Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
61 online now:
(61 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,163 Year: 4,275/6,534 Month: 489/900 Week: 13/182 Day: 1/12 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Old is the Earth ?
Peter
Member (Idle past 713 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 1 of 145 (4572)
02-15-2002 9:14 AM


This seems fundamental to many creationist's objections to the
theory of evolution, but there doesn't appear to be a single
thread devoted to the question at the moment.

Creationists argue that the Earth is only about 6000 years old.
The original basis for this appears to be tracing back
genealogies from Jesus of Nazereth back to Adam. Some
other evidences have been put forward, none of which stand too
much investigation (in my opinion ... and said in the hope of
sparking some 'Well what about this then').

Evolutionists site many evidences, from many different fields
which suggest a much older earth (4.5 billion years or there
abouts).

Perhaps, as it is fundamental to the debate it should be addressed
specifically.


Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by LudvanB, posted 02-15-2002 4:18 PM Peter has taken no action
 Message 71 by bkwusa, posted 02-18-2002 10:47 PM Peter has taken no action
 Message 109 by Peter, posted 02-22-2002 7:03 AM Peter has taken no action

  
quicksink
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 145 (4600)
02-15-2002 11:26 AM


I believe that time is circular, and therefore you cannot put a time on the beginning of the universe. The cosmos, which may be composed of an infinite # of universes, never bagan and won't ever end.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 3:55 PM quicksink has taken no action
 Message 46 by Peter, posted 02-18-2002 5:29 AM quicksink has taken no action

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 145 (4625)
02-15-2002 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by quicksink
02-15-2002 11:26 AM


"I believe that time is circular, and therefore you cannot put a time on the beginning of the universe. The cosmos, which may be composed of an infinite # of universes, never bagan and won't ever end."
--Age of the earth, not origin of the Universe, also, are you a cosmologist? I was just wondering.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by quicksink, posted 02-15-2002 11:26 AM quicksink has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by joz, posted 02-15-2002 4:12 PM TrueCreation has replied

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 145 (4627)
02-15-2002 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by TrueCreation
02-15-2002 3:55 PM


What do you want to know about cosmology TC?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 3:55 PM TrueCreation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 4:20 PM joz has replied

  
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 145 (4629)
02-15-2002 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Peter
02-15-2002 9:14 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
This seems fundamental to many creationist's objections to the
theory of evolution, but there doesn't appear to be a single
thread devoted to the question at the moment.

Creationists argue that the Earth is only about 6000 years old.
The original basis for this appears to be tracing back
genealogies from Jesus of Nazereth back to Adam. Some
other evidences have been put forward, none of which stand too
much investigation (in my opinion ... and said in the hope of
sparking some 'Well what about this then').

Evolutionists site many evidences, from many different fields
which suggest a much older earth (4.5 billion years or there
abouts).

Perhaps, as it is fundamental to the debate it should be addressed
specifically.


Well,lets consider the diverging points of view here...one one side,you have creationist establishing the age of the earth at 6152 years old based entirely on the reading of a book writen God know when and God know by whom(the creationists themselves dont even know who the autor(s) is),that may very well be just a collection of recycled mythologies from earlier times,stating that from jesus,who lived about 2000 years ago(some people often forget that there is a 5-10% tolerence to our calendar...meaning that today we might be in the year somewhere between 1802 and 2202),they could go back 4150 years counting the genealogy of men who supposadly lived to by 900+ year all the way to Adam,the alledged human on earth after the 6 day creation thereof. And on the other extreme,you have people who studied the question for years,decades and even centuries(not the same guys,since we dont live 900 like the patriarch of christianity alledgedly did),and in many fields of study,have converged toward the ball park conclusion(aside from math,nothing is ever 100% precise in science) that our world is ABOUT 4 billion years old. Based on these facts,who would you say sounds like the more plausible alternative?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Peter, posted 02-15-2002 9:14 AM Peter has taken no action

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 145 (4630)
02-15-2002 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by joz
02-15-2002 4:12 PM


"What do you want to know about cosmology TC?"
--I guess I wasn't really asking, but I would come up with a couple questions such as the methods for star measurement and the like, cosmology is another one of those fields that I would love to get into, Though I would rather Geology Marine/Geophysics, Molecular and celluar biology, and ofcourse cosmology/cosmogeny/astrophysics, and its relatives.
--I would argue in the cosmological field of a young earth, but I would be to have the equiptment to carry on discussion as I could site many different theories and everything like that, but I would have to know the information and how everything works to sustain the argument.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by joz, posted 02-15-2002 4:12 PM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by joz, posted 02-15-2002 4:30 PM TrueCreation has replied
 Message 8 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 4:35 PM TrueCreation has taken no action

  
joz
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 145 (4633)
02-15-2002 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by TrueCreation
02-15-2002 4:20 PM


How strong is your math background?

If your comfortable with calculus I really recomend this book:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201547309/qid=1013807778/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_67_1/002-5138200-2718434

It was one of the texts I used at Uni and is very good as a undergrad level intro to everything from planetary motion to the black holes....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 4:20 PM TrueCreation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 4:38 PM joz has taken no action

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 145 (4634)
02-15-2002 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by TrueCreation
02-15-2002 4:20 PM


"Well,lets consider the diverging points of view here...one one side,you have creationist establishing the age of the earth at 6152 years old based entirely on the reading of a book writen God know when and God know by whom(the creationists themselves dont even know who the autor(s) is)"
--Who said it was 6152 years old?

"that may very well be just a collection of recycled mythologies from earlier times,stating that from jesus,who lived about 2000 years ago"
--Just remember ludvanB, this argument is not at all valid untill you can figure some support.

"(some people often forget that there is a 5-10% tolerence to our calendar...meaning that today we might be in the year somewhere between 1802 and 2202)"
--Cool, but where did you get the 5-10% tolerance assertion, never heard of it?

"they could go back 4150 years counting the genealogy of men who supposadly lived to by 900+ year all the way to Adam,the alledged human on earth after the 6 day creation thereof. And on the other extreme,you have people who studied the question for years,decades and even centuries(not the same guys,since we dont live 900 like the patriarch of christianity alledgedly did),and in many fields of study,have converged toward the ball park conclusion(aside from math,nothing is ever 100% precise in science) that our world is ABOUT 4 billion years old. Based on these facts,who would you say sounds like the more plausible alternative?"
--I don't at all argue, and I should hope no other creatinist does unless they have a very, and I mean very good reason for it, that the earth is young by geneological records. Also what are these facts that say that the world is in the billions of years (4.5 at estimate), that the young earth cannot deal with.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 4:20 PM TrueCreation has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by LudvanB, posted 02-16-2002 4:41 AM TrueCreation has replied
 Message 21 by wj, posted 02-16-2002 6:34 AM TrueCreation has replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 145 (4635)
02-15-2002 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by joz
02-15-2002 4:30 PM


"How strong is your math background?"
--I'm strong, but I'm still inadvancment in math. I am doing some Physics and I'll have to get into calc soon.

"If your comfortable with calculus I really recomend this book:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201547309/qid=1013807778/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_67_1/002-5138200-2718434

It was one of the texts I used at Uni and is very good as a undergrad level intro to everything from planetary motion to the black holes...."
--I think that this would be a very good book, I remember you recomended it to me earlier in another forum, I don't think i'll be able to purchase it, though I'll have to check the local libaries.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by joz, posted 02-15-2002 4:30 PM joz has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by mark24, posted 02-15-2002 6:31 PM TrueCreation has replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 4429 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 10 of 145 (4646)
02-15-2002 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by TrueCreation
02-15-2002 4:38 PM


Wasn't calculus a Roman Caesar?

May as well be......

------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 4:38 PM TrueCreation has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 6:39 PM mark24 has taken no action

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 145 (4648)
02-15-2002 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by mark24
02-15-2002 6:31 PM


"Wasn't calculus a Roman Caesar?
May as well be......"
--I think we were speaking of mathematics.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by mark24, posted 02-15-2002 6:31 PM mark24 has taken no action

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3879
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 12 of 145 (4657)
02-15-2002 9:02 PM


I just wish to point out that there has previously been considerable discussion on this topic, at the Great Debate topics:

The Geologic Column
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=1&t=95&p=6

and

Dating Methods Controversy Discussion
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=1&t=30&p=6

Moose

------------------
BS degree, geology, '83
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Old Earth evolution - Yes
Godly creation - Maybe


Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 11:42 PM Minnemooseus has taken no action

  
zimzam
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 145 (4665)
02-15-2002 10:20 PM


Has anyone entertained the idea that if God created Adam as an adult why couldnt he create the earth as a million years old?

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by TrueCreation, posted 02-15-2002 11:39 PM zimzam has taken no action
 Message 16 by joz, posted 02-15-2002 11:49 PM zimzam has replied
 Message 18 by RetroCrono, posted 02-16-2002 2:48 AM zimzam has taken no action

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 145 (4674)
02-15-2002 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by zimzam
02-15-2002 10:20 PM


"Has anyone entertained the idea that if God created Adam as an adult why couldnt he create the earth as a million years old?"
--Because Adam was actaually '0' years old when he was an created. You could argue if you really wanted to that the world 'look's' millions/billions of years old, but really at the day of creation it was 0.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by zimzam, posted 02-15-2002 10:20 PM zimzam has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by doctrbill, posted 02-16-2002 12:08 AM TrueCreation has replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 145 (4675)
02-15-2002 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Minnemooseus
02-15-2002 9:02 PM


"I just wish to point out that there has previously been considerable discussion on this topic, at the Great Debate topics:"
--I think my Dating methods discussion forum sort of collapsed because it was too vague, there were many conversations in various areas all going on at the same time.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Minnemooseus, posted 02-15-2002 9:02 PM Minnemooseus has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022