|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 29, 2019 17:14:59 GMT
But how did you specifically come up with "it could easily change to 5 billion". What exact parameters are you using? What does that matter? the point is the date could potentially jump significantly. So essentially you based it on nothing and just making it up. Thanks for admitting to that. |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jan 29, 2019 17:17:55 GMT
But how did you specifically come up with "it could easily change to 5 billion". What exact parameters are you using? What does that matter? the point is the date could potentially jump significantly. ^^^ Can't openly support a YEC stance on the age of the Earth, but can make pathetic attempts to undermine credibility in scientific estimates of Earth's age. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2019 18:40:29 GMT
What does that matter? the point is the date could potentially jump significantly. ^^^ Can't openly support a YEC stance on the age of the Earth, but can make pathetic attempts to undermine credibility in scientific estimates of Earth's age. Bingo. |
|
|
|
Post by rizdek on Jan 29, 2019 18:45:33 GMT
There is also a theory suggesting that the universe can be both 6000 years old and 14.5 billion years old. Something to do with the "time dilation" principle, one of many subjects beyond my comprehension. There's also the Schrodinger's God theory, where quantum mechanics allows for the simultaneous existence and non-existence of God. So, if they had crucified Jesus under a bushel, he could be both dead and not dead at the same time? |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jan 29, 2019 19:13:42 GMT
There's also the Schrodinger's God theory, where quantum mechanics allows for the simultaneous existence and non-existence of God. So, if they had crucified Jesus under a bushel, he could be both dead and not dead at the same time? Yep, which means you could be saved and unsaved at the same time. They could also have crucified him behind a black monolith for the same effect. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 29, 2019 21:08:18 GMT
But how did you specifically come up with "it could easily change to 5 billion". What exact parameters are you using? What does that matter? the point is the date could potentially jump significantly. Great! However, I think we are all agreed that 'significantly' is not in the range of thousands of years? |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jan 30, 2019 0:39:43 GMT
It's theoretically possible, but it's highly unlikely. The technology/methods used today has obviously improved over the years since the 1800s when scientists though the Earth was only 100 million years old. As the methods improved and we got more accurate numbers, we saw "diminishing returns" in accuracy (by the 1911 we believe the earth to be 1 billion years old, by 1941 they moved it to 3 billion). Eventually perhaps we could find more accurate measurements of the earth, but it's probably going to be maybe something like 4.6 or 4.7 billion years, but not some ridiculously different number like 6000 years or anything. You and Rizdek say it’s possible. Graham says it isn’t. Make up your minds. If it indeed is possible and the date can jump from even 4.5billion to 4.6 or 4.7 then currently science doesn’t know for sure the age of the earth. Case rested. I'm still not sure what point you think you are making, or how this helps a case for Young Earth Creationism even if I were to concede to all of this. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jan 30, 2019 0:41:34 GMT
You're playing riddiculous semantics and you know it. It doesnt "know" exactly how old the Earth is, but it gives a very close approximation. You might as well be complaining science doesn't know down to the very last year how old the Earth is so we should just write it off, that's the level of riddiculousness you're presenting. So it can be off by millions of years but still a “very close approximation”. Okay, if you insist. LOL His insistence isn't required. A million years IS a very close approximation (extremely close) when you're dealing with BILLION year time-frames. You know the difference between a million and a BILLION right? |
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Sept 12, 2019 23:12:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Sept 12, 2019 23:28:37 GMT
One study is hardly representative of the entire scientific community. I doubt it's even been peer reviewed yet. Even within the article there seems to be some doubts to their methods: "Harvard astronomer Avi Loeb, who wasn't part of the study, said it an interesting and unique way to calculate the universe's expansion rate, but the large error margins limits its effectiveness until more information can be gathered." That link essentially proved nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Sept 13, 2019 0:10:56 GMT
Ahem...
The article makes no reference to revising the age of the EARTH, which is the thing you were going on and on about. (The age of the universe, a matter of physics, and the age of the earth, a matter of geology, are two separate questions.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Sept 13, 2019 0:31:53 GMT
There is also a theory suggesting that the universe can be both 6000 years old and 14.5 billion years old. Something to do with the "time dilation" principle, one of many subjects beyond my comprehension. I read that guy’s book. I can’t think of his name.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Sept 13, 2019 0:33:18 GMT
There's also the Schrodinger's God theory, where quantum mechanics allows for the simultaneous existence and non-existence of God. So, if they had crucified Jesus under a bushel, he could be both dead and not dead at the same time? Or a tomb?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Sept 13, 2019 0:38:32 GMT
Ahem...
The article makes no reference to revising the age of the EARTH, which is the thing you were going on and on about. (The age of the universe, a matter of physics, and the age of the earth, a matter of geology, are two separate questions.)
Poor old Cody, he can’t fathom that scientific data changes as the quantitive variables tighten. However, the hypothesis that the universe is 6000 years old has been falsified.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Sept 13, 2019 0:44:01 GMT
I’ve been noticing a lot of necrothread bumps.
This is way better than creating a new thread about the same topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by You_Got_A_Stew_Goin_Baby on Sept 13, 2019 1:39:18 GMT
KIBL and the wolf-something guy were the only ones on the old board, and they didn’t transfer over. Good riddance...YECs are dense as fuck.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Sept 13, 2019 2:15:02 GMT
KIBL and the wolf-something guy were the only ones on the old board, and they didn’t transfer over. Good riddance...YECs are dense as fuck. Yeah but they're hilarious, they always use the same terrible arguments: "If humans evolved from apes then why are there still monkeys? Check mate atheists!"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 10:41:44 GMT
Ahem, an article that's not about the age of the Earth. Well done you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Sept 13, 2019 10:48:44 GMT
Ahem, an article that's not about the age of the Earth. Well done you. Same point. Science does not currently know the age of the earth or universe and the estimates could change drastically in the very near future.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2019 10:53:04 GMT
Ahem, an article that's not about the age of the Earth. Well done you. Same point. Science does not currently know the age of the earth or universe and the estimates could change drastically in the very near future. Chronology is always refined, as new evidence comes to light. But I will tell you this boy... The age of the Earth and universe will never, and I mean NEVER, be refined to just 6,000 BP. |
|
