Bitcoin Forum

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

Are you interesting in religious or scientific answer?
If you literally believe Bible, answer is about 6 000 years.
If you believe science, answer is about 7 billion years.
You can research about it much more on Internet, specially on Wikipedia.

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).

Google suggest that earth is about 4.543 billion years old which is a good educated guess. Theres a lot of work goes into deciding this by using radiation half lives and all that sort of thig to decide on the age (best to google this for yourself . But should you want to take a completely made up uneducated guess that goes against everything we've learned so far then the answer is 6-10 thousand years.

To answer your question i would go with my first answer because i dont believe in fairy tales.

As i wasn't there to see its birth i dunno. The odds of it being more than 6000 years old are really really high imo.

It can be older than what every body think it is.
Nobody really knows.
It is one of earth's many mysterties that science can not be sure of since they have been wrong in the past with how old things are before.

Ok it's not a question of thinking or whatever. You've got two choices, denying physic reality or accepting it.
Unless laws of physics have been clearly EXTREMELY different, the earth is something like 4.5 billions year old.

And it's not a question of guessing we KNOW it, simply thanks to radioactivity studies!

Interesting hypothesis - some scientists believe that our current Homo Sapiens civilization is not a first intelligent life form which inhabited Earth.
In fact Earth is billions old rock and we had many life cycles during that time.
Species were born and died, we could had even multiple nuclear holocausts caused by 'humans from before time' and total revitalization of the whole planet...

10 years or something

I'm not sure because I don't live that long to see earth from the beginning until now  ;D

earth is so old now. I think its age is more than 5000 years because Adam's age is 1000 years, and it's long time ago when Adam was alive.

OP is not asking for your age :D. There are many theories about the age of the earth but ranking should be like this, Universe > Our Solar System > Earth. From an article that i read [1] the age of earth should be few billion years.

[1] http://www.speed-light.info/miracles_of_quran/age_of_universe.htm

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.

8)

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

How old are you?  Three?

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.

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.
This is also a false claim. Scientist well know about environmental variations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating_considerations).
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.

My age is 41.

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?

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 .

I don't think anybody will ever find the answer to this question. Even with the most complex theories & equations. We just can't.

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. :)

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

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.

8)

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.

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.

8)

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.

8)

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.

Nobody is saying that meteors don't happen. But you are not taking into account the electric cosmos, the water that used to protect the earth, and the fact that most of the water of the upper atmosphere of the past boiled off the heat.

There are lots of things to be considered. Science often looks at them point by point rather than considering the whole.

8)

I dunno how old is Earth now and im not interested that much. What is more interesting for me is how long will Earth last?. I believe others is more interested in this rather than knowng how old earth is.

The sun will exhaust it's fuel supply eventually, swell and vaporise planet earth. We've got a few billion years left yet.

Scientists have calculated that Earth is 4.54 billion years old, with an error range of 50 million years or only 6000 years old as the Bible teaches

i think Scientists answer are more relevant

Amazes me how the dubious bible god of Christian mythology got things so very wrong.

Trouble is it casts doubt on other parts of the book. Strong doubt.
You would of thought someone would of edited out all the bible errors by now and created the New New Testament, though probably why that never happened is instead of a weighty tome, we'd be left with a feeble pamphlet. And that's being optimistic.

Badecker is a long term troller on this Politics and society section. You should expect that all his claims came from non-progressing religion while he oppose science which is probably working and been prove to give a progress in our life.

I go with science, i don't believe in fairy tales.

Quite the opposite. BADecker likes science. This is why he is continually showing things like the fact that people believing science theory to be fact when it is not, is believing lies. BADecker is trying to uphold the good name of science while showing that liars are using fake science to attempt to control people for their own, political will.

You are probably one of those people who wants to believe the so-called science lies that scientists and politicians and the media promote.

8)

If you went with science, you would believe God... because real science (not fairytale science) and the Bible complement and uphold each other.

8)

Why do people think,that the creation of Earth in Bible in true?
It is such a bullshit for me,that i just laugh if I hear about it.
Just believe science,there are proofs at leasts -,-

It's most likely somewhere between 5,000 years and 5,000,000,000 years

just watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QfjrMcXPHM ( indonesian sub but english dub )
Earth was being created on 4,500,000,000 years ago and all unverse was being created 14,500,000,000 years ago, I was so amaze by this fact

It's exactly 2 years older than it was on this date two years ago.

Of course that is a ridiculous answer. There is no way to ever know EXACTLY how old the earth is.
                   
There are only educated guesses based on observations and assumptions.

Not only that, the farthest we can go back with any reasonable accuracy is about 4,500 years.

8)

BADlogic HATES science because it casts a nasty huge bad shadow of doubt over the bible. Doubt begrets more doubt which weakens faith. Weakened faith equals weakened dreams of heaven.
The religious elite have dangled that heaven carrot in front of him for a long long time.
It's his.
He wants it.
He's going to get it whatever it takes.
He's owed it.
No-one is taking that away from him, certainly not that pesky old science.

Which is why he's at war with science. One he will lose.


On the other hand BADlogic LOVES pseudoscience. Cannot get enough of it. Fantastic. Pseudoscience supports the bible. Doubt vanishes, faith is restored, heaven back on the radar.

Pseudoscience GOOD, science BAD.

And knowing this information helps because??

Why is this even in the poltics section.. it should be in towards off-topic.

I suppose the age of Earth, like most scientific constants (not technically constant, I know, don't shoot me down) such as the speed of light, is subject to political manipulation.

Contest the groupthink!

That's about right.

It's not so hard to know the number of billions of years, one pretty easy way is to look at our Moon.  It is a perfect historical record of events, without any of the atmospheric processes, weathering, water action and so forth.

... and only about 10,000 years of moon dust depth.    8)

Well I agree with you man since you have a source I also have my own source. According to an earth science book used by grade 11 here in the Philippines. Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. This estimate is based on the age of meteorites found on earth I mean in the meteorites is the oldest ones found here on earth.

Watch this.

The Earth is 4.5 million years old.

The Earth is 100,000 years old.

The Earth is 6,000 years old.

The Earth is 15 minutes old.

Do I have to prove it?

8)

being Muslim i can give you answer in Islamic point of view. According o Islam it is only Allah who know that how old is the earth. but it is also said that the earth is present from the time if the earth is full of grain and a bird comes once in a year and eat one a sing one so how much time will the bird take to eat all the grain so it is said that earth is so old.

how do they even calculate something like this?

Typically, I ask google... like this:

https://www.google.com/search?q=how+do+scientists+calculate+the+age+of+earth (https://www.google.com/search?q=how+do+scientists+calculate+the+age+of+earth)

Google responds... like this:

How is Earth's Age Calculated? (http://www.livescience.com/32321-how-is-earths-age-calculated.html)

How Do Scientists Measure Earth Age? (http://dnr.louisiana.gov/assets/TAD/education/BGBB/1/measuring.html)

Its interesting to know that.If the universe created 14.5 billions years ago then theres a biggest possibility that other civilization is more advanced than us.But so far this is yet to be discovered as we dont have contact yet. Nice info, thanks.

None of this info is conclusive. None of it is necessarily anywhere near accurate. When you examine alternatives, you will see the inconclusive nature of all this. You have your choice... pick and choose what you want to believe. But know that it is inconclusive, and that you may easily be wrong.

8)

If you study such things, as scientists do... it is 100% conclusive

One example...

Creationists, such as Ken Ham, claim that humans and dinosaurs existed at the same time (he just wasted $100,000,000 building a replica Noah's Ark with dinosaurs)

Scientists on the other hand, have actually dug into the ground and found these bones/fossils... scientists have found that humans and dinosaur bones are never found together... they are in fact separated by vast amounts of dirt (representing time)...

There are no dinosaur bones found above the K-T boundary... and there are exactly zero human bones found below the K-T boundary

The K-T boundary is a visible layer of dirt formed around 65million years ago, found all around the earth, containing high concentrations of iridium, likely from an asteroid impact
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous–Paleogene_boundary (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous–Paleogene_boundary)

This is how science works...


Now, how does your religion determine this is all wrong?  "God" said so?  Do you have evidence of dinosaur and human bones together?  Do you even look?

I could go outside my house and not find any dinosaur or human bones at all. This is how science works.

Look at the various strata that supposedly are from different ages in time... like who knows how many thousands of years apart. Then look at the tree fossils that cross all the stratum.

And look at the fossil record. Tons and loads and a gigantic percent of the fossils were formed with their most delicate parts intricately shown in the fossil. How long does it take to form a fossil? Thousands of years? Hasn't anybody heard of decay?

Or look at that place in Australia where a guy fell into a mine shaft, and less than 100 years later he has been fossilized.

Or look at the many places around the world where gigantic, hundred thousand year old stalactites and a stalagmites have formed in less than 100 years.

This is science... self-contradictory, fake, fiction, and unknown for certain where it is attempting to be serious.

And if machines work, it isn't the scientists that made them work. It is the engineers.

Most of science has become a BS game... especially where dating the earth is concerned.

8)

Earth is old 4.5 billion years just believe what scients say and don't listed God books because that isn't true.That thint from Bible are just scam informations from some crazy brain in crazy history.

Listen to scientists when they tell you how old the earth is. Why? Because essentially they say that they do not know.

The scientists that have studied the question will tell you right out that they "think" that the earth is this or that old. But they will, also, tell you that they don't really know. So, listen to them.

The scientists who have NOT studied the question will tell you that they were listening to the scientists who DID study the question, and that they interpreted the answers this way or that. But they, themselves, don't really know how old the earth is.

Then there's the media, which will tell you anything that they think you want to hear, as long as it makes some money for them.

So, listen to the scientists, because they telly us that they don't know how old the earth is.

8)

Major flaws in standard scientific dating of the age of the earth: http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth:
There are many links within the text, at the website (http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth), to back up what is said there.

8)

^
If your getting your "science" from "creation.com", it's little wonder you're so confused.  ::) ::) ::)

The site is 100% interested in pushing their agenda, and 0% interested in the truth.

They have links from all over the place to back up what they say, Fluffer.

8)

Too bad your source of information is as biased as your perspective in life. Lol.
Seeing the name of the site will give you an idea that it's a site for theist people looking for argument that they can use in scientific datas.

You are confused  :)

You don't understand much about anything and yet you still creating content here.

If you knew much of anything about science, you would see that the old-age-earth is a far more biased picture. Scientist want to promote old-age-earth simply to remove the thinking of people from the fact that God exists. It's a plan to enslave the people for monetary purposes, so that the scientists can gain wealth... and prestige, I might add.

Looking at the links in the site shows us the fact that the proofs for old-age-earth are flawed through and through.

8)

Please continue...  Let's hear what you got to say.

RealityTruth can show old-age-earth easily by throwing in all the links in the site I linked to above. Then he can add a bunch more from Googling "age of the earth." But you can do this, yourself...
I was going to add "can't you" to the end of my last sentence. But I am realizing that maybe you can't.

8)

If I Google "age of earth" I would get 50 links for proof of young earth and 100 links for proof of old earth.

Your point?

Assuming you are being truthful with your numbers^, all this proves is that there are more propagandists out there than truth tellers.

8)

Young Earth: 14 500 000 results, not 50. Old Earth: 42 800 000 results, not 100.

= You are wrong.

*shrug* If you can't even look at the other side of the argument in case there something there that frightens you, what's the point?  :-\

You've made up your mind. You've submitted to misinformation sites like "creation.com", designed purely to mold you like soft candle wax, into the shape they want, their way, by their rules.

That's the foolish path you've chosen, burdened with the consequences it carries.

Good luck with that.

*sign*
I dispair sometimes, I really do.

This sounds exactly like you! You are so close to home that you can't seem to say anything that isn't about yourself, right?

When you read what the scientists say about dating the earth and universe, in their papers, they say it right out, that they are essentially guessing.

Further, science theories are not science fact. If they were, they would be called scientific laws. This doesn't mean that they are NOT laws. All it means is that nobody really knows for sure.

My question is, why are you promoting something that nobody knows if factual, and especially when there is strong evidence that it is not factual? Oh, that's right. You are Fluffer Overblow.

8)

*sign*
The thread topic is asking the age of the earth. If nobody was allowed to say anything unless it was 100% factual, nobody would able to make any posts. Be a pretty dull thread.

However, until another theory comes along with more evidence than what we have now, old earth is simple the best we have. Is it perfect? Of course not. But the evidence is certainly conclusive, and nothing yet has even come close.
Old earth won't be losing any sleep over young earth, any time soon.

Maybe 4.54 billion year old earth theory is wrong. Maybe it's trillions of years old!

Bible history is documented eye-witness reports. No theory needed. Eye-witness beats theory, hands down. The earth and universe is less than 7,000 years old.

8)

No one really knows how old is the earth. Even science had difficulty on it, in religious state it says 6000 years and in scientific says million years which could actually bring question to our minds regarding to this mystery.

Except that the Bible is not vague. It is very clear, as is the history of the people who wrote it down.

Even today, Israel is one of the toughest and shrewdest nations around. And that is after God kicked them out of their position of strength because they failed Him. Think of what they were like when they obeyed God fully.

8)

I think human beings can not predict when Earth will survive, even if it was the smartest person in the world. I think if the ground was not persist then it is called Resurrection, and only God knows when the Hour. So do not you bother to calculate how long the earth survive.

*yawn*
Where you've gone so wrong is start from the premise that your interpretation of the Bible is the literal description how the universe began, and then proceed to hammer your square peg into round holes.

Then when it doesn't fit, you blame the hole, not the peg. Almost childlike in behaviour.

Your big mistake is not realizing that God exists, even when the points of proof are shoved right in your face. Since you won't accept God, none of the things you say about Him and the Bible have any value.

Perhaps if you come to understand that God exists, then you can start on the journey to understanding His power, and that if He had wanted, He could have made the universe in all of its vast array, faster than a snap of the fingers. He chose to do it in 6 days so He could savor the beauty of it.

8)

If this was true why did god gave us the power of thinking, questioning. God is just energy. The energy that created universe. The energy is in you and every other living and non living being coz every one is the product of earth, and earth of the big bang. So we will question we will research and find out every secret of the universe.

Agreee, we're a product that use to keep our gene using evolution, the one who undergo evolution are the fittest which undergo survival. We fit ourselves in the universe and that shouldn't go the other way around like what theist say intelligent design. We're the one designing ourself to survive with the ever-changing world we live in.

There was no Big Bang. The math that proves evolution impossible also proves intelligence through a Big Bang impossible. In other words, if the BB happened, there would be no intelligence, anywhere.

God is not only energy. He is way beyond energy. Anybody that can cause the complexity in the universe as is seen today (after thousands of years of cause and effect) is way beyond what anybody can dream that energy is. On top of that, we have intelligence, proving that God's intelligence is way larger and greater.

As long as you jokers don't open your minds to what is really going on in science, you are liable to miss the greatest most wonderful thing... God.

8)

Earth has been here for billions of years. It is comparatively in a young planet. Everything around us is energy. The real god is Energy. It can neither be created nor destroyed. Every living thing is the part of eternal energy.  We evolve to cope up with the changing environment.

Billions of years makes the earth a young planet? How long would earth have to be here to make it an old planet?

All our attempts at determining the age of the earth scientifically, are completely inconclusive beyond about 5,000 years ago. To see this, look at the wording the scientists use. They speak in "disclaimers language," so that nobody can come back and say that they lied or even made a mistake.

8)

The earth's age is well known. With a margine of error of 1%. 6000yrs? Can you really believe that?   

I think nobody can answer this question correctly. Scientists use Radiometric dating and they believe they are pretty accurate in their calculations, but what if the speed of the radioactive decay was different say 5 thousand years ago than it is now?

Do you think the laws of physics and mathematics has changed? Maybe 5000 years ago 2+2 was 5?

Scientists have calculated that Earth is 4.54 billion years old, with an error range of 50 million years.

still here is no conformation about this, the scientist are still confused about this. they are giving different ideas and figure about the age of the world. i think that is only Allah who know the real age of the earth and only he can know the ending date of the Earth.

Appeal to ignorance and putting therefore it is god. Remove your head out of your ass to avoid thinking this poorly. If you think science confuse you then don't use the things that scientist made and discovered, go back in stone age life.

Nobody has to talk about God to see that the scientists who calculate the age of the earth constantly use limiting words as disclaimers so that they can protect themselves from libel. This is the way they tell us, themselves, that they don't know that what they are telling us is factual.

8)

Scientist may not tell the absolute truth but they can tell part of it and it means to us.  I believe in scientist because unlike religion claiming certaing things, they claim a certain fact by observing and gathering data. It means it was scrutinized before presented as fact.

For example. Scientists can tell the truth of the half-life of C-14. Because of this, if the C-14 creation rate in the atmosphere was always the same as it is now, scientists could accurately date things.

The point is, scientists don't know if the C-14 creation rate was always the same. In fact, they don't know if there was any C-14 created in the atmosphere at all beyond about 5,000 years ago. So, we don't need all the examples of carbon dating inaccuracies that abound right now. We can see that nobody knows the truth using scientific means.

8)

EDIT: If this was all, we could say that science simply made a mistake. But the fact that they don't tell you that they don't know, shows that they are deceptive, and shouldn't be believed without personal examination of EVERYTHING that they say.

It could be a foundation to base things, even though they might be wrong then what's wrong with that? As long as they are changeable it will never be a big deal. If they see something that is a mistake they can easily remove that data and look for another, scientist are doing trial and error until they get things that may suit things right.

I too think that scientist really predict the age of the earth. everything can not be explained. We may never truly know the age of the earth.

Is that your opinion or is that based on facts? Different opinions still fall within the margin of error, so...no, they are not "confused".

I think you were going to say "scientist can't really predict the age of the earth" and by predict you meant determine. Yes, they can't. They say the age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years, but this assertion is based on radiometric age dating which might be not accurate.

In his sentence is very confusing cause it contradicting to each other maybe he would like to say scientist can't really predict. as you said. No one could tell whats the exact age of Earth. 

That's interesting. I am really curious to know which degree you have and what your field of study is. A geologist I suppose?

Well there will be lot of answers, i can give you funniest one.

Christians will answer something more then 2000 years, my grandmother can explain you how something like that is possible. I can open skype conf if you are interested  ;D

I easily agree with this in many scientists. But not in others.


A scientist does some scientific studies, and tells someone what he found.

Then other scientists, the media, the governments and even book-writers take his information and say all kinds of "stuff" about it.

Then, average people read or hear about this information from:
1. The scientist who does the original studies;
2. Other scientists, the media, the governments and even book-writers;
3. And from their ignorant friends and neighbors.

We get different stories from all over the place. So we need to screw our heads on, and take a good look at the stories to see how they match logic and the whole of science.

The point isn't that scientists make mistakes at times, and other times they don't. The point isn't that science is changeable in some thing, and maybe not in other things.

The point is that anybody who claims he is telling the facts, when he knows that he might not be telling the facts, is an absolute liar. If we are truly attempting to be honest, we need to do due diligence on everything that we proclaim as fact before we proclaim it as fact. But if we find that we were mistaken in our claims, we need to confess our mistake.

Scientists are not stupid. They know that they don't know how old the universe and earth are. But it comes down to us as 13 to 15 billion years... like it is a fact. Who is the liar?

8)

It is not accurate but it is close to that and they determine in using carbon-dating which is proven useful and reliable for scientific basis. This dating also can draw a line on our pre-historic pattern and even that happen long years ago.

The Earth is around 4.54 billion years old, as per Space.com website. I think, this is only a scientific guess. As science progress, there are several other factors to consider. Rock formations changes from time to time. I do not think humans can still calculate the age of the Earth. It will be endless. Nobody will ever know the real answer to this question.

Every scientific thing that suggests the age of the earth beyond about 5,000 years ago, is based on the assumption that the geological and other activity of the earth has always been going on as it does today, and that all the changes are gradual ones.

The idea of a great flood covering the earth - like the Great Flood of Noah's day - is recorded in the traditions, the writings, and the ancient drawings (rock carvings) of peoples and nations around the world. The writings of the earth and the Flood in the Bible, suggest a way that the C-14 (used in carbon dating) may not have been in existence on earth before the Great Flood.

If there were no pre-Flood C-14 on earth, carbon dating is completely and gigantically false. There are flaws like this in all the dating methods of the universe, including the cosmic ones. Scientists simply ASSUME things that they have no knowledge about. See this video for a clear understanding of what I am saying here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TerTgDEgUE... and this website that has the explanation of the video written down - https://steemit.com/science/@morpheustitania/the-science-delusion-banned-ted-talk.

Science ASSUMES a whole lot of things that they don't know. Then the universities, the media, and even some of the scientists tell you that it is truth WHEN THEY DON'T REALLY KNOW. When you believe it, you become part of their religion.

8)

They didnt used the c-14 method.

To find out the age of earth they determined the amount of PB which was created due the radio active decay of Uranium in meteorites that felt down on earth.

Meteorites that didnt change since 4.5 billion years except for the radio active decay of the chemical elements.

The meteorites were meteors before they changed. Then they changed and became meteorites as they fell to earth. Nobody knows what they were while they were still meteors. Why not? Because nobody was up there to analyze them enough to know. It's all ASSUMPTION. If there is any real meteor science, there is extremely little of it.

The thing to do would be to go out there in a space plane, grab a meteor, analyze it as best possible, attach super-heat-resistant monitors to it, and dump it onto the earth at speeds and vectors that it would have had if it had hit earth on its own. Then we might have some scientific knowledge about meteors... at least one of them.

And that is just the beginning.

The popular scientific age of the earth is all assumptions.

8)

The thing that is basically wrong with it doesn't have anything to do with scientific discovery and examination. The thing that is wrong is that we are being lied to (not necessarily by the scientists themselves). We are being told that this or that is the scientific truth, when much of the time the scientific truth is not known. Lying to people is wrong.

8)

People talking that  earth age is around 4,5 millards, but we will never know how old is earth without better technolagy and new scientiests.

And the wild guess of goat herders from the iron age with no education what so ever is so much better..

Don't know what goat herders have to say, but Moses' info about what to write, directly from God, is the best we have.

8)

There are a great many ways to estimate age of planetary bodies, not just radioactive decay. 

The speed of light is something to consider.  If, say the earth was 6000 years old, the universe would have no stars farther away than 6000 light years.  And new ones beyond that would be popping into existence all the time, as the sphere expanded.  That's not what's happening.

The light from some stars has traveled a billion years to get to us.

Even Big Bang Theory suggests holes in the light distance thing listed above.

Nobody knows what happened scientifically in the creation 6,200 years ago or so.

If you see a wall of solid concrete, but never saw a cement truck, or saw one dump concrete, you might have all kinds of suggestions and theories about how that wall got there.

8)

You must be too lazy to go to wikipedia and read it, you can actually do it in 15 seconds.

First of all, I'm no expert in physics, is there a source on the first point? Just that the idea the first person suggested sounds fairly reasonable, I'm wondering what the evidence is against it?

Secondly, we have a pretty good idea of what happened 6,200 years ago. In geological time 6,200 years is a blink of an eye. In fact, humans had been around for a while 6,200 years ago, and had already developed agriculture and basic civilizations. The lineages that would develop into modern day humans first diverged from chimpanzees(our closest relative in evolutionary terms) 6,000,000 years ago, and anatomically, behaviourally modern humans had developed by 50,000 years ago.

I don't really see the idea of the last point - we have a lot of experience with molecular and geological dating methods as well as study of the fossil records that gives strong evidence for a lot of the information we have now about the history of nature, the Earth, and our own species and its evolution.

There have been some coins and vases that date back to 30,000 years. Carbon dating is not precise but no way would miss 24,000 years.

Big Bang suggests that in an instant, stars, planets, all kinds of materials and energy were spewed from a single point into a gigantic size, and continued to expand at both, increasing velocities in some places, and decreasing velocities in others. The speed of light could absolutely not have been uniform back then.

If you search for it, you can find scientific data that shows that the speed of light isn't an uniform thing right now, long after things have stabilized. Google and Youtube search on "Sheldrake, speed of light."


This is the exact thing that we are talking about. Why do we and scientists think like this?

Pottery dating based on civilization backwards-in-time extrapolation can only go back more-or-less accurately, about 4,500 years, if that.

Genetic and mitochondrial dating suggest a divergence from the original woman to be not that far back in history.

When you look at the basic scientific papers by those scientists who have done dating studies, all of the papers use limiting words like "if" and "maybe" and "we think" and "possibly," and even direct statements that tell us that they are only speculating regarding the time of things.

Evolution is mathematically impossible - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1454732.0. Google it and you will find that even the debunkers of the impossibility math show by their language that they are not sure even when they say that they are sure.



If there wasn't any C-14 in the atmosphere beyond 5,000 years ago, carbon dating suggestions would only be off by billions of years. Nobody knows for a fact that there was C-14 in the atmosphere back then. The closest we have is the Bible record that suggests that there was a high-water-content upper atmosphere which would block the cosmic rays necessary for converting nitrogen into C-14. The Great Flood of Noah's day - which is referenced in writings and cave drawings are and traditions of many peoples around the world - could easily have destroyed the upper atmosphere water curtain, so that C-14 in the atmosphere is only a recent thing. The point is, nobody ever went back there to analyze what it was like back then. And none of those people left us a clear enough scientific record so that we know. We only guess. Carbon dating is all a guess.

How long does it take to fossilize something? Google it. The standard suggested scientific minimum is 10,000 years. There is present day evidence that it can take as short as a few months. But here is the big question. How long does it take for something to rot? Yet in some of the so-called ancient fossils we see delicate tissues being preserved. Delicate tissues don't last for even 3 months in the presence of the putrification process. The point is, fossilization is a very inaccurate science. It is another science that suggests something that we only guess at.



The point is, somehow the sciences that we use to determine the age of the earth, have been treated as fact when there is little if any fact in the results. We could talk all day on this. But you can easily search the Internet for debunking and attempted debunking, this way and that, to see for yourself that we really don't know.

8)

No that is not what it suggests.

Galaxies formed billion years after the big bang, when the universe started cooling down.

LOL!

Here you are. You can't answer the point that the speed of light is variable. So you distract into the idea that galaxies formed later.

Well, the whole BB doesn't have any known thing factual behind it. So it doesn't matter at all.

The thing that matters is that the scientific community is trying hard to hide the fact that the speed of light isn't constant, and that they know a lot less than they claim to know.

8)

It's all clear around conspiracies :) You are the one who privately said that the speed of light, and not as savsem, which everyone knows. And most importantly, you personally, because this knowledge to the real speed of light? Are you a scientist? Are you a politician? Or you just do not what activities?

6 billion years according to science

Internet researcher.

Are you a first hand experimenter who has proven the speed of light?

8)

I can still remember our school caretaker build a machine to determine the speed of light for our 7/8th physics class. He could determine the speed of light with less then 0.1% failure rate.

It is not hard to use your brain to think - you just need some patience and endurance.

The standard light speed is suggested at 186,000 miles per second. Point 1 % is 18,600 MPS. Even the suggested variation and deviation by Sheldrake and others is less than that.

The point is, nobody knows what it was 1,000 years ago, 5,000 years ago, or at the time of the creation before light was created, when the stabilization of the "stuff" that the electro-magnetic energies are made of hadn't settled down yet.

If you are a Big Bang believer, even the first several seconds of the BB show us that the whole electromagnetic spectrum acted quite differently than it does now. All we have is speculation about the past.

The thing to look for is the best speculation. The Bible record is the best we have, because it is eye-witness accounts of the times of the stubborn Hebrew people. See http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

The people of the Hebrews unvaryingly upheld the information about family lines and other things that go back to the Beginning. Do you know how stubborn they are? And family is the thing that they stubbornly hold to the most.

8)

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.

So, you are trying to hide the fact that carbon dating doesn't tell us anything about the age of the earth, right?


There isn't any doubt that carbon dating works. It works very well, in fact. It's just that it can't be applied beyond 4,500 years ago, or so. Why not? Because up to 4,500 years in the past is all the further back we can go with standard "pottery-style" dating methods. What do standard "pottery-style" dating methods have to do with it? We don't know beyond that time how much C-14 was in the atmosphere IF ANY. And the further back we go, the less certain about C-14 in the atmosphere we become.

Now, this wouldn't be so bad if the scientists and the media and the books all said it straight out, rather than trying to hide the fact that we don't know if carbon dating can be accurately applied beyond 4,500 years back.



We don't know that earth was hot. Without even considering what religions say, we simply don't know that earth was hot in the first place. All that formation of stars and planets info is simply unproven theory. The FACT is that we just don't know about heat on the earth in the distant past.

Wake up. You are becoming denser than the earth's core.

8)

Since the planet Earth doesn't have a birth certificate to record its formation, scientists have spent hundreds of years struggling to determine the age of the planet. 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.

This is the point. The ever-changing part.

When you find out how fast water can create a canyon if it running fast enough and strong enough, you will find that this form of standard geology is way off.

Trees lying across several hundred thousands of years of standard dated strata in the ground, shows how far off this can be.

Dating by moon and meteors doesn't really mean anything, because nobody knows what goes on in space geology.

I don't doubt that scientists do their best, but their best can be way off.

8)

But maybe you are just way off? ^^

The Earth is 4.543 billion years.

I have no idea but I think you could answer that through yourself.  It is easy tk know since everything can be searched just type and then enter.  But they said according to bible it is around 6000 years. The scientists on the contrary said that itnis about billion years. 

Consider, even the scientists and geologists tell you that they aren't sure. The say things like "maybe" and "if" and "it looks like," and a few of them will actually come right out and say that they really don't know.

The Bible, on the other hand, says it all in a factual way. The Bible writers were eye witnesses, and witnesses of other eye witnesses. When you look at the Dead Sea Scrolls, you will find very few differences between what they say and what the Hebrew Bible says today. In other words, the Bible is a faithful witness, copied faithfully, down through the ages. It has power in it, and the people of Bible times recorded the power in the Bible, and the fact that there are so many powerful Christians today, shows that the power of God is in the Bible.

Essentially, the Bible beats all the other records hands down. Study it. I am not making this up.

8)

I'd like to see how Young Earth Creationists try to explain the existence of aged dinosaur fossils. I mean, I do admit that everything I know could be wrong. But I don't rely on alternatives like absolute certainty from a book whose supporters literally claim humans coexisted with dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs were created along with everything else. All the fossils are generally miss-dated. Consider, there is such a thing as rot. Delicate ferns and mollusk and other fossils would have completely rotted away long before they could ever think about fossilizing, if the standard of 10,000 or more years for fossilization was accurate.

Fossilization in the ancient past was a process that we probably don't understand at all. But, we DO have several fossilized people and other things that we know are only a hundred years old or less.

In other words, fossilization that takes less than a hundred years is in evidence. So the whole theory about the age of "aged dinosaurs" needs to be re-hashed.

8)

Which dinosaur did Jesus ride? Why aren't dinosaurs ever mentioned in the Bible?

Now you are being just silly. By far the majority of animals and birds and fish are not mentioned in the Bible by kind. Like the rest, dinosaurs are mention in general reference to all the animals.

Probably the dinosaurs died out shortly after the Great Flood of Noah's day, not being able to find enough food to keep them going after they were let out of the ark.

8)

I guess that explains why so many bugs went extinct. They were stomped on by T-Rexes on the ark. Natural selection at work.

The ark was of a size and shape that the dinosaurs could have been kept caged, and the insects, as well, in different cages.

8)

What about parasites? (I don't mean churches, I mean the microscopic organisms that need a host to survive)

Who was hosting them?

You can do your own research into parasites and who hosts them.    8)

The problem with repeating religious dogma that bends into the scientifc domains is that you are immediately in areas you don't know anything about.

There are many, many ways to get a first approximation of the age of the earth, the age of the moon, and the universe.

This is exactly the thing that I have been talking about for a long time. Science theory that is believed as fact, since it is not known to be fact, is religious dogma that is bending into scientific domains.

"There are many, many ways to get a first approximation of the age of the earth," but so what? None of the ways are based in fact, because there are too many possible happenings in the past that could throw the approximations way off. In other words, these approximations are theory. Believing them to be fact is a faith thing. It is full-blown religion even though it isn't considered to be such by the believers, the science followers.

When scientists examine the whole aspect of the Bible record - including the nation of Ancient Israel, the life-sense contained in the Bible, the prophesies that have been fulfilled and those that are being played out, the fact of the Dead Sea Scrolls accuracy comparison to present day Bible, that the record of the Bible is factual in the areas where it is known (the walls of Jericho), and many other things - they find that there is way more solidity in the Bible than there is in their so-called scientific investigations in other ways.

Couple this with the fact that science proves God exists, as well as nature shows that God exists, and modern science turns out to be the wild religion.

8)

Well, if you listen God in the Old testament, all universe and our planet was created in 6 days!
If you ask Jews, earth is about 6 000 years old.
If you ask scientists, earth is about 4 billion years old.
So, what is truth?
In my opinion we should more believe in science than religion.
I'm also believer but I don't think that we should accept and believe everything in the Bible literally.
If God said he created everything in 6 days, it can means 6 periods or ages, what is in accordance with science.
After all, in other place in the bible it's said that in the eyes of god one day is like thousand years and thousand years is like one day.

 

Based on radiometric dating of meteorites, the age of the Earth is more than 4.54 billion years. Planet where people depend to live already very old, broken, more solid. The question is, how long before the Earth can survive the apocalypse - that time is entirely your own prerogative of God - happened?

If God says that He is talking figuratively, then understand it as figurative language.

If God doesn't say that He is talking figuratively, then believe what He says. If you don't, you are making Him out to be a liar. That is something like the first sin was about. Eve believed the devil rather than God.

If you don't believe all of the Bible, why would you believe any of it? You can't just pick and choose what parts of it to believe. Why not? The whole Bible is a unit at the same time it is many separate writings. It is a unit that tells about Jesus and the salvation He provides.

When God says that one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like a day, which one is it? God isn't talking literally about days and years in this place (in Peter). Rather, He is showing that He is showing us that we can not fathom how God understands things, and that He is different in the way that He understands things than we are, and that He views all things way more thoroughly than we do, and that He is way beyond us.

Science is guesswork. Most of us have not lived much longer than 4,500 years. So, we don't know what happened back then for sure. Even the scientists will tell you by the language that they use in their papers that they do not know for sure. The Bible is what God told His prophets to write. Will we call God a liar like Eve essentially did?

8)

It is approximately 7 billion years old. Because when the time god make the universe big bang theory will happen it is like an explosion of one particles that is the sun and create 9 sphere which is also known now a planet. And during that the most beautiful planet in te universe is earth. Earth consist water and land, have gravity and only one satellite.

Radiometric dating of meteorites doesn't have anything to do with it. Why? Because we don't know what meteors were like before they entered the atmosphere of earth. We don't know for a fact how they changed in their plunge through the atmosphere. It's all guesswork... like guessing how much C-14 was in the atmosphere before 5,000 years ago.

8)

Big Bang Theory is guesswork. Why? Because scientists don't know what could have happened in the past that would make BB out to be foolishness. For example...

There are 3 major Big Bang Theories that are all different. None of these Big Bang Theories are compatible with each other.

There are 4 major Black Hole Theories. None of these theories are compatible with each other. But the important thing is, none of the Black Hole theories could work inside any of the Big Bang universes.

Scientists simply don't know what they are talking about. And people who want to say that things like BB and BH theory are true, are saying that they believe in a religion.

Believe God.

8)

http://creation.com/radiometric-dating-age-of-earth

It's interesting how Christians are the only group of people who object to the age of the Earth, while everybody else accepts it. Most Christians are not even Young Earth Creationists themselves today. One group of Christians is right, the other isn't. You would think that an all wise, all knowing, loving deity that brags about universal truth would have made it clear to his "chosen people" in his only source of communication: vague scrolls found dried up at a beach somewhere in the Middle East.

Christianity is "rainbow fascism". What I mean by that is, they have all the traits of fascism (ie believe they're God's chosen people, others are inferior to them, etc) but they try and sugar coat it so it can be fed to the masses, which is what makes it so dangerous.

No they are not.  Muslims are similar "fundamentalists" and believe the same crock of shit.

I have to date not met a single Muslim fundamentalist who believes that the Earth is 6,000 years old.

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

Scientists don't date rocks. They simply claim that they are dating rocks. Then they make up some numbers, and toss them out there for us to believe.

8)

I'm pretty sure Tesla dated rocks, he was a weirdo.

Why? Won't they let you date married Muslim fundamentalists?    ;D

In some scriptures declare that the universe created in 6 days, but science states the universe was created billions of years and takes about 9 billion years until the sun and the earth eventually formed. Some people would say that the "days" mentioned is actually a "period" or "period" and not the actual day, but you can not show the information of the holy book itself supporting the statement

Some say around 4.5 billion years, lol and we only live max 120 years yet manage to screw our lives for eternity which is very longer than 100 billion years.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGt0YV1AMQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj8hT9YO884
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypRcl4x80U4
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/saudi-muslim-cleric-claims-the-earth-is-stationary-and-the-sun-rotates-around-it-10053516.html

However, if you do even a mediocre search on the dictionary definition of "religion," you will find that scientists and their science are a religion. Or don't do the search, and maintain your silly belief, which is a religion for you.

8)

I have dated many fundies in the past. Fundie girls are the best, especially the Christian ones, hahahaha.

The bible is silent on how old earth really is.
This is for bible readers...



In the book of Ezekiel, it is written that Lucifer walked the garden of Eden, traded, had a mighty angel guarding him till evil was found in him... which means the garden of Eden existed before the time of Adam.

Genesis 1: 1.  In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.
                  2.  The Earth was formless and desolate and darkness was upon the surface of the waters.

Commentary: When God created the heavens, it had a form... so also the Earth.

Question: What happened to the Earth to now make it formless and desolate?

Suggestion: Could it be that a fight ensued in the heavens which destroyed the old Earth and God had to rebuild it from the foundation...
                              Could that be the explanation for the existence of dinosaurs and why they suddenly went extinct... there are fossils to prove they once lived.
                              Could dinosaurs have lived during the time Lucifer walked the garden of Eden...

                               I do not believe in evolution, but I know dinosaurs once lived, probably in the old earth...

Conclusion: There are so many things the bible is silent on, we will know when we get to heaven and see God.

The Bible isn't silent on the age of the earth. It is simply encrypted in a really strong but gentle way regarding many things. From http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm:
Go to the website and look, because the explanation is lacking here, because of the HTML scripting at the actual site.

Note that between Arphaxad and Salah in the Gen 11:11-26 genealogy, that there was another, Cainan. Cainan was probably dropped by an early scribe because his name was too close to Caanan, son of Ham, causing a mix-up. "12When Arphaxad had lived 35 years, he became the father of Cainan. 13And after he became the father of Cainan, Arphaxad lived 430 years and had other sons and daughters, and then he died. When Cainan had lived 130 years, he became the father of Shelah. And after he became the father of Shelah, Cainan lived 330 years and had other sons and daughters." This adds 130 years to the indicated section of time making it 420 years rather than 290 years.

8)

You are talking about the Adam era i.e the time man came into the picture. It is true that man is 6000+ years old on this planet and the "new earth" was created about 6000+ years ago to accommodate life as we know it.

I am talking of the pre-Adam era, before God created man.

Lucifer traded and walked in the garden of Eden. There was an old garden of Eden... there must have been an old Earth. I think God has destroyed and created Earth more often than we thought... I know the hidden things belong to God.

This has got nothing to do with evolution, man didn't evolve from apes and no animal evolved from another animal. But really, how old are the angels... do you know?

In the book of revelations, Lucifer is called the ancient serpent. How old is he?
Scientists say the universe is billions of years old, I can't argue with that.
You and I both know Lucifer existed long before Adam was created..
I do not know how old he is...


The bible is silent on life before the creation of man... things happened before Adam was created. Things we were not told.

Oh, man.  Those preachers' daughters...

If it was 6000 years old, methinks it would be one pretty hot rock.

Because we could figure the numbers on all that inbound gravitational energy turned into compression and heat, and then look at outbound radiant energy, which is essentially a 2d outflow, 3d inflow problem.  So the rock would stay hot a long time, which it has indeed, still having a molten core and such.

While the first verse in the Bible covers a period that is unknown, because things like the electromagnetic spectrum had not been settled into place before there was light, the KEY biblical understanding of this is that "the earth was formless and void." In other words, there is no knowledge of what went before the day that light was made. Some of it might correspond to billions of years, or trillions. Other of it would correspond to only an instant, like a nano-second or less. And some might correspond to any amount of time in between.

8)

Since things like heat and energy in the form of the electromagnetic spectrum were not settled before the first day, when light was made, there is no way to understand how hot or cold anything was.

Scientific understandings of how the earth came about are as much guesswork as anything else.

8)

And you've just shot down your own belief that the bible proves the Earth's age is 6000 years by saying that any time period between Earth's creation and there being an electromagnetic spectrum could have been billions or trillions of years, or a nano-second or less. Nice work!!!  ;D

Just have to post that you are one brainwashed fool, Dahhi.  Good luck in life.   :-\

Vod, let's see if your theory about God not existing is really true... time will tell.

let

i think no one that how old is the earth, is to Allah who know about the fact about the world that how old is the earn and no human or any other creator know about this that how old the earth.

No one knows it for sure.  It was always a theory.  Science have all its complex studies and research but still cannot prove and akways ends up as theory.  They come up with billions of years.  On the other hand, bible states that it has been like a thousand years ago with much simple and believable explanation.

Quite the contrary. The time before time was not time. It wasn't even before time. So, using time, the thing that the year is made up of, the earth is a little over 6,000 years old. Just because it has some other things that look a little like time but aren't time, doesn't change the time.

8)

To use your own argument against you, if the time before time was not time, then the period between the Earth being "created" and the "time" before man was "made" could be either an instant or any number of years - hence you shoot down your own argument of 6000 years.

no one know about the earth history, only God now the reality of the earth, may be million and trillions of trillion year old.

firstly "Interested" secondly Earth is approximately 4.543 billion years old according to science not 7 lol

Why would you ask us?  It can be searched through google or as Mr. Wikipedia about it.  All I can say is that we are on the near end of life on earth because of its look today compared before.

you sound like you have knowledge , so I'm curious what is the exact science behind dating the earth?

Wrong! You don't even provide any reason for your thinking.

The so-called time before the day that light was created is a mixture of long-time, short-time, no-time, and maybe even "all-time." It is outside anything we know.

Once time was created at the beginning of the first day, since light was created the first day along with the whole electromagnetic spectrum, then the first day became a 24-hour day.

Earth is a little more than 6,000 years old... perhaps as much as 6,200 years.

8)

Sometimes you really surprise me how dense you are (assuming you're not a troll). Time doesn't exist, therefore cannot be created. 24h day was created to simplify the counting of ones. There could be 2 months for every season and day could be lasting more or less hours. Your whole theory is not that good.

Okay, okay. Since time doesn't exist for you, why are you even posting in this thread? I mean, if you were going to post here, why are you talking about the time as it is listed in the Bible? Shouldn't your points be around the idea of no time at all? So, if time doesn't exist for you, the earth doesn't have any age at all... in your belief, that is.

How in the world goofy are you trying to be? And then you talk about the idea that I have a theory? I don't have a theory. I have faith in the things that God has told all of us through His prophets.

What in the world is your point, anyway? Are you another of those flat earth people?

8)

I think it is 4.544 billion years old.  I'm throwing in another 0.001 billions years, also known as one million years, for you to debate Badecker and convince him the earth is not 6000 years old.

Okay, let me break down my reasoning for you.

Let me assume that your calculation of 6000 / 6200 years for the age of Earth is correct.

The Bible states that light was made on the first day after the Earth itself was created. Your argument above states that "there is no knowledge of what went before the day that light was made. Some of it might correspond to billions of years, or trillions. Other of it would correspond to only an instant, like a nano-second or less. And some might correspond to any amount of time in between."

So you have a gap between when the Earth was created and when light was made. This period of time could be, in your own words, billions or trillions of years, or a nano-second or less. If this period was an instant, then your calculation of 6000 / 6200 years would be correct. If this period was trillions of years, then your calculation is trillions of years out.

Okay. Let me break your mistaken understanding down for you. Your mistake lies in the fact that you are not believing of the Bible.

As for what I have to say, the non-time "before" light was created is a mixture of things that looked and acted (to some extent) like, "... there is no knowledge of what went before the day that light was made. Some of it might correspond to billions of years, or trillions. Other of it would correspond to only an instant, like a nano-second or less. And some might correspond to any amount of time in between."

But here is the important part of what I said, "... there is no knowledge of what went before the day that light was made."  Did you catch that? I'll repeat it a little shorter: "... no knowledge ..."

The closest thing that we have to understanding about the "time" before light comes in 3 parts:
1. The earth was "formless and void;"
2. There was apparently some cohesion in whatever existed because there was a "surface of the waters;"
3. How do we know that there was this cohesion and a surface of the waters? Because the "Spirit of God moved over the surface of the waters."

The New International Version translators of the ancient Hebrew write it this way, Genesis 1:1,2:
So, now you can see your misunderstanding. It is contained in the fact that you want to believe silly science fairy tails rather than the absolute best record we have of the beginning of the earth "times," the Bible.

8)

Says everything and nothing.

Before I wrote my first post in this thread I knew what type of person I was attempting to converse with, so your latest reply comes as no surprise.

The fact that I do not believe in the Bible is irrelevant to the point I raised about your argument to the Earth's age. My point was, and continues to be, that you are unable to accept that your explanation of 6000 / 6200 years relies on period of time for which there is no knowledge, again I'm using your own words here. Another way to describe "no knowledge" is unknown.

So in simple maths terms....

Earth's creation + unknown period + 6000 (or 6200 years) = Unknown

The difference between a scientific explanation and your explanation is that the scientific one recognizes and allows for a margin of error, as you yourself have pointed out, while you are unable to accept that your own also has a margin of error, although your margin is an unknown quantity rather than a margin born out of reproducible physical testing.

I know that the above will mean nothing to you and that you will attempt to teach me the error of my ways by making self referencing or circular arguments as to the legitimacy of the Bible, so knock yourself out - figuratively speaking of course.  ;)

And for the record, I agree with Spendulus's post above and like Tyrantt I also believe that time does not exist other than as a construct of man, so when I say years above I'm referring to the passage of the Earth around the Sun.

A reasonable hypocrite of a Christian would agree with you, of course.

Personally I think the understanding of stellar evolution is well established.  Stars burn until they are rich in heavier elements, and when iron predominates, fusion starts to end and they implode and supernova.  A couple cycles of that is what results in planets with "elements" and that's why the universe is 13+ billion years, while the Earth and it's moon are about 4 billion.

As for time, there would clearly be a a lower limit based on quantum theory, a smallest possible and fixed unit of time.   

Anyone who wants to argue these issues should reject their computers and their cell phones, because those could not exist without man's understanding of these issues. 

But they want it both ways. They want to be free to babble mindless puke from past ages, while using the benefits of quantum theory to do so.  Such as posting on this forum.

Fuck 'em.

Thank you for this. As you finally start to understand the flaws in your thinking, you start to pick on me, because you are running out of facts. So you move into twisting, which includes picking on me.


You neglect to state in what way you believe that my thinking relies on no knowledge. But it doesn't matter, because...

Up until the beginning of the electromagnetic spectrum (light), we have knowledge that something existed, but it was void or empty. This means that it doesn't match our understanding of physics and physical laws.

Then God spoke light into existence, and we have the beginning of the first day. Certainly there were other things that God did to make the day - "separated the light from the darkness." But because most of it is beyond our understanding, and certainly is beyond the understanding of simple people, God chose to talk about the light, something that almost all of us understand in one way or another.

Day 1, day 2, day 3, etc., - time - down to the present; some amount of time a little over 6,000 years.


Wrong! In simple terms, nothing that we know about. "Then" 6,000+ years. I have "then" in quotes, because "then" denotes time even though there was no time. Possibly there is no correct word to use when talking about "movement" from no time into time.


What does a margin of error have to do with it? Does anybody know the exact number of days that have existed, other than God? However, way less of a margin of error than secular science. Why? Because even if Big Bang had been a reality, nobody knows what things were like before the BANG. But the secular margin of error is, like, 2 billion years following the BB. And that is all based on a theory that has absolutely no way to be proven. Big Bang should not even be relegated into theory it is so flawed as such.


Huh! You have no answer. So you start to pick on me again.



Since the sun was made on the 4th day, time existed 3 days longer than the passage of the earth around the sun. Whoopty doo. Now you really want to get picky by 3 days, all the while modern science suggests billions of years difference, and all that with a theory that shows itself to be doubtful (BBT), all the while there could be any number of things that invalidate the BB Theory entirely. Science really needs to get back to the Bible, the best record we have.

8)

Of course, this that you seem to believe is way more improbable than the Bible explanation.


Science could build a theory of no time, or no electromagnetic spectrum if they wanted.



Poor baby. Hurt your itty bitty feewings, did I?

The tools we use are engineered into existence, not theorized into existence. Most of the time the theories need to change to match the reality of the engineering. Much of this theory change has to do with semantics.

The theories of how stars work? Fun things. But totally laughable as something practical. They don't even deserve theory status, because there will never be a practical way that these theories can be tested.

Because of this, it is the scientists who have a religion of hypocrisy.

8)

Not sure why you think I was picking on you as I was simply stating that I'm more than aware of the kind of answer you'll post in reply to anything I write. And you certainly didn't disappoint this time around.  ;D


Actually I've stated it quite clearly - you wrote that there is a period for which there is no knowledge.

Scientists have calculated that Earth is 4.54 billion years old, with an error range of 50 million years or only 6000 years old as the Bible teaches

i think Scientists answer are more relevant
This can be true

Couldn't agree with you more on all points with the only exception being your comment regarding time.

The difference between me and BADecker though, is I'm open to discussion about other possibilities and if offered up enough reproducible evidence will change my stance and admit when I'm wrong.  ;)

Science teachings are based in guesswork that can never be proven.

Bible teachings are based in eye witness reports, and in the things God tells people. While these won't be proven until we meet God in the judgment, there is way stronger evidence in Bible teaching than in science guesswork.

8)

Reproducible evidence? Science doesn't have a start towards reproducible evidence regarding a factual Big Bang. When are you going to start to be open to other possibilities as you said?

8)

God works in mysterious ways.

God works in mysterious ways.

Just because I don't agree with your specific version of events does not mean I'm closed to other ideas or possibilities. The difference is that I don't choose to believe something simply because someone says it to be true.

You have your faith and that's great, but you're a blind believer and that makes you blind to anything but your own opinion and no number of presented facts, arguments or proof can sway you from you belief. The irony is that in your eyes anyone who doesn't agree with you is the one who isn't open.

If someone were able to produce enough evidence to demonstrate the existence of a Supreme Being then yes I would change my stance, but I'm yet to see any actual evidence that supports one.

I think that if light is well demonstrated to travel at a certain speed, then we have measurable amounts of time.  Similarly if there are minimum size movements of objects possible eg.  Plank's constant, then there should be a minimum unit of time, eg time is quantized.

But I could be wrong about that.

Now don't jump back and forth. You are confessing God here. So, don't jump back to suggesting that He doesn't exist. Why? God wants confession to His existence. He wants confession to faith in Him. He will not tolerate jumping back and forth.

8)

I understand how hard it can be to get down to the basics of what you know or believe, sometimes... and often when you are simply trying to express it. That's why you appear to be jumping around in the things you say rather than staying on topic.

As for blind believers with regard to the age of the earth, you will find enough unprovable theory and even "silly" theory, and enough contradiction among science and scientists, to show that accepting what they say is blind faith.

So, if you want to start to have knowledge, you can take the part of science that is fact, and see that God is proven to exist (in combining the laws of cause and effect, complex universe, and universal entropy). God's existence is, also, shown in the machinery of nature. Since not much is shown about God in a simple look at nature, or in the science law that proves the existence of God, we need to seek God more fervently, if we want to find out things like how old the earth is.


Looking at this a little deeper, we can see that God appears to be love. How can we see this? We see it in the fact that the machinery of the body is so extremely complex that we cannot duplicate it. We can barely help it along a little in its operations of life. Yet it works quite well, and certainly in such a complex way that we don't understand it. And we have pleasure at times.

So, where does the body and life come from? Sure, scientists have their guesses in unproven, foolish evolution ideas. But the body is a gift from God. So, it seems, that even without God telling us directly through religion that He is love, we can see it simply through the nature He has made for us, and the body He has given us.

It isn't that God hasn't given us proof and evidence of Himself. It's simply that people don't want to believe the proof and evidence when it almost jumps right out at them.

8)

In addition, when God "tossed" the universe into existence a little over 6,000 years ago, He also set the light in place between the planets and stars, so it looked like the light had been traveling a much longer time to get here. What it was, was, God simply, almost instantaneously, set everything in place, just as though it had always been this way.

Because of this, all looking at nature to understand the age of the earth won't work. Science that suggests otherwise is the religion.

8)

 :D :D :D :D

Good work, Fluffer. Took you all day to take some things out of context just to prove how goofy you are, right?

Turn, now, while you still have a chance.

8)

Hahahahaha omg. Nice one, I'm saving this quote for a later date.

Less than 10,000 years.

I am confused.  Science and Bible have different approach on telling how old are earth is.  But the only certain thing is we are alive right now.  Maybe we should focus on what we can do to help our mother Earth in keeping its reign by helping her to live more years.  We already become the mere reason why we keep her in danger.  The question of how old is the Earth would be good if it is gone already.  Let us leave that to the scientist to figure out how old it is.  But I want to believe on the simple explanation on the Bible. So yes, it is maybe less than 10,000 years.   ;D

Free from the artificial limitations the yoke of establishment scientific dogma puts on the mind I look at the available facts and they tell a fantastic story not fit for the mind of a mind-controlled sex-slave/farm-animal. You must escape the black magic NASA has used on your mind if you're truly interested in the age of the Earth.

Be man not a lamb!


Bonus image:

https://i.imgur.com/JwMkS7L.jpg

Tyrantt, do not be a tyrant with your tongue.

It pays to always be polite... remember what mama said?

I have been following this thread and TooQik said something that caught my attention.





TooQik, you are aware that 95% of the entire universe is made of something different from what we are made of, right?


Stars, Planets, asteroids, dust, animals, man etc. are made of visible matter... it can be seen, and touched.

95% of the remaining universe is made of black matter... matter that cannot be seen or touched, yet exists.


There is no vacuum in outer space, it is filled with dark matter and dark energy...

95% of the universe is not made of the same material we are made of.

Why do you think God must be of the same material that our body is made of?


Can anyone on this forum answer this question?

The confrontation between science and religion is very stupid. Religious people call it God. For a man of science is a universe. But in reality, everything is much easier. All that has created us - it is not God, no universe.
It's just a coincidence.

You have not answered the question :)

I personally believe that if we could break down everything in the universe, visible or not, into its smallest part we would find everything is made of the same basic element. Call this smallest element whatever you wish. Based on this, if a Supreme Being were to exist then he/she/it/they would be made from the same "stuff" as everything else, although I'm not sure where any of this fits in the discussion around the age of the Earth.

While I'm replying to this thread again, BADdecker's last reply to me is the same old "humans don't understand how nature works ergo this proves that a Supreme Being exists" argument. If mankind simply chose to believe this then we would not have much of the technology that has existed through out the ages, as we would have no curiosity to investigate how things work. So thank you free-will. ;)

Sure.   Dark matter and dark energy are not of interest in these respects.  And of course there is vacuum in outer space.  You show some misunderstandings, then try to make things even worse by bringing fictional constructs in such as "God."

Next, there is the question as to whether, if there were a "God" it would have to be constructed either of regular matter or dark matter.  This is a nonsensical question, since both are "part of this universe" and could not exist prior to it.

Pretty much without exception when people invoke physics and cosmology to prove a God, they get it all ridiculously wrong.

Quite the opposite. The thing I am saying is, "humans know how enough laws of nature work to see that nature proves that God exists. Then they muddy the issue by making theories that are not laws, and treating them as laws, just to prove that God does not exist."

This isn't always the reason why humans make theories, of course. Often they make their theories to help them focus on finding things out. It is part of science.

The question is, why don't they even suggest that the laws of nature might prove that God exists? If they want theories, what better thing to do than make theories to attempt to prove God, since scientific laws, and the nature machine, both, at a bare minimum, suggest God exists?

8)

If there were a God, it would have to be constructed of things outside of anything we can understand. Why? Because we only understand things that obey laws in this universe. That is what we and our minds and "souls" are made of. Abstract thinking fails to be abstract enough to imagine outside of our universe.

God is at least partially from the outside. That's how He could create the universe. What thinking can imagine God reality-wise? That's part of the reason many people have such a difficult time accepting that He exists. Yet, the universe itself suggest nothing else, even though we don't really understand God at all.

8)

Cant you just google it instead of asking us how old the earth is?   ;D  Maybe more or less 10,000 years.  I guess.

You asked him to just google it but still left a clever guess.  I agree with you about your estimate life of Earth.  That is according to theologians, people who studies about theology about God.  It is always contradict to scientist claims that it must be around million years old. 

Wow this is some good bullshit right here lol. So  if the Universe is 7000 years old how do you explain the fact that there is light that we see from other stars that took longer than 7, 000 years to reach us. (on that note your entire creationist blog that you just wrote for us has been debunked)

the point is science is more than just carbon dating alone, its carbon dating combined with multiple other sciences that we base our facts on. Science facts do not get formed from people inferring things after only viewing  one piece of scientific evidence, that is what you just did and accused scientists of doing. (pot calling the kettle black over here)

What about Snow ice?, which is yet another very accurate form of dating things or also Layers in sediment. Creationists use the same tricks over and over. They try and focus on one point and make it sound like the facts are derived from that point alone. Its nothing new here...

There's sedimentary rock, as another example.  How does it form?  How long does it take?

Another is gold.  It takes millions of years to form veins of gold in rock.  How does that happen?

Geological processes are fascinating.

Then there are the processes on the moon.  They are very different than those on earth.  They are a simple, direct sort of proof of the age of the Earth/Moon system.

The Sun, Moon, Black-Sun, planets and stars are all small, close objects under an artificial steel dome with a 3,000 mile high ceiling. The Earth is flat and you've been brainwashed by the globalist elite.





All rocks, metals and minerals started off as silicon life, giant trees, mushrooms, plants and animals. The Earth was built from a giant forest that was cut down.


Also I'm sure we gone over this before but, the Moon is made of cheese a 32 mile wide light, nobody goes there.

Parable: When a car manufacture builds a car, what does he do? He builds the parts and puts them together. It isn't a car until it is completely built. Until it is finished, it is just a compilation of parts.



As far as light from other stars...
When you examine standard understanding of fossilization, the standard minimum time that it takes to fossilize something is 10,000 years in the understanding of science. But, you will find all kinds of records of things and people that have fossilized in well under 100 years... if you look for them.

The point? Science doesn't know how fossilization works. And they definitely don't know how it worked in the past. So, why would they know how light worked in the past? Even now there is strong evidence - maybe even proof - that light isn't the constant that has long been thought. Research it.



Cause and effect probably is NOT the greatest law of nature. But it absolutely is a very penetrating one. It is seen all over the place, and there is no evidence of something that does not owe its existence to cause and effect. Yet, we have no evidence whatsoever of something that started cause and effect to begin.

Does there have to be a beginning to cause and effect? Yes! Entropy is a law that is possibly more penetrating than cause and effect. If there were no beginning, entropy would have dissipated all things into a massive, "equilibrium" of what?... long ago. There would be almost absolutely no complexity at all.

Big Bang? BB is theory that only suggests something. Such a thing as BB might have any number of things that could have effected the theory to make it nonsense... things which are not taken into account. After all, there are at least 3 BB Theories that are different from each other in subtle ways.

The point? Because we don't know what happened in the past scientifically, we don't know which things were true in the past and which weren't.



The Bible record is the best record of the past that we have. Why? It is conscientiously written and copied records of people who were there. Study it, and the nation of Israel, and see what sticklers for perfection the people of Israel are and were, especially for copying the Bible record perfectly.


8)

Isn't the 6.000 years old refers to how old is the bible ? I think if would calculate the age of earth scientifically it would be more than 6.000 years since the time that earth was made .

So-called scientific calculations about the age of the earth are science fiction.

8)

Earth is 6.1 billion years old according to numerical values in Quran. As a muslim i believe Quranic figure but according to science it is 4.54 billion years old. So its up to your belief.

It seems to me that the age of the Earth several billion years. 6000 years is very little to evolve from unicellular to man

Evolution is probability math impossible - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1454732.0.

8)

If evolution is mathematically impossible how do you explain the mutation of flu viruses as detailed here: http://jvi.asm.org/content/80/7/3675.full (http://jvi.asm.org/content/80/7/3675.full) ?

Part of the explanation is the definition of the word "evolution." Another part is that the so-called mutations are programmed in.

I have not clicked the link. I am not going to go into details of something without first looking at the basics. The basics of everything is cause and effect, as upheld by Newton's 3rd Law. This means that even so-called mutations are cause and effect brought into being.

Cause and effect acts like programming. Programming means a programmer. Because of the size and complexity of the universe (wherein we see nothing but cause and effect programming), the Programmer of the universe must be very great. Such a Programmer matches our definition of the word "God." In fact, our definition of "God" does not do Him nearly enough justice to honor Him correctly and properly. He is far greater than our definition of Him says or implies.

8)

So in essence what you're saying is that everything in the universe has been programmed (by your God) to allow it to change and become something else ie evolve. I'm still missing the part where mathematics proves that evolution isn't possible.

The underlying message in all your posts is that humans don't contain the necessary intelligence to be able to explain the workings, what you call "God's machines", of the universe, yet you make references to human studies to back up your statements eg. Newton's third law. If everything is cause and effect, then what cause effected your God into existence? And if something effected your God into existence, isn't it possible that this same cause effected the universe into existence? Alternatively, if your God simply existed from the start, then isn't it also possible that the universe always existed from the start?

Not exactly. Everything in the universe is programmed by God over all.

The definition of "evolve" includes various ideas. Mutations don't happen because of the programming. The only reason mutations appear to happen is because we don't understand the programming.

Roll the dice, toss the coin, look at the odds. The odds against non-programmed change in life are so extremely great that such change is impossible.



Everything that we know in the universe comes about through cause and effect. Science has for years been looking for something that proves pure random (which is the opposite of cause and effect). They have not been able to find anything that is pure random. So they have twisted their theories into "odds-things," just so that they can say that probability strongly suggests that pure random is true, and therefore it is true. However, they don't quite say it directly, yet. They simply imply that their odds are the thing that is the reality when it is not.

Part of the point in all this is that science says that it is looking for the truth. Everything in nature that we understand points towards God via cause and effect. So, why is it that science wants to ignore the obvious, and instead try to twist it into something that it is not? Shouldn't the reverse be the thing that they would do? Shouldn't they state right out in the open that cause and effect points towards the existence of God, and that they have been testing it out for decades but haven't been able to find anything to refute it and God's existence? Do they really want truth and fact after all? Or are they simply liars?

The universe had a beginning as expressed by entropy and complexity. God made the beginning. In order to begin the universe, God must at least be outside of it in part. We can't even conceive what being outside of the universe must be like, since we are so attached to the universe. So, how in the world are we going to be able to calculate anything about God except if He tells us?

8)

So which is it? Are mutations part of the programming or not? You're either arguing against yourself or lack the ability to convey your true meaning.


You keep raising cause and effect as a reason a God must exist but yet you fail to recognize that the same argument can be used against the existence of a God.

Do you have eyes, but fail to see? Or can't you read? Or don't you have any reading comprehension at all?

Look at my statement that you quoted, below, right under this that I am saying right here: "Everything that we know in the universe comes about through cause and effect." Not just almost everything. Rather EVERYTHING... even the causes are effects of prior causes. This says PROGRAMMING.



And you fail to show any reasoning why you think that cause and effect has to apply to a God that exists outside of this cause and effect universe, especially considering that there was no cause and effect in existence before God made it specifically for this universe.

8)

My point of view was nobody knows how old earth is. We must remember that Earth was created without any human in that time. Human was created after the earth has been fully launch in the universe. That time there no any technology on earth. So there no exact information about the age of Earth, everything that we will heard or read is just an assumption.

strength and human intelligence will not be able to measure the exact age of the earth. the power of the human brain has not been able to do so. humans have limitations and age of the earth is not possible to predict.

Hahahaha!!!! I point out a contradiction you make to seek clarification and you launch into personal insults.  ::)

If you can't see that your two above statements (highlighted and underlined for emphasis) contradict each other then continuing any conversation with you is pointless as you're not the type of person who can admit when they make a mistake.


The reasoning is quite simple, for your God to have been able to have been the "cause" to "effect" the universe into existence means that cause and effect exist in the realm where your God exists.

I'm willing to bet this man believes he's a direct descendant of a monkey living in a tree in Africa billions of years ago.

If you could see how hairy I am then you'd believe it too, although I don't like bananas....go figure!!!  ;D

I also like the assumption that I'm a man.

God was the cause that caused the universe. The universe is the effect. Before God caused the universe, nobody knows if He caused anything else.

And, again, the word "before" is not really appropriate, because there is no time in eternity... before God made time in the universe. But in an attempt to get the idea across, because of our weakness in understanding, sometimes we need to use words that don't match reality.

8)

 :D You have a sense of humor.

I see you neither believe in God nor intend to believe in Him...

While I do not agree with your point of view, I will respect your decision.
Why?

Because everybody has a free will.

Right. And the sooner we all know it, the easier it will be to separate ourselves from them. I mean, we don't want to go along with them and burn.

8)

the earth is about 59billion billion years old and I do not know exactly what will be the correct answer for it as you can find it on google but I know one think due to evolution we are here today

Well, probability math and cause and effect say that evolution doesn't work.

And regarding the age of the earth, you are wrong. You are off by 5 minutes.

8)

The math you showed had nothing to do with evolution.
Read up on what it is

Exclusively, Word for badecker:

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the LOGOS, the heavens were of OLD, and the flat earth standing out of the water and in the water.

So you are wrong. Earth is old and you are willingly ignorant. Case closed, no need to reply.

I am fairly conversant with advanced probability and math.  In no fashion does it or "cause and effect" say that evolution does not work. 

What happens with people like Badecker is that someone who looks and acts sciency says things like this to them and they just go repeat it, not really knowing any better.

It's a shame, but that's the way it works.

You have two ways you can go with evolution. Either you go with cause and effect, or you go with random mutation that is not associated with cause and effect.

Random without cause and effect has never been shown to exist anywhere.

This means that evolution, whatever definition there is for it, comes about by cause and effect. Cause and effect essentially equals programming. And programming needs a programmer. In the case of evolution, the programmer is God.

There is nothing else except science fiction.

8)

I think the earth is really very very old. It's not even possible to adequately express it in human related terms. In terms of why I think it's that old I can say it's just a feeling I have - I sense the ancientness of earth you could say.

2 Corinthians 4:4
But even the believers are blinded about things that they don't trust and believe God for - http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

8)

Genesis 1:27  Young's Literal Translation:

 And God prepareth the man in His image; in the image of God He prepared him, a male and a female He prepared them

Therefore I am in the image spoken of. I do see the glory of man. It's great, it's wonderful. It has opened my eyes and now I see. I see the earth is really really old.

Is that where you stopped reading? Right after the image of God part? Don't you remember that mankind lost the perfect image of God when sin came into the world? Only through belief in the death of Jesus, and His resurrection, is that image restored.

But we don't see that image restored right now. Why not? Because the restoration is by faith in God, for a time when God will destroy this universe and take His faithful ones to the New Universe He is preparing for us.

How do we know that the restored image is not for this life? We know it because we daily make mistakes. And nobody can keep himself/herself from death when his/her time is up.

The mistaken idea that the earth is really old, beyond the 6,200 years or so, is something that can be forgiven by God, if the ignorance of the age-of-the-earth fact is held a certain way. But it is dangerous to hold the wrong age in mind. Here is why.

You didn't actually watch the life, death and resurrection of Jesus while it was happening. You understand it by faith in God, that the words God directed His apostles and prophets to write is correct. Yet, it is only by this faith that you will be saved, because you didn't actually witness the things of the past. If you reject the words that God wrote about Jesus-salvation, you will lose your salvation. So, how is it that you can pick and choose which words of God to believe? Either you believe what God says or you don't. And if you don't believe Him about the age of the earth being about 6,200 years, why would you believe Him about Jesus-salvation? And if you don't believe Him about Jesus-salvation, you don't have salvation.

The Bible is a complex thing. Anybody can hold a mistaken understanding of some of it and be forgiven. If you mistakenly think that this explanation (http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm) is not the thing that God was expressing - http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm - but that God was expressing something else by those words, then you could still be believing God, and that is what is important for you salvation.

But the words at http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm are quite clear. So don't reject them if you want to believe what God says. Otherwise you just might not believe Him for salvation, either.

8)

this is quite an strange topic asked in bitcoin related forum,take a look at stones and think about how old it might be,since those matters existed as long as the earth and was formed and as old as the earth iteself,be it in solid or molten form.

Perhaps this topic should be in the Off-topic section.

If your grandparents tell you how old the stones are, and they say that their grandparents told them, you need to believe them. Other than that, the stones are only as old as when you remember seeing them the first time. They aren't really that old at all.

The only real record we have for the age of the earth is right here http://www.albatrus.org/english/theology/creation/biblical_age_earth.htm.

8)

i think no one knows how olds earth now scienetist may given the year but not the exactly because i know that its almost centuries past and still rhe earth and other planet are there except one planet i think pluto was gone long time ago right? no one can give the exact date others tells that lord created earth

About 500 Million Years . Lol no one knows , else God who created it .

BADecker, you are a little off track here my friend.  ;D  Once created in an image > always created in an image - it's the image of GOD. I have it, you have, every body has it. Be it distorted, twisted, contorted, bent, flipped, cracked, crushed, bruised or even broken, it still is the image of GOD, and always will be.

yeah I'm not really sure how we can measure or what metrics are we going to use to know how old the earth is. and I don't think we should concern ourselves about that haha we should worry more on how to take care of this earth because it's pretty much the only one that we have

Earth is 6000 years old.

old earth can know with calculation chemical theory
or physics science
only use science you can known old is earth

Theory is not know to be fact. Chemical theory is guesswork.

8)

Correct.

Various rocks tell us age, simple example is sedimentary rocks.  Also types of aggregation, such as gold deposits.  To a geologist, rock formations are layer, and each has a range of ages, which are pretty well known.

That's not even getting into the isotopes.

Its impossible to know if when earth is alive or how old are earth.. well there is no bad to speculate. but according to google i just search it 4.543 billion years old is earth..

None of this tells us the age. It all tells us what the age appears to be. If God set these things in place as though they had been running the whole length that science suggests that they have existed, we wouldn't know it without a time machine to go back and look. Nor would we know it when scientists make big mistakes like they do with carbon dating; they don't know if C-14 existed on the earth much further back than 5,000 years; it's all guesswork.

The age of the earth by scientists is guesswork. The Bible is the clear record. The fact of the existence of God is proven by science and shown by nature. Believe God, not the scientists. The scientists don't know.

8)

i think no one know about the fact that how old is the fact and still no one can tell the exact time that from what time the earth is existence but it is assumed that the earth is about billions and billions of years old.

what is this,what did you actually mean dude.


you really cannot calculate the age of the earth only thing you can do at the most is speculate the age,assumptions are not facts and so it is not believable

I have to disagree.   You can calculate the age, and then you have an error bound.

For example, on this forum we could even agree, the age of the earth is somewhere between 5 thousand and 5 billion years.  But scientifically, we can get much more precise.

There is no way to get exact.  When did the Earth form?  Was it when 90% of the material on the Earth today had formed on the then primeval Earth, or 95%, or 99%?  You pick when it "formed."

This is a good question.
No one knows how old the earth is.
Because way back in the past, there are people who lives in here for too long until they got died. Then there is another batch then and so on.
That's why they don't know exactly how old it is.