be depleted and heavier elements will follow and the sun will expand outward perhaps past the Earth and Mars. The oceans will evaporate.

But where did this dust come from? it came from other stars that lived before our solar system existed. Our ancestors are these ancient massive stars that had relatively short lives but seeded our galaxy with the solar nebula clouds that were necessary for star formation. During the supernova explosions heavy elements, even gold were produced. These solar Nebulae would hang out in space until the shock waves of a massive super or hypernova explosion caused the cloud to spiral into motion which would ultimately lead to the formation of or sun and planets.

Our Universe is about 13.7 billion years old. Billions or even trillions  of solar systems have been formed in the universe in billions of galaxies. The birth of a  solar system is more common than that of a human it would seem.

clearly one of the brighter minds at work in this post

 

[mr.turbo]

I pray daily.  Raised Catholic.  I live right.  

But this article...  Wow.  

It explains a lot.  

so far the link to "the answers book 2" kindly provided by coach is the only substantive material offered on behalf of the young earth creationists position.  By that I mean the folks who take a literal interpretation of the material in the bible as factual truth that the world is 6000 years old.

In response to the science based claims about the age (creation) of the earth they would ask...

were you there???

[mr.turbo]

To be fair if you look at what was being told in that book, basically, hygiene and don't eat animals that are infested with salmonella and ecoli, like no pork, no fowl.  People back then didn't understand/couldn't understand the idea of cooking things fully, washing plates, washing hands.  But they could understand when God told them just don't eat the shit and make sure you rinse your silverware in water before using them.  A good example is that they are encouraged to eat lamb and lamb can basically be eaten raw if one so desired, as well as fish, but if you eat birds raw your ass gonna probably get really sick or die or both.

I see, but what about eating bats? those critters look pretty tasty are we still not supposed to eat them?

lets keep this simple

 

[mr.turbo]

Guys, as I exposed this guys ties to Radical Islam in Canada and his sites and apps that he builds to promote Islam he is getting more and more enraged. It started with him making a threat to me for no good reason. I will not stop exposing him and will use all legal means to tell his Islamic neighbors about his sex related activity online as well as contact all his clients including various Muslim organizations to tell them who he really is. I already reported him to many groups that monitor radical Islamic terrorists.

This guy is an ISIS sympathizer openly here on getbig and other places.

If the forum rules were different, I would post openly exactly what I have on him, SO FAR.

why the hate  

Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great commandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

— Matthew 22:35-40

[mr.turbo]

do people even know what a "year" is?

if I had to guess I would say it's how long it takes for the earth to travel around the sun

[V Man]

not what the man's interpretation of the bible says though

fixed

[mr.turbo]

Not nearl as old as Wes.

a scientists opinion

more of he same

[rocket]

I find it extremely hard to believe that there is a single person with ties to radical islam on here.

Religion has two functions left on earth:

1.  To continue to moderate the critically limited (whether by choice or lack of wit) from acting without an overarching book of rules governing their actions.  On the whole, we're keeping a lot of people from going crazy with this.

2.  To give hope for after death, when the first law of thermodynamics is beyond their comprehension (hint: all energy in the universe existed from inflation to now, none of it has been destroyed).

(I'm guessing there is a lot of *whoosh* about that last bit)

Alas, though it has a third function that is still resident that makes those of us who do not believe in anything in particular (other than physics) extremely negative towards religion.

3.  To give bat shit crazy ideas to the critically limited and legitimise their poor behaviour by suggesting said behaviour will be considered to have been "correct" in the afterlife.

It's hard to know if 1 outweighs 3, these days

[rocket]

I pray daily.  Raised Catholic.  I live right.  

But this article...  Wow.  

It explains a lot.  

No it doesn't.  All it does is cast doubt on a method of dating.  All religion ever does is cast doubt on rates of change and scientific accuracy, despite the fact that I can go outside tomorrow night and watch the ISS silhouette pass in front of the moon at a precise time down to the second, calculated by that oft-doubted science.  Despite the fact science can land probes on chunks of rock travelling at ridiculous speeds.  Despite the fact that we can measure and correctly predict time dilation between the people in the ISS and us on earth etc etc

The level of precision that is running this world's technology right now is profoundly accurate and continues to rise.  If you understood that, you'd not be doubting science.

I think you're a fairly intelligent person - or you could be.

All the people who believe the earth is 6000 years have one thing in common.  To abandon their belief, they have to take a chance of eternal damnation in the fires of hell.  I get that.  That is a tough thing to swallow.

The fact is, were it not the case that the fires of hell were waiting for a non-believer or a believer crossing into that territory, you wouldn't last 2 years believing the earth was 6000 years if you started digging into physics and the origins of the universe.  Nobody would ever swallow such weak ass evidence against science.  The only reason they do is because they are afraid for their future.

I'm not going to spend hours debating this with you or anybody, but that article explains abso-fucking-lutely, nothing.  It is you who is being lied to.  It is not proof to cast doubt on something.  That article does nothing but say that it could not be true.  It does nothing but soothe that nagging feeling at the back of your mind that is either truth or satan: that you're a party to a pack of lies.

Every day, science proves to you that it is a continually evolving towards accuracy movement.

Every day, faith puts its head in the sand and points only to moments where that accuracy has increased as if progress due to a new measurement is a negative thing.  

But the one thing you can be fucking sure of is that at no stage will that 4.5 billion years ever, ever go back to 6000 years.

[Julio Ceasar]

no human can tell how old the earth is! And those who think they can, are some stupid mother fuckers believing their own lies!

[Thong Maniac]

https://answersingenesis.org/age-of-the-earth/how-old-is-the-earth/

Lol

[Thong Maniac]

No it doesn't.  All it does is cast doubt on a method of dating.  All religion ever does is cast doubt on rates of change and scientific accuracy, despite the fact that I can go outside tomorrow night and watch the ISS silhouette pass in front of the moon at a precise time down to the second, calculated by that oft-doubted science.  Despite the fact science can land probes on chunks of rock travelling at ridiculous speeds.  Despite the fact that we can measure and correctly predict time dilation between the people in the ISS and us on earth etc etc

The level of precision that is running this world's technology right now is profoundly accurate and continues to rise.  If you understood that, you'd not be doubting science.

I think you're a fairly intelligent person - or you could be.

All the people who believe the earth is 6000 years have one thing in common.  To abandon their belief, they have to take a chance of eternal damnation in the fires of hell.  I get that.  That is a tough thing to swallow.

The fact is, were it not the case that the fires of hell were waiting for a non-believer or a believer crossing into that territory, you wouldn't last 2 years believing the earth was 6000 years if you started digging into physics and the origins of the universe.  Nobody would ever swallow such weak ass evidence against science.  The only reason they do is because they are afraid for their future.

I'm not going to spend hours debating this with you or anybody, but that article explains abso-fucking-lutely, nothing.  It is you who is being lied to.  It is not proof to cast doubt on something.  That article does nothing but say that it could not be true.  It does nothing but soothe that nagging feeling at the back of your mind that is either truth or satan: that you're a party to a pack of lies.

Every day, science proves to you that it is a continually evolving towards accuracy movement.

Every day, faith puts its head in the sand and points only to moments where that accuracy has increased as if progress due to a new measurement is a negative thing.  

But the one thing you can be fucking sure of is that at no stage will that 4.5 billion years ever, ever go back to 6000 years.

Great post. I wouldnt bother arguing with religious clowns. Life is to short.

[rocket]

no human can tell how old the earth is! And those who think they can, are some stupid mother fuckers believing their own lies!

I mean, take this specimen for example.

He has defined a line in the sand which is that we cannot date the earth.

Yet, is that really a line that is accurate?

There is tons of evidence for dating things.  Stellar evolution, geology on here and other planets, etc

If there is a lot of evidence, would it not follow that we should be able date the earth?

We currently have rovers on mars digging in the sand and finding conclusions that water was on that planet millions, if not billions of years ago.

Instead, this poor sap says "no! impossible!"

He closes his mind and then still expresses an opinion that it cannot be done.  Where does anybody get closing their mind and saying something cannot be done?  Fucking nowhere.  None of what society is about today would exist were there only people with his mindset.  He is a sheep who gets up, communicates with people around the world with technology that functions far beyond his understanding and he still thinks that his opinion on what we can or cannot do is his best evidence of the truth

[Julio Ceasar]

no human can tell how old the earth is! They can have nice theories etc but no one can ever prove it. They can only prove it by their own theories they made up.

let me repeat that: Proven "fact" by theories made up by themself. How can u verify it? Please tell me!

[pellius]

Guys, as I exposed this guys ties to Radical Islam in Canada and his sites and apps that he builds to promote Islam he is getting more and more enraged. It started with him making a threat to me for no good reason. I will not stop exposing him and will use all legal means to tell his Islamic neighbors about his sex related activity online as well as contact all his clients including various Muslim organizations to tell them who he really is. I already reported him to many groups that monitor radical Islamic terrorists.

This guy is an ISIS sympathizer openly here on getbig and other places.

If the forum rules were different, I would post openly exactly what I have on him, SO FAR.

Not clear who you are talking about.

[pellius]

no human can tell how old the earth is! They can have nice theories etc but no one can ever prove it. They can only prove it by their own theories they made up.

let me repeat that: Proven "fact" by theories made up by themself. How can u verify it? Please tell me!

Good point. There can be evidence to support a given theory. Even compelling evidence. But that does not make it a fact.

Whether there is a God that created a universe or that the universe just popped up out of nothingness is both a matter of faith. Neither can be proven.

[_aj_]

not what the bible says though

Who is to say what a year looks like to God Allah?

[Ropo]

lol at you now using wikipedia. When CTer's use it, you laugh and make fun of them .lmao You're all over the fucking place dude.

So you, an idiot, are saying that fact which is readable from thousands of science articles around the internet, isn't fact if it is on Wikipedia? The difference here is simple. If crap is crap all over the internet, it will be crap in the Wikipedia. You and your kind of idiots  can't understand the difference between the crap and the fact, so you are puzzled. Let me help you: The fact means a thing, a piece of information or knowledge, which has been proved to be a fact. As you remember, that proving thing was too hard to your kind of idiots, so you and the other foil hat idiots hasn't prove even a single detail of their fairytales, no matter which insane conspiracy theory we are talking about  

[mr.turbo]

Who is to say what a year looks like to God Allah?

that is what we are discussing

what's your position??!?

[Man of Steel]

not what the bible says though

Here's the thing, people assume my position on creation and the ages of the universe/earth, but since I was about 10 years old I've been questioning the ages of things and today I'm much more persuaded by an old earth and old universe perspective.  I actually perceived a “day-age” notion of creation before I’d even realized it had been proposed.  I asked my Mom about it as kid and she had no idea but said “it could be”.

Does this damage my faith or scripture?  Not at all....it actually strengthens it (much longer discussion obviously).

Further, the age of the earth and the universe have no bearing whatsoever on faith in Jesus Christ and his revelation in my life.

Still, there is a part of me that has never been convinced of a young earth creation perspective.  I am overcome with the evidence for an old earth and old universe and how current geological and cosmological findings help strengthen and align with the creation accounts in Genesis and Job (on which my faith is founded first but again a much longer discussion).

I am much more persuaded by the notion of 6 days of creation occurring over 6 ages and that in fact we are existing in God's 7th day/age of rest after his activity of creation (as all 6 creation days had a “morning and evening” except day 7 which appears to be ongoing to the present).  The hebrew word for “day” is "yom" and actually has multiple definitions.  "Yom" can refer to the daylight, an actual 24-hour day or a long expanse of time (ex: an age).  Moses who was divinely inspired to write Genesis had no other Hebrew word other than “yom” to use to describe these things so we must be willing to step deeper into the text and the source languages to understand it (because Hebrew to English isn’t always 100% cut and dry).   Hebrew words used in the Genesis creation account such as “happa’am”  which literally translates into “at long last” (which Adam exclaimed after Eve’s creation) and Adam being asked to tend the entire garden and name all the animals, being put into deep sleep, being operated on for the creation of woman and the determination that man should no longer be alone (implying a period of loneliness on Adam’s part prior to Eve’s creation) would be hard, hard pressed to fit into a single 24 hour day.   Also biblical references to the “generations of creation” and the biblical statement that a thousand years is like a day to God is compelling.  These are just some things to consider and by no means an exhaustive list  and I haven’t even discussed how creation events and cosmological and geological ages of the universe and earth align with creation accounts LOL….and they do!!

Gleason Archer was perhaps the foremost linguistic theologian who ever lived and prior to his death his explanation of biblical Hebrew (which he was an expert) puts the literal explanation of "yom" as a literal 24-hour day in Genesis 1 and 2 in absolute question.....he is by no means alone in this interpretation.  There’s an old story that goes that as a student of languages Gleason would actually take notes in one language class using ancient Hittite LOL!!

Admittedly I was raised in a typical young earth (6000 years) literal days creation household, but I've done my own independent study and actually attended a series of lectures on these very topics over this last weekend (believers actually read and study).  I've also made it my personal goal in 2014 to finally come to terms with my position on the age of the universe/earth, biblical creation accounts in Genesis and Job (and elsewhere…yes there are more creation accounts than Genesis), and my definite position on evolution.  I see definite evidence for microbial changes (ex: evolution of bacteria and viruses yet both remain bacteria and viruses – the flu virus) and definite speciation in very small animals under 10lbs.  We see that some birds (ex: some finches) have evolved slightly due to environmental circumstances (yet remain finches), but no significant evidence for a "macro evolution" position (one species into another) has ever been completely validated.  The fossil evidence of the cambrian explosion (so many, many animals suddenly appearing at once) and the totality of fossil record lacking any specific transitioning examples simply doesn't support a species to species (macro) evolutionary change (and yes I'm aware that 'science' only has 'evolution' not 'macro' and 'micro').  We merely have artistic renderings (including some definite artistic license....the classic "deer to whale" evolution example) to help make the case.  But a definite record of fossils?  None yet.  Even though our universe if almost 14 billion years old that is not enough time for a large species to evolve into another; hence some sects of the scientific community push for an even grander age of the cosmos than has been established in order to compensate for this…….modern cosmology refutes this “even older universe” position.

At this point in time I am much more persuaded and adopt an old-earth creationist perspective as I can still make a definite distinction between the concepts of age and evolution while in absolute support of creation, but I plan on continuing to study more debates (old v young creation, old creation v evolution, young creation v evolution, etc…) and continue my independent reading (I read this material everyday and listen to debates on these subjects almost daily).  I’ve already taken university level physics, biology, genetics and chemistry courses (yes believers study science in school also) so I grasp the secular, scientific position (not exhaustively LOL, but beyond an average layman).  

I’m humble enough to admit that I don’t have all the answers and believe me that coming to terms with this is not something I take lightly (it shakes some believers to their core and others to cry "heresy!!"), but like others I will continue to search out answers honestly and proactively.  I’m simply willing to examine both secular science and theology and do so with an attitude of learning and humility.

Although, my foundation is now and forever in Jesus Christ

You also have to realize that the Hebrew language is quite small.  One individual can memorize every word in the language so attempts at producing new translations from the same available manuscripts can produce slightly different translations in terms of OT material.  Not all linguists agree on how words translate.  Often times the differences are very slight, but occassionally they're significant.

For example, the word "yom" in Hebrew means day, but "yom" can be translated according to 5 or 6 correct definitions.   In terms of the Genesis creation account some textual critics say "yom" means a literal 24-hour day and other textual critics say that same "yom" means an age or expanse of time.  In this case the context is needed to help define, but (in this case) the context still has support for both young and old earth creationist perspectives.    

========================================================================================================

The bible says many things such as bats are birds. (Leviticus 11:13-19)

These are the birds you are to regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle,[a] the vulture, the black vulture, 14 the red kite, any kind of black kite, 15 any kind of raven, 16 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, 17 the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, 18 the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, 19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

 

Modern classifications of animals are not found in the bible.  Typically animals were grouped or referred to according to their own "kind" in scripture.   That said, it would not be incorrect for the ancient hebraic culture to classify a winged animal (such as a bat) that has movements and hunting abilities similar to a bird within that type of animal kind.   It's not a biblical error, but it certainly is a difference in classification methods of the ancient hebraic culture and today's modern biological animal taxonomy.

In actuality the crux of the verse is about the "cleanliness" of the animals as it refers to the Israelites and their alignment with Jehovah.

A species and a biblical "kind" are not the same.  

For example, a dog is a kind of animal, but there are many breeds of dogs within the varying species of dogs.  

God could bring forth many different species of dogs and breeds of dogs from a single kind of dog.

I suppose a kind would be more appropriately associated with a genus; although, the term "kind" isn't explicity defined in scripture nor is it directly associated with modern biological taxonomy.

If you step into the Christian worldview then you must allow God to be God and in doing so we trascend the bounds of naturalism.    God neither requires the vehicle of evolution to bring forth many types of spiders from a single pair of spiders nor is he bound by the rules of man-made taxonomy.

For what it’s worth.  

I'm just a regular guy...not a scientist...not a theologian.  A regular guy that loves Jesus Christ and whose life was changed because of him.

If the earth is old then great.  If the earth is young then great.  Either way it was created by our Lord and Savior and I'm redeemed regardless.

Good thread....I enjoy these topics immensely!  I always learn something new.

Hopefully it won't devolve into a typical "let's bash the Christians" dog pile thing.

[Irongrip400]

The bible is kind of a "greatest hits" compilation, and it has many authors. Yes, there are those who insist it's literal, but that's a tiny slice of Christians.

It's disturbing when people high-five each-other over "calling out" people over this, and patting themselves over the back when people contradict themselves.

How old is the earth, you piece of shit?  Is it 10 seconds long? Does time hang eternally like a drop of dew on an orange leaf? Can your watch predict when time will end?

You have no imagination and your argument is the product of a simple animal brain living in the slice of a moment like a sample of a petri dish that has been scraped onto a slide.

You eat some mushrooms today? That was a very interesting paragraph.

My opinion on the earth, I'd say millions or billions of years old.