Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
But the estimation changes so much how can you just keep agreeing with it?The scientific consensus has never once contradicted my own personal observations, at least in terms of the physical world. So I trust its current estimation of 4.6 billion years.
Well there are nineteen or so different vectors that lead to the current dating of 4.54 billion years accurate to within about 1 percent. Scientific dating works by comparing the results of as many different vectors as possible.There are so many different views on how old the earth is,so regardless of how it came about,why do you think the earth is the age that it is and how do you know that your belief is accurate,or is it all just a hypothesis?
Another question.Does the age of the earth really matter as far as religion is concerned?There are so many different views on how old the earth is,so regardless of how it came about,why do you think the earth is the age that it is and how do you know that your belief is accurate,or is it all just a hypothesis?
Not to scientists. Religions can do whatever they want with the scientific date, accept it or ignore it.Another question.Does the age of the earth really matter as far as religion is concerned?
Because we learn stuff. It is a best guess, based on a vast body of evidence. Evidence gained from technologies that have changed everything we once thought we knew.But the estimation changes so much how can you just keep agreeing with it?
I'm not sure what you mean by "changes so much." Could you expand on this a little, give some examples?But the estimation changes so much how can you just keep agreeing with it?
And we're supposed to believe you know what real scientists believe? Hardly.You guys actually believe the age of the earth has been determined to 1% accuracy, not even real scientists believe that,
Might be, but it isn't.I'd say 4.5 billion + or - 1 billion might be more accurate!!
But the estimation changes so much how can you just keep agreeing with it?
Another question.Does the age of the earth really matter as far as religion is concerned?
But the estimation changes so much how can you just keep agreeing with it?
+ or - 1 Billion years is beyond comprehension to us in regards to size. But in regards to the age of...everything? A Billion years one way or another is utterly meaningless at that scale. Stop using our pathetically short lifespans as a yardstick.You guys actually believe the age of the earth has been determined to 1% accuracy, not even real scientists believe that, I'd say 4.5 billion + or - 1 billion might be more accurate!!
Not "determined." This is just the best estimate, based on current data. Modification is assumed, as more data are collected and analysed.You guys actually believe the age of the earth has been determined to 1% accuracy, not even real scientists believe that, I'd say 4.5 billion + or - 1 billion might be more accurate!!
If you don't care to find out why science is satisfied with its conclusion, and instead prefer your own uneducated notion then have it your way.All the age of the earth theories are based on the concept that the radioactive decay of this substance or that decayed at exactly the same rate 4.5 billion years ago as it does today. We really have no way of proving that these decays are completely constant, that's why I say + or - 1 billion years, not + or - 1%.
Lol, funny but entertain the suggestion. He is saying we know it is older than 3.5 billion years and less than 5.5 billion years. If new evidence, that proved with 100% certainty, came out tomorrow stating a number in between these years we would be a little surprised if it was toward the low end, but not really that surprised.+ or - 1 Billion years is beyond comprehension to us in regards to size. But in regards to the age of...everything? A Billion years one way or another is utterly meaningless at that scale. Stop using our pathetically short lifespans as a yardstick.
Show me an example of anything that just randomly changes its base properties without any outside influence and your idea might have merit.All the age of the earth theories are based on the concept that the radioactive decay of this substance or that decayed at exactly the same rate 4.5 billion years ago as it does today. We really have no way of proving that these decays are completely constant, that's why I say + or - 1 billion years, not + or - 1%.