The age of the Earth
- Thread starter milefile
- 68 comments
- 2,155 views
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
The thing is, science is self-correcting - that's what the whole scientific process is for. You try something. It doesn't work. You try something else - it appears to work. You try it that way a few more times and some flaws show up. In the meantime, three other teams have picked up on your work and are coming at the problem from three different ways. One of them seems to work all the time, so that becomes the newest understanding of the phenomena. Everybody immediately starts trying to find ways to make that not work, and the whole process starts another cycle.
That's the absolute joy of science - everybody's putting forth the effort to see where they've screwed up, and correct it, so they can move on to correcting the next more detailed level of understanding. They've gotten darn good at it in the last 100 or so years, and the pace is just accelerating.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
There is an important distinction to be made between circular logical reasoning and iterative solution finding.
Iteration is used to home in on a solution to an equation that is not analytically solveable and is used by scientists and engineers to solve complex systems.
Circular reasoning is using your conclusions to validate your premeses and is used by relgions zealots to solve complex systems.
- 10,832
One place to wher you can touch and see the age of the Earth first hand is Petrified National Forest in north eastern Arizona.
"During the Triassic Period (200 - 250 million years ago) the Colorado Plateau area of northeastern Arizona was located near the equator and on the southwestern edge of the landmass known as "Pangea". (Eventually this super-continent separated to create our present continents.) This tropical location resulted in a climate and environment very different from today. Fossil evidence of this ancient land lies in the sediments called the Chinle Formation that is now exposed in Petrified Forest National Park.
Over time, trees died or perhaps were knocked over by floodwaters or wind. Rivers carried the trees into the lowlands, breaking off branches, bark, and small roots along the way. Some trees were deposited on the flood plain adjacent to the rivers and others were buried in the stream channels. Most of the trees decomposed and disappeared. But a few trees were petrified, becoming the beautiful fossilized logs we see today. Most of the fossilized logs are from a tree called Araucarioxylon arizonicum. Two others, Woodworthia and Schilderia, occur in small quantities in the northern part of the park. All 3 species are now extinct.
Some logs were buried by sediment before they could decompose while volcanoes to the west spewed tons of ash into the atmosphere. Winds carried ash into the area where it was incorporated into the deepening layers of sediment. Ground water dissolved silica from the volcanic ash and carried it through the logs. This solution filled, or replaced cell walls, crystallizing as the mineral quartz. The process was often so exact that replacement left a fossil that shows every detail of the logs original surfaces and, occasionally, the internal cell structures. Iron rich minerals combined with quartz during the petrification process, creating the brilliant rainbow of colors.
Over time, this area has endured many changes. About 60 million years ago, after the Chinle Formation was deeply buried by younger strata, the region was uplifted as part of the massive Colorado Plateau. As time passed, many rivers and storms eroded the land, removing the layers of rock until, again, the Chinle Formation was exposed. Now fossilized logs lie strewn across the clay hills and are exposed in cliff faces. Most logs are broken into segments. Humans did not cut the logs. Because the sections are still in order, we know that the logs fractured after they were buried and the petrification process was complete. Since petrified logs are composed of quartz, they are hard and brittle and break easily when subjected to stress."
Okay well that's your lesson for today
"During the Triassic Period (200 - 250 million years ago) the Colorado Plateau area of northeastern Arizona was located near the equator and on the southwestern edge of the landmass known as "Pangea". (Eventually this super-continent separated to create our present continents.) This tropical location resulted in a climate and environment very different from today. Fossil evidence of this ancient land lies in the sediments called the Chinle Formation that is now exposed in Petrified Forest National Park.
Over time, trees died or perhaps were knocked over by floodwaters or wind. Rivers carried the trees into the lowlands, breaking off branches, bark, and small roots along the way. Some trees were deposited on the flood plain adjacent to the rivers and others were buried in the stream channels. Most of the trees decomposed and disappeared. But a few trees were petrified, becoming the beautiful fossilized logs we see today. Most of the fossilized logs are from a tree called Araucarioxylon arizonicum. Two others, Woodworthia and Schilderia, occur in small quantities in the northern part of the park. All 3 species are now extinct.
Some logs were buried by sediment before they could decompose while volcanoes to the west spewed tons of ash into the atmosphere. Winds carried ash into the area where it was incorporated into the deepening layers of sediment. Ground water dissolved silica from the volcanic ash and carried it through the logs. This solution filled, or replaced cell walls, crystallizing as the mineral quartz. The process was often so exact that replacement left a fossil that shows every detail of the logs original surfaces and, occasionally, the internal cell structures. Iron rich minerals combined with quartz during the petrification process, creating the brilliant rainbow of colors.
Over time, this area has endured many changes. About 60 million years ago, after the Chinle Formation was deeply buried by younger strata, the region was uplifted as part of the massive Colorado Plateau. As time passed, many rivers and storms eroded the land, removing the layers of rock until, again, the Chinle Formation was exposed. Now fossilized logs lie strewn across the clay hills and are exposed in cliff faces. Most logs are broken into segments. Humans did not cut the logs. Because the sections are still in order, we know that the logs fractured after they were buried and the petrification process was complete. Since petrified logs are composed of quartz, they are hard and brittle and break easily when subjected to stress."
Okay well that's your lesson for today
And if I find you making any comments belittling anyone I will come down on you like white on rice. 
and have a nice day. 
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
You're right pako. That was pretty harsh. It was sarcastic and belittling. It was also instructive, though, and I think it helped clarify the conversation.
That is really how many of the creationists sound to me. I say many because some of them would not argue that the earth is literally only a handful of thousands of years old.
The ones that do argue that the age of the earth is that low, sound (to me) exactly like what I wrote.
So yes, I admit that it was hurtful. I appologize if anyone lost sleep over that comment (I doubt that is the case). But I would invite anyone to argue against my sarcastic comment or to use that (I believe clarifying) statement to better refine your argument so that I may understand how I have misinterpreted it.
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Is it a human idea that the earth cycles around the sun once for every 365.25xxx times that it revolves? Is it a human idea that the moon presents its full face to the earth every 28.5 revolutions of the earth?
Those occurances have nothing to do with "human ideas". Hours, minutes, and seconds units are arbitrary constructs, but the other events are not.
So the calendar is a human idea, but the Bible isn't?
Those occurances have nothing to do with "human ideas". Hours, minutes, and seconds units are arbitrary constructs, but the other events are not.
So the calendar is a human idea, but the Bible isn't?
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,450
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
Actually, saying that the Bible is a human idea would be a non-believer opinion, whereas, a believer, being one of faith in the validity of the Bible, would say that the Bible is the Word of God, inspired by God, Directed by God, but written by man.
So again, in regards to that opinion, of which there is no scientific fact to prove either way, it comes down to having faith or not as to which opinion you choose to adopt.
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,450
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
I'm not going to speak for frestkd, but I am going out on a limb here assuming that what he was trying to say is that our value of time is relative to human ideas. I would say this because of the finite resources of our own human mortality and the lifespan that we have. It is said that a day to God is like a 1,000 years to us. We define a day as the period of time for the earth to complete a cycle in 23.56.32 hours, however, time is still a relatively uncharted domain. There are theories and concepts of time manipulations by distorting gravity and other natural laws that we have put boundaries on by our early definitions, which would distort all that we know to be true of time. Be care in saying that time is limited to the days and nights of our earth, as I doubt our earth is at the center of the universe.
Physical Laws are not human idea's, but how we define them are human interpretations and observations.
Physical Laws are not human idea's, but how we define them are human interpretations and observations.
- 10,832
But human ideas are derived from and conditioned by physical laws. The Earth revolves around the sun and we have, for our own reasons, divided this period into increments that allow us to plan. We measure time for practical reasons. Nobody ever set out, thinking "I don't like Christians so I will work hard to prove them wrong." Rather, observant individuals noticed things that didn't fit into the bible's story. They looked into it, discovered things, inspired others to do the same, and over time a body of knowledge ecumulated, evidence was recorded, and humanity advanced, improving itself along the way. Conversely, the bible says: "Everything was already answered before that ever happened." It has the gaul to suggest that science is a waste of time... until they have to go to the doctor, or until you use a digital camera or a mobile phone, all of which are technologies based on science who's conditions and evidence continually refute biblical interpretations. The only way to assimilate into a technological, advancing society under these biblical interpretations of history and the physical world is to deliberately choose to ignore facts and overwhelming evidence to the contrary, to invoke "faith", which, in this context, compells one to view the beautiful universe as some mere magic trick. Understanding and any hope for progress is lost in this ignorance.
But humans wrote the bible, which was and is beautiful in it's own limited way. I am grateful that despite its perversion, our species has managed to advance and outgrow its past. I am grateful that Christianity has been demoted from the primary characteristic of Western civilization. Science and new ideas about the nature of life do the same thing that the bible did, only better. Why should the world grow technologically while it spiritually stagnates? When will people see that these two things are inseperable? Their resolution, which is really a reunion, is simply our species' only hope for the future. Sticking ones head in the sand and insisting the Earth is 6000 years old is akin to a child covering his ears, closing his eyes tight, and yelling "bla la la la!" to block out some unwanted thing. Of course it doesn't work, and kids grow up, as will homo sapiens.
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,450
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
Whoa! And all that was inspired from my little sentence that you quoted? I'm impressed, really.
I honestly cant discern what the first paragraph has to do with this discussion but in replying to it, where is that verse in the Bible? God is all knowing, so does that mean we don't need continue to grow in all aspects of our life? Does it mean that everything is pre-destined because God already knows what's going to happen? If we give our life to God's direction, does that mean we make no conscience free-will decisions? The answer to all those questions would be certainly not. To deny technology and science would be to stifle your own race and cultural development which (I don't think) would be a very good thing.Secondly, who ever said the earth was only 6k-7k years old? I have yet to hear anyone saying that. The only thing Im saying here is that every time we come up with a new way to measure the age of the earth, we come up with a different scientific fact. Since Im not personally in the R&D department of new ways to measure the age of the earth, Im probably going to have to wait until I can ask the One who made the earth as to how old it is. When I find out for sure, Ill be sure to let you know.
From your last paragraph there, it really sounds like you have some strong resentments towards the Bible and what it stands for, almost to the point of disgust and hate. I was surprised to read the tone in that paragraph. Theres thousands of Christian doctors that use modern medicine every day to treat their patients. Im trying to find how you arrived at your conclusions about people who indulge in the readings of the Bible to have their head in the sand?
- 2,281
The earth is 31 years old...
because that my age, i have no way of proving for fact that it is older than that, everything before this is just what i have heard from other people or read in books but never experienced for myself...how do i know it existed for sure or not? how do we know that our lives are real and not some big staged show with everyone being actors?
if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to witness it...does it make a sound?
yes, the earth is 31 years old, that much i know for a fact...
because that my age, i have no way of proving for fact that it is older than that, everything before this is just what i have heard from other people or read in books but never experienced for myself...how do i know it existed for sure or not? how do we know that our lives are real and not some big staged show with everyone being actors?
if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there to witness it...does it make a sound?
yes, the earth is 31 years old, that much i know for a fact...
- 2,281
The Universe: The constraints within which our conciousness is bound.
Example 1:
The Consious universe - look about you
Example 2:
The Subconcious universe - Spiritual collective unconcious as defined by Karl Jung (http://www.psy.pdx.edu/PsiCafe/KeyTheorists/Jung.htm)
Example 3:
The Superconcious universe - the universe that exists outsides the boundaries of the first two believed to be experienced my Tibetan monks and praticioners of Bhuddism and higher forms of meditation
okay Neon Duke...something a little more challenging please..
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,450
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
[lighting-thunderstorm]
It's ALIVAAAH! This thread is ALIVE!
[/lighting-thunderstorm]
Here is a good start for further research:
http://www.google.com/search?q=biblical+archeology&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
- 10,832
This does not demonstrate that the bible is a reliable means of determining anything factual about the physical world. Mentioning a house is nothing. Finding the house later is also nothing. Archeologists proved a house existed, not the bible. Also, one can look for a house at a particular place and reasonably believe that a house did exist because many houses have existed and still do (the ivory factor is inconsequntial since much of the grand achitecture of the period utilized ivory). But to believe that the Earth is 8000 years old and was created in six days, was populated by Adam and Eve who blew it for us all because a talking snake coerced them into eating an apple, is silly, when overwhenlming evidence suggests otherwise.
Here is another application of the biblical logic. It demonstrates it's circular nature:
The bible mentions Jews. There are Jews living today so it must follow that everything the bible says is factually true.
Here is another application of the biblical logic. It demonstrates it's circular nature:
The bible mentions Jews. There are Jews living today so it must follow that everything the bible says is factually true.
Pako
Staff Emeritus
- 16,450
- NW Montana
- GTP-Pako
- GTP Pako
Literal Facts of the Bible haven't been proven otherwise, to the contrary, science just re-enforces Biblical facts.
Metiphoric or Symbolic examples in the Bible should not be taken literally, the difficulty for some (I guess) is in discerning the differences between that.
Metiphoric or Symbolic examples in the Bible should not be taken literally, the difficulty for some (I guess) is in discerning the differences between that.
Yeah - they'll have to try a lot harder to prove the Bible existed!
Good point. In the 16th century, Galileo hypothesized that the Earth rotated around the sun. The church though it was crazy and attempted to kick him out for his blasphemous idea.
But like you say, science just re-enforces Biblical facts.
