Can science prove the world is over 4 billion yrs. old?

[rossum]

I would change the Creation Panel to read:

“Here is what God has Revealed, let this aid in your research and subsequent reasoning.”

How’s that?

How about:

“Here is what I believe God has revealed, though other Christians believe differently, let this aid in your research and subsequent reasoning.”

rossum

 

[inocente]

Given the editorial cartoon added to your post, I guess not.
By the way, the cartoon is a red herring to the topic at hand and the subject of the cartoon itself is a straw man.

It was only intended to lighten the mood. Did it?

 

[inocente]

“Here is what I believe God has revealed, though other Christians believe differently, let this aid in your research and subsequent reasoning.”

I would change the Creation Panel to read:

“Here is what God has Revealed, let this aid in your research and subsequent reasoning.”

How’s that?

Terrific.

One question.

Where did God reveal the age of the world?

 

[buffalo]

How about:

“Here is what I believe God has revealed, though other Christians believe differently, let this aid in your research and subsequent reasoning.”

rossum

Nah rossum I don’t like it.

What God has revealed is more than a cafeteria belief.

 

[buffalo]

Terrific.

One question.

Where did God reveal the age of the world?

We do not know that He didn’t verbally reveal it to anyone.

As far as Scripture goes there is no date that I am aware of. The ages are calculated through the genealogies. The Jews run a calendar to this day since the beginning of creation. I am not sure where they got the start date from.

 

[Robert_Sock]

The Jews run a calendar to this day since the beginning of creation. I am not sure where they got the start date from.

The start date is the creation of Adam.

 

[vz71]

It was only intended to lighten the mood. Did it?

But this also reveals where the true gap lies.
Many simply do not understand what the creationist beliefs are, and characterize them in the worst possible terms as a result.

I am a creationist, and the cartoon does not even come close to depicting what I believe. And in all truth, no one else in this stream has come close either.

 

[vz71]

The start date is the creation of Adam.

How do they arrive at that without knowing the precise ages of the descendents as well as the precise age of Adam when his first child was born?

 

[rossum]

Nah rossum I don’t like it.

What God has revealed is more than a cafeteria belief.

What God has reveled is perfectly clear. It is clear in the Bible (Protestant version), it is clear in the Bible (Catholic version), it is clear in the Tanakh, it is clear in the Bhagavad Gita, it is clear in the Qur’an. It is clear in lots of places.

All you have to do is to determine which clear version of God’s revelation is the correct one.

Let me propose a solution. Let us compare God’s revelations with God’s world. The revelations that match God’s world are correct. The revelations that don’t match God’s world are not correct. How about that idea?

rossum

 

[buffalo]

What God has reveled is perfectly clear. It is clear in the Bible (Protestant version), it is clear in the Bible (Catholic version), it is clear in the Tanakh, it is clear in the Bhagavad Gita, it is clear in the Qur’an. It is clear in lots of places.

All you have to do is to determine which clear version of God’s revelation is the correct one.

Let me propose a solution. Let us compare God’s revelations with God’s world. The revelations that match God’s world are correct. The revelations that don’t match God’s world are not correct. How about that idea?

rossum

rossum - you have now officially entered the IDvolution fan club. Welcome. No dues, no membership fees, and you get a free IDvolution poster along with your wallet card.

Remember this?

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=639&pictureid=7720

 

[Pag_Hingowa]

Someone said something to me quote"if i build you a boat made of wood from a tree 200 yrs. old could you say to me that the boat is 200 yrs. old?'I understood his point to be just because the earth is made up of materials which are billions of years old(because that/s how long it takes some substances to be created how can we say that the earth is billions of years old.In otherwords God could have created the earth in a second yet is made of up materials which take billions of years to form.Like a diamond for instance.

Have you examined the following the following?

Uranium-lead dating

Uranium-lead is one of the oldest[1] and most refined of the radiometric dating schemes, with a routine age range of about 1 million years to over 4.5 billion years, and with routine precisions in the 0.1-1 percent range.[2] The method relies on two separate decay chains, the uranium series from 238U to 206Pb, with a half-life of 4.47 billion years and the actinium series from 235U to 207Pb, with a half-life of 704 million years. These decay routes occur via a series of alpha (and beta) decays, in which 238U with daughter nuclides undergo eight total alpha and six beta decays whereas 235U with daughters only experience seven alpha and four beta decays.[3]

The existence of two ‘parallel’ uranium-lead decay routes (238U to 206Pb and 235U to 207Pb) leads to multiple dating techniques within the overall U-Pb system. The term ‘U-Pb dating’ normally implies the coupled use of both decay schemes in the ‘concordia diagram’ (see below). However, use of a single decay scheme (usually 238U to 206Pb) leads to the U-Pb isochron dating method, analogous to the rubidium-strontium dating method. Finally, ages can also be determined from the U-Pb system by analysis of Pb isotope ratios alone. This is termed the lead-lead dating method. Clair Cameron Patterson, an American geochemist who pioneered studies of uranium-lead radiometric dating methods, is famous for having used it to obtain one of the earliest accurate estimates of the age of the Earth.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-lead_dating

 

[rossum]

rossum - you have now officially entered the IDvolution fan club. Welcome. No dues, no membership fees, and you get a free IDvolution poster along with your wallet card.

Yeah, but do I get a Secret Decoder Ring?

rossum

 

[buffalo]

Yeah, but do I get a Secret Decoder Ring?

rossum

That remains a secret.

http://www.threecentstamp.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/box678.jpg

 

[razredge]

Wow, 22 pages… (though admittedly the geocentrist thread was longer.)

…So who thinks the earth isn’t billions of years old?

You know I was talking to a guy in my parish who thinks while it may have 4 billion human years only 7,000 years passed for God - so there actually is no discrepancy at all between the scientific age of the earth and the biblical one, problem solved!

 

[inocente]

We do not know that He didn’t verbally reveal it to anyone.

As far as Scripture goes there is no date that I am aware of. The ages are calculated through the genealogies. The Jews run a calendar to this day since the beginning of creation. I am not sure where they got the start date from.

It would have been real handy if scripture used that calendar to date the events of which it speaks. It’s revealing that instead the epoch seems to have been invented later from genealogies.

 

[inocente]

But this also reveals where the true gap lies.
Many simply do not understand what the creationist beliefs are, and characterize them in the worst possible terms as a result.

I am a creationist, and the cartoon does not even come close to depicting what I believe. And in all truth, no one else in this stream has come close either.

The only form of creationism bearing on the OP is YEC, which I previously knew very little about, and from the arguments so far does seem to be just whimsical American folklore - it’s unrelated to scripture except by a Jesus Code style of mystic pseudomath, the cosmology essentially ignores Genesis, it involves a pile of assumptions, it requires major changes to the physical law, it denies evidence and common sense, there’s been no good answer to claims it paints God as a deceiver and takes attention away from Christ … …

But you’re right, perhaps much better arguments can be made. If any YEC wants to up the game and be a bit more convincing I’m sure we’re all ears.

 

[TheHolyTrinity]

I have a great interest in archaeology, in fact as a child I wanted to be an archaeologist!

I do follow Michael Cremo. Information given by Michael Cremo who is the writer of Forbidden Archaeology raises a serious question about the objectivity of established research with in the science field. The book explains in detail and with scientific reasoning. A number of finds made by top researchers of the time discover human artefacts or human bones in layers of rock so old, ends up contradicting mainstream scientific dogma. Just like the old geology professors in the sixties denied plate tectonics till their death some 30 years later.

The book also discusses the experience of some of these scientists who were subsequently ridiculed and estranged from their career and job as their archaeological finds unfortunately, paints a chilling image of scientists behaving towards those they have ridiculed on the level of dogmatists.

I believe Cremos’ research and book raises some very serious questions that require further consideration. Most people who are interested in the history of man and life should read it.

Cremo, M. A. 2010. Forbidden Archaeology and the Knowledge Filter. Pleistocene Coalition News 2(2):4-5

How old is the anatomically modern human species? According to the standard views, human beings like us first came into existence between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. Other sources, including the writings of ancient wisdom traditions, say that humans like us have existed for millions of years…………

…………. This literature contained no reports of evidence for extreme human antiquity. It contained only reports of evidence confirming the currently dominant view that humans like us came into existence less than 200,000 years ago.

But I went further. I looked at all the primary scientific literature on human origins and antiquity, from the nineteenth century to the present. I have a reading knowledge of most of the major European languages, so I looked at reports in many languages, not just English. When I looked at this primary scientific literature, I found many reports of archaeological evidence for extreme human antiquity-reports of human bones, footprints, and artefacts showing that humans like us existed in the distant past.

This led to a question: why is this evidence for extreme human antiquity present in the primary scientific literature, but not in the current secondary literature? There appeared to be a process of knowledge filtration. Here I am not talking about a conspiracy to suppress truth. Instead, I am talking about something historians and philosophers of science have understood for a long time: theoretical preconceptions may determine how evidence is treated in a scientific discipline. Evidence that conforms to theoretical preconceptions passes through the knowledge filter very easily, whereas evidence that radically contradicts theoretical preconceptions does not.

There are some extraordinarily brilliant articles in all the Pleistocene Coalition Newsletters by some very amazing thinkers and each issue deserves to be read from cover to cover.
pleistocenecoalition.com/

Please note that Michael Cremo is Hindu, he does publicly oppose the Darwinian theory of evolution and espoused a kind of Vedic creationism.

 

[vz71]

The only form of creationism bearing on the OP is YEC,

And it was not until just the past few posts that this was actually defined.

So what was the argument before then? Was it over a straw man, because I cannot see how a real argument can be made without defining where exactly the sides are.

 

[inocente]

And it was not until just the past few posts that this was actually defined.

So what was the argument before then? Was it over a straw man, because I cannot see how a real argument can be made without defining where exactly the sides are.

I don’t know as there are any sides, everyone’s debating their own corner.

I don’t remember joining the thread right from the start but guess we’re debating the weight of evidence, and whether science started out to prove the world is old (it didn’t, it drew conclusions from facts, it just turns out the world is old beyond any reasonable doubt).

Plus why the age of the world might be so all fired important that we feel the urge to debate it anyway.

 

[buffalo]

Wow, 22 pages… (though admittedly the geocentrist thread was longer.)

…So who thinks the earth isn’t billions of years old?

You know I was talking to a guy in my parish who thinks while it may have 4 billion human years only 7,000 years passed for God - so there actually is no discrepancy at all between the scientific age of the earth and the biblical one, problem solved!

Gen 1 seems to be written from God’s perspective. Consider time as a rolled up tape measure. God is outside and can see the entire tape with its rolled layers. Man who lives on the tape itself only can see it like it is unrolled. (flattened)