-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Earth is much younger than previously thought
- Thread starter Sententia
- Start date
Rationality
The Grand King of Nothing
People focus so much time on how old the earth is, and they focus so little time on earth's beauty.
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
I notice that the article talks about timespans of tens of millions of years, rather than of ten thousand years normally used in creationism. Orders of magnitude, much?
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Ha! Lousy scientists and their methods of empirical observation. Pshaw, I say! Pshaw!
Neat article.
Neat article.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Egads! The horror!
Actually, yeah this is pretty cool... especially if it is backed up by other research. It would mean life on Earth got it's jump-start even quicker after the Earth formed.
I wonder how long it will take Creos to jump on this and start twisting it?
wa:do
A little more research & perhaps they'll be able to get the Earth down to 6K years old.
Only about 4.5 billion to go!
Only about 4.5 billion to go!
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Skwim
Veteran Member
Telegraph headline writer:
"Earth is much younger than previously thought."
Telegraph Science Correspondent. "*Sheesh!* read the d - - - article, dummy."
"The Earth could be younger . . . ." "Researchers have calculated that the planet could have taken far longer to form following the birth of the solar system 4.567 billion years ago than scientists have previously believed."
How big a percentage do you think this revision to the Earth's age is?
Half Asleep
Crazy-go-nuts
You demonstrate a complete ignorance towards what "science" is.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Then why are you sitting at a computer?
RedOne77
Active Member
With the numbers given, do a little heathen math, and I got a little over a 1.56%.
Sad part is, I know much more about science than the average American! Heck, I've probably taken more science courses than the average non-science major college graduate.
Someone has to speak up against absurdities. With science unchecked they'll be telling us that ice can sink in water, not everything will continue to 0 entropy, or that a single neuron can hold memories or recognize people's faces. Or God forbid a story about our ancestors having marital relations with chimp ancestors.
P.S. I'm glad that Mestemia had a good laugh.
Last edited:
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I not so sure that you know what science actually means...
Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you hate science, what business do you have utilizing its fruits, such as technology (i.e. your computer)?
RedOne77
Active Member
Science is derived from some Latin word that means "knowledge". Didn't even need to look that one up. It's not that I hate science, but we all know science comes up with some pretty insane ideas. Everything that I've said science [will] say they've already more or less established it.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Science is derived from some Latin word that means "knowledge". Didn't even need to look that one up. It's not that I hate science, but we all know science comes up with some pretty insane ideas. Everything that I've said science [will] say they've already more or less established it.
By "insane ideas" you mean they conflict with the superstitions of ancient goat herders? If somethings is to be called a legitimate scientific claim, it tends to be thoroughly substantiated by evidence and logic. Everything you've mentioned however are merely straw men and non sequiturs you've pulled out of the air.
RedOne77
Active Member
Indeed, and science has shown us that babies are born with a primitive 'language' as part of instinct, the human body does emit visible light (something like a million times fainter than what our eyes can detect), the speed of light has changed over time, water ice can sink in water, some systems cannot reach 0 entropy at absolute zero, single neurons can hold memories and recognize people's faces, and humans and chimp ancestors have quite possibly interbred for over a million years after the initial split. No straw men, nor logical fallacies, just 'knowledge'.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
New information and new discoveries are what science is all about.
This news if anything, proves the scientific method.
This news if anything, proves the scientific method.
Yerda
Veteran Member
I can't tell if you're a genius pardoying a lunatic, or a lunatic parodying a genius. Either way, pat yourself on the back. You are funny.Science is derived from some Latin word that means "knowledge". Didn't even need to look that one up. It's not that I hate science, but we all know science comes up with some pretty insane ideas. Everything that I've said science [will] say they've already more or less established it.
With the numbers given, do a little heathen math, and I got a little over a 1.56%.
I'm slow....just now figuring out that you're joshing us.
Last edited:
Man of Faith
Well-Known Member
I'm still waiting for scientists to tell me whether coffee is good or bad for me, much less the age of the earth, where they have to make many assumptions in order to guess anyway.