It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: SkepticOverlord
The failing of humans is that it is often hard to imagine things on a much larger scale than is actually thought possible. Even now, knowing the vastness of the universe, I struggle to imagine it. I can look at the numbers and understand that the universe is a very, very huge and very, very old. However; I have trouble imagining those numbers as actual space and time. It's literally unfathomable.
originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: stosh64
Egyptian mythology tends to paint the oldest non-scientific picture of the age of the earth. What mythology are you referring to?
originally posted by: IndependentAgent
originally posted by: eriktheawful
The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years
Age of the Earth - Wikipedia
Take a look at that number. Specifically take a look where it says "± 0.05 billion years"
That's Plus or Minus 50,000,000 years. Plus or Minus 50 million years.
Not exactly a pinpoint figure.
As time goes buy, science learns things. One of the things it learns to do is: ask more questions. And when they find the answers to some of those questions, it can cause even more questions, and cause certain theories or knowledge before it to change.
A long time ago they thought everything surrounded the Earth and orbited it.
Quite a bit later, we figured out that no, everything orbit's the sun.
Still much later we discovered galaxies and found that our sun is in orbit around the center of our galaxy and that our galaxy is just one galaxy among a extremely large number of galaxies through out our universe.
So by your logic: we shouldn't believe science on that either, because they keep changing their minds.
Prior to the 1960s, they thought Venus might be a hot tropical type of world, and they just knew Mercury did not rotate anymore on it's axis.
Turns out Venus is a barren wasteland of temps close to 900 deg F and Mercury does indeed rotate on it's axis.
Prior to the 1970's, we were not 100% sure of the mass of Neptune. Voyager flies by it and allows us to refine what it's mass is with precision.
As we learn more things, we are able to revise things that we know. Science is great that way.
So scientists should learn not to place that much trust in their own work, and should be open to acknowledge the possibility of being wrong?
originally posted by: AnuTyr
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
we have steel, iron and aluminum tools are are embeded in limestone found all around the world.
And using *carbon dating* puts a lot of these objects into the hundreds of thousands - 1 million years.
It comes from an early human campsite in the bottom layer of deposits in Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. Potassium-argon dating indicates that this bed is between 1.6 and 2.2 million years old from top to bottom. This and other tools are scientifically dated to about 1.8 million years.
Using another hard stone as a hammer, the maker has knocked flakes off both sides of a basalt (volcanic lava) pebble so that they intersect to form a sharp edge. This could be used to chop branches from trees, cut meat from large animals or smash bones for marrow fat - an essential part of the early human diet. The flakes could also have been used as small knives for light duty tasks. To some people this artefact might appear crude; how can we even be certain that it is humanly made and not just bashed in rock falls or by trampling animals? A close look reveals that the edge is formed by a deliberate sequence of skilfully placed blows of more or less uniform force. Many objects of the same type, made in the same way, occur in groups called assemblages which are occasionally associated with early human remains. By contrast, natural forces strike randomly and with variable force; no pattern, purpose or uniformity can be seen in the modifications they cause. Chopping tools and flakes from the earliest African sites were referred to as Oldowan by the archaeologist Louis Leakey. He found this example on his first expedition to Olduvai in 1931, when he was sponsored by the British Museum.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
There was this alleged "400 million year old machine" that made the rounds a couple of years ago:
But, alas, it is not a machine after all. It's just the fossils of Crinoids (sea creatures).