How old is earth

[Buffer Overflow]

-  there is the potential that there was little to no C-14 back beyond 5,000 years ago. This would mean that carbon dating numbers are extremely far off... by as much as millions or billions of years.

Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14C to be measurable.

Carbon dating is based on the idea that the C-14 content on earth, in the atmosphere, has been relatively the same for at least hundreds of thousands of years

This is also a false claim. Scientist well know about environmental variations.

Dead Sea scrolls of over 2,000 years ago

Age of this document is calibrated at 35-324 BC and 202-107 BC thanks to method you claiming is false...

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

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

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

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

Amusing.

[1715092464]

1715092464

[1715092464]

1715092464

[1715092464]

1715092464

[1715092464]

1715092464

[Seansky]

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

[BADecker]

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.

[zythen]

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.

[rackam]

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

[Buffer Overflow]

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

[BADecker]

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

[Buffer Overflow]

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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?

[BADecker]

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

[Buffer Overflow]

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

[BADecker]

How old do you think Earth is? Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

[Shinpako09]

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.

[Buffer Overflow]

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.

[vanburen]

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

[Buffer Overflow]

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.

[escrowboy]

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.

That look when you're not sure if someone is trolling or not...

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.

[frankmb]

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.

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

[BADecker]

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.

That look when you're not sure if someone is trolling or not...

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.

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.

[BADecker]

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.

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

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

[hermanhs09]

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.

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

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

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 -,-