How old is the world according to Theologists?

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Originally posted by: conjur

Hmm...actually, all scientists, in one way or another, are out to do that. That's how they can prove earlier theories as either valid or invalid.

And, you haven't looked? But you were so hot to state that carbon dating has failed. How would you know if you didn't look?

A poseur troll.

Double Blind experiments and placebos and many other measures are taken to avoid it. If you want to believe something fanatically you are going to no matter what.

Wow...you just defined yourself!

I am not a Fanatic silly. I have changed my mind on many things. The truth is that there isnt really any evidence to show the Earth is 4 Billion years old.

I am sorry that NASA thought there would be a lot of space dust and debree but there are too many possibilities for the reason why there isnt much debree.

There is not however good reasons why trees are 10,000 years old through counting rings and the Earth is 6. There is not a single good reason why when examining the half life of a Uranium (or many other) sample that the age would be incorrect.

It is true that the instruments originally used to carbone date were incapable of the precision required to get an accurate date. I wish they hadnt attempted any measurements until that was fixed because now it fuels Flyer's strange belief that there exists some proof that C-14 cannot gain accurate measurements. It also is laughable that even though it has been said at least three times by me and at least twice by others that C-14 isnt used to measure things more than 50,000 years old that he still insists that the reason science is wrong about the age of the Earth is because there exists (in his head) some proof that C-14 dating sux the ballz.

Either way I am off to bed the woman says so. (I may not be fanatic but I am whipped good night).

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

I will change my mind if you show me why Uranium cannot be used to find an accurate date.

How am I supposed to do that? I'm not a scientist, and I certainly don't have access to uranium so that I can test it and disprove its accuracy in dating the age of things. The only thing I have to fall back on is 1) the Bible and 2) the work of others. I don't like relying on others' work so that pretty much leaves me with the Bible.
BTW, I don't expect you to change your mind on this subject. That's the difference between the approaches seen in this thread.

I would change my mind if you showed me viable proof and not some theory. That is the difference between our open mindedness.

Goodnight.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: stnicralisk

Originally posted by: conjur

Hmm...actually, all scientists, in one way or another, are out to do that. That's how they can prove earlier theories as either valid or invalid.

And, you haven't looked? But you were so hot to state that carbon dating has failed. How would you know if you didn't look?

A poseur troll.

Double Blind experiments and placebos and many other measures are taken to avoid it. If you want to believe something fanatically you are going to no matter what.

Wow...you just defined yourself!

I am not a Fanatic silly. I have changed my mind on many things. The truth is that there isnt really any evidence to show the Earth is 4 Billion years old.

I am sorry that NASA thought there would be a lot of space dust and debree but there are too many possibilities for the reason why there isnt much debree.

There is not however good reasons why trees are 10,000 years old through counting rings and the Earth is 6. There is not a single good reason why when examining the half life of a Uranium (or many other) sample that the age would be incorrect.

It is true that the instruments originally used to carbone date were incapable of the precision required to get an accurate date. I wish they hadnt attempted any measurements until that was fixed because now it fuels Flyer's strange belief that there exists some proof that C-14 cannot gain accurate measurements. It also is laughable that even though it has been said at least three times by me and at least twice by others that C-14 isnt used to measure things more than 50,000 years old that he still insists that the reason science is wrong about the age of the Earth is because there exists (in his head) some proof that C-14 dating sux the ballz.

Either way I am off to bed the woman says so. (I may not be fanatic but I am whipped good night).

oh...oops!!

In the frenzy I thought you were flyermax!
My apologies!

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Ameesh
i really dont care what faith you have if you think the earth is < 10,000 years old you are a complete idiot.

I'm sure Columbus was told the same thing when he said the earth was round

Calling someone an idiot because they have different beliefs than you makes you an idiot, my friend.

Disagree. Columbus went out and proved people who called him an idiot wrong.

Nobody who believes the earth isn't millions or billions of years old can do the same. So they are idiots if they don't believe what has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt.

If the age of the earth had been determined and proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" as you so claim then why are we having this discussion?

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur


oh...oops!!

In the frenzy I thought you were flyermax!
My apologies!

Speaking of lack of reading comprehension... ROFLES! Thanks for the laugh Conjur

 

666

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: conjur


oh...oops!!

In the frenzy I thought you were flyermax!
My apologies!

Speaking of lack of reading comprehension... ROFLES! Thanks for the laugh Conjur

It's the head cold and the sinus meds.

I really should go to bed now. Moving tomorrow and I still feel like sh*t!

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: conjur


oh...oops!!

In the frenzy I thought you were flyermax!
My apologies!

Speaking of lack of reading comprehension... ROFLES! Thanks for the laugh Conjur

It's the head cold and the sinus meds.

I really should go to bed now. Moving tomorrow and I still feel like sh*t!

Sorry to hear that, conjur I'm on my way there with you, just starting to come down with something here I think... Get well soon! I hope you feel better.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Ameesh
i really dont care what faith you have if you think the earth is < 10,000 years old you are a complete idiot.

I'm sure Columbus was told the same thing when he said the earth was round

Calling someone an idiot because they have different beliefs than you makes you an idiot, my friend.

Disagree. Columbus went out and proved people who called him an idiot wrong.

Nobody who believes the earth isn't millions or billions of years old can do the same. So they are idiots if they don't believe what has been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt.

If the age of the earth had been determined and proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" as you so claim then why are we having this discussion?

Because lots of people are not smart enough to see truth. They cling to old beliefs, even when proven wrong.

How long after the world was proven not to be flat did it take before everyone believed it? I'd bet there might be a few people even today who still don't.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Sorry to hear that, conjur I'm on my way there with you, just starting to come down with something here I think... Get well soon! I hope you feel better.

I'm on the tail-end of it. It lasts off an on about 3 weeks. This has been the worst of it.

Here's hoping you *don't* get it.


Later...

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Sorry to hear that, conjur I'm on my way there with you, just starting to come down with something here I think... Get well soon! I hope you feel better.

I'm on the tail-end of it. It lasts off an on about 3 weeks. This has been the worst of it.

Here's hoping you *don't* get it.


Later...

Three weeks??!!oneone111??11? :Q Wow. I'm just glad you're still alive after an illness like that, LOL

 

[Chadder007]

Im thinking this thread deserves a lock now....

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb


If the age of the earth had been determined and proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" as you so claim then why are we having this discussion?

Because lots of people are not smart enough to see truth. They cling to old beliefs, even when proven wrong.

How long after the world was proven not to be flat did it take before everyone believed it? I'd bet there might be a few people even today who still don't.[/quote]

Your statement could be used on either side of this argument. It is my belief that G-d's word is truth and anything else is simply wrong.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Chadder007
Im thinking this thread deserves a lock now....

I don't see why... I believe everyone's differences have been worked out at this point, perhaps now discussion can return to the original topic.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb


If the age of the earth had been determined and proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" as you so claim then why are we having this discussion?

Because lots of people are not smart enough to see truth. They cling to old beliefs, even when proven wrong.

How long after the world was proven not to be flat did it take before everyone believed it? I'd bet there might be a few people even today who still don't.

Your statement could be used on either side of this argument. It is my belief that G-d's word is truth and anything else is simply wrong.[/quote]
Except for the "proof" thing. We flew way up in the air, looked down and said "Hmm....that's pretty round." whereas there haven't been any followups on the bible. That, as I pointed out before, is the fundamental difference between religion and science.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Chadder007
Im thinking this thread deserves a lock now....

I don't see why... I believe everyone's differences have been worked out at this point, perhaps now discussion can return to the original topic.

Because of the sickening bashing that has happened in this thread...

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Chadder007
Im thinking this thread deserves a lock now....

I don't see why... I believe everyone's differences have been worked out at this point, perhaps now discussion can return to the original topic.

Because of the sickening bashing that has happened in this thread...

Closing the thread now certainly won't change that, though. Besides, I'm the one who took the brunt of the bashing, but I don't mind I'm kinda used to it

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Your statement could be used on either side of this argument. It is my belief that G-d's word is truth and anything else is simply wrong.

Except for the "proof" thing. We flew way up in the air, looked down and said "Hmm....that's pretty round." whereas there haven't been any followups on the bible. That, as I pointed out before, is the fundamental difference between religion and science.[/quote]

I don't know how many times I can say this: if the Bible could be proven, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[matt426malm]

Originally posted by: Chadder007

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Chadder007
Im thinking this thread deserves a lock now....

I don't see why... I believe everyone's differences have been worked out at this point, perhaps now discussion can return to the original topic.

Because of the sickening bashing that has happened in this thread...

It's just bashing flyer and since he is making this stuff up as he goes, and doesn't actually believe it no one is really hurt.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Fausto

Your statement could be used on either side of this argument. It is my belief that G-d's word is truth and anything else is simply wrong.

Except for the "proof" thing. We flew way up in the air, looked down and said "Hmm....that's pretty round." whereas there haven't been any followups on the bible. That, as I pointed out before, is the fundamental difference between religion and science.

I don't know how many times I can say this: if the Bible could be proven, we wouldn't be having this discussion.[/quote]
Which is basically my point. It can't be proven/disproven because it's a book, but science continually works to correct and revise itself through tangible means. As such, your almost complete discounting of the vast scientific works of man is just.....<shrug>.

There are other religious texts out there as well, why are you so sold on just this one? What if you're wrong? How can you ignore the various discrepancies pointed out in and amongst all the yelling in this thread? What if the Buddhists are right and you end up reincarnated as a dung beetle for saying it's okay to kill certain "non-righteous" persons?

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb


If the age of the earth had been determined and proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" as you so claim then why are we having this discussion?

Because lots of people are not smart enough to see truth. They cling to old beliefs, even when proven wrong.

How long after the world was proven not to be flat did it take before everyone believed it? I'd bet there might be a few people even today who still don't.

Your statement could be used on either side of this argument. It is my belief that G-d's word is truth and anything else is simply wrong.[/quote]
No, it couldn't be used on either side. The earth is either flat or it isn't. After it was proven not to be flat, there were still people who didn't believe it. After years and years of proof and more proof, there are very, very few that don't believe the earth is basically round. (I know it isn't exactly round)

If you believe God's word is the truth and anything else is simply wrong, then that's your choice. The debate over religion, IMO, hinges on what exactly in the bible is God's word, and what is Man's?
God didn't write the bible, men did, and men know a lot more today than they did back then. It is a known fact that some of the stories in the bible are fables that existed long before they were supposed to have happened, yet people still believe them. You can sit around and refute a good portion of the bible if you really do some research.
Many people are weak-minded, and can't handle the fact that we simply don't know exactly how or why we and our world exist......that's why every culture has some sort of god-like being that they reference to. Something had to be made up to explain that which nobody understood.

Personally, I think that lots of science and God can easily coexist. Science can tell us a lot about how things happened...essentially the nuts and bolts of the universe. I tend to believe that the majority of science, evolution and such, is true...in fact, if you don't believe in evolution, you simply have your head in the sand, ignoring facts. Evolution is an absolute, unrefutable fact.
But IMO, who's to say that's not how God wanted it?

A good analogy to scientists would be auto mechanics and computer techs. They can tell you all day how this part works, that part works, how fuel burns, etc......the nuts and bolts of the thing.....but they can't design it or tell you how or why a part or whole engine was designed the way it is. They can only say, this is the way it's supposed to work, because the repair manual says so.
The difference is, we have the ability to go to the engineer who designed it to get an explanation of the hows and whys........we haven't found a way to get direct answers from God, yet.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Fausto

Your statement could be used on either side of this argument. It is my belief that G-d's word is truth and anything else is simply wrong.

Except for the "proof" thing. We flew way up in the air, looked down and said "Hmm....that's pretty round." whereas there haven't been any followups on the bible. That, as I pointed out before, is the fundamental difference between religion and science.

I don't know how many times I can say this: if the Bible could be proven, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Which is basically my point. It can't be proven/disproven because it's a book, but science continually works to correct and revise itself through tangible means. As such, your almost complete discounting of the vast scientific works of man is just.....<shrug>.

There are other religious texts out there as well, why are you so sold on just this one? What if you're wrong? How can you ignore the various discrepancies pointed out in and amongst all the yelling in this thread? What if the Buddhists are right and you end up reincarnated as a dung beetle for saying it's okay to kill certain "non-righteous" persons? [/quote]

Science is not perfect and never will be. I can't put my faith in something that isn't perfect. Concerning my choice of "religions", I couldn't do my story justice by trying to relate it. Besides, no one would believe me

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb


If the age of the earth had been determined and proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" as you so claim then why are we having this discussion?

Because lots of people are not smart enough to see truth. They cling to old beliefs, even when proven wrong.

How long after the world was proven not to be flat did it take before everyone believed it? I'd bet there might be a few people even today who still don't.

Your statement could be used on either side of this argument. It is my belief that G-d's word is truth and anything else is simply wrong.

No, it couldn't be used on either side. The earth is either flat or it isn't. After it was proven not to be flat, there were still people who didn't believe it. After years and years of proof and more proof, there are very, very few that don't believe the earth is basically round. (I know it isn't exactly round)

If you believe God's word is the truth and anything else is simply wrong, then that's your choice. The debate over religion, IMO, hinges on what exactly in the bible is God's word, and what is Man's?
God didn't write the bible, men did, and men know a lot more today than they did back then. It is a known fact that some of the stories in the bible are fables that existed long before they were supposed to have happened, yet people still believe them. You can sit around and refute a good portion of the bible if you really do some research.
Many people are weak-minded, and can't handle the fact that we simply don't know exactly how or why we and our world exist......that's why every culture has some sort of god-like being that they reference to. Something had to be made up to explain that which nobody understood.

Personally, I think that lots of science and God can easily coexist. Science can tell us a lot about how things happened...essentially the nuts and bolts of the universe. I tend to believe that the majority of science, evolution and such, is true...in fact, if you don't believe in evolution, you simply have your head in the sand, ignoring facts. Evolution is an absolute, unrefutable fact.
But IMO, who's to say that's not how God wanted it?

A good analogy to scientists would be auto mechanics and computer techs. They can tell you all day how this part works, that part works, how fuel burns, etc......the nuts and bolts of the thing.....but they can't design it or tell you how or why a part or whole engine was designed the way it is. They can only say, this is the way it's supposed to work, because the repair manual says so.
The difference is, we have the ability to go to the engineer who designed it to get an explanation of the hows and whys........we haven't found a way to get direct answers from God, yet.[/quote]

I meant the first part of your statement, silly

 

[cubanx]

Originally posted by: PipBoy
I can't prove it's older than 32 years.

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: WinkOsmosis

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
As far as the fanaticals are concerned, the Earth is as old as their holy books tell them, and no amount of scientific evidence to the contraray is going to make them think otherwise.

For the ones capable of rational thought, whatever the latest figure from science is.

LMFAO! Here's a newsflash for you: science cannot prove that which it cannot observe in nature or reproduce in a labroratory. To believe either *theory* you have to have faith since neither can be proven.

4.22 billion years is the age of the earth observed in nature.

Sorry, don't buy it. The figure changes every time I hear it. When science can nail down a figure and explain exactly why the universe is that age without relying on theory of any sort, then I may believe it. Until then, I'll go by what the Bible says. Call me an idiot if you like, I'd rather be considered an idiot and be right than be considered wise and be wrong.

Wait a fuggin second, you say IF SCIENCE NAILS IT DOWN THEN I MAY BELIEVE IT... WTF is that BS, So if science nails down to an UNDISPUTABLE FACT, you are still just going to go by faith?