It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

6000 year old earth

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 12:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
Therefore, why wouldn't anything that could possibly, theoretically, within the laws of physics exist.. Not exist?

Because that's not how infinities work.




posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:09 AM
link   
I wanted to post here, but i realized, maybe i might be doing something wrong..

The world is what you believe it to be, dont listen to other telling you that you are wrong cause they dont know either..



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:13 AM
link   
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

It is how probability and infinities work together.

If a scientist said that only 1 in a decillion planets could have a certain life form on it, I'd argue that an infinite number of planets have such a life form.

If something is deemed to be impossible to exist based on our understanding of physics.. I may or may not care for that assumption. We know very little, that I can be sure of. We believe the small area we live in is billions of light years across and we haven't even close to traveled or explored 1.

To assume our knowledge or assumptions mean anything at all on a grand scale.. Is beyond stupidity.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Tsuro

Why would you be doing something wrong? You're welcome to post whatever you'd like within any thread so long as it's within the rules of this site.

I don't often listen to others xD

We are like the ants next to the highway. They likely have no idea why the highway exists, what Cara and humans are, what they do, how a car works.. Etc.

Those that assume they know a lot and shove it my way is akin to an ant finding a piece of dirt that's differently shaped than most. I really don't care or give them any credit for being intelligent.

I do respect those that try to teach in a more humble fashion, though.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:23 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

With that kind of thinking...why even apply the laws of physics at all? There might be unobserved areas of unknown phenomena which negate the laws of physics entirely....

There is a certain point that one reaches where it's just mind numbing to think about...so we have to bring it back down and put it back in it's little box of limitations...our brains can only handle so much....it becomes like trying to run battlefield 4 on my old IBM PC Jr.

A2D



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: mazzroth

There are people who claim to have seen dragons, sasquatch, faeries, goblins, leprechauns, gnomes...there are people who claim to have been touched by angels, healed by god, possessed by demons...where do you draw the line between what is probably real and what is probably fake?

A2D


Something can be very 'real' to someone if they don't understand their mental disorder. The human brain is an extremely complicated computer, hallucinations without a mental disorder is also very possible. If something like foreign accent syndrome or lilliputian hallucinations can happen, just imagine the possibilities of all that could go wrong.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 01:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: mazzroth

There are people who claim to have seen dragons, sasquatch, faeries, goblins, leprechauns, gnomes...there are people who claim to have been touched by angels, healed by god, possessed by demons...where do you draw the line between what is probably real and what is probably fake?

A2D

Some very high ranking Military Officers have claimed to have seen UFO's does this mean they never existed ? I suspect everyone of these claims can be accounted for..either the person is crazy, seeking attention, lying, hallucinated or the event was real take your pick. I for one can deal with the fact they may be seen to be real but are in fact artifacts from another simulation happening on the same Quantum Computer using the same stick of memory. Memory has this ability to hold over some data and not release properly which is commonly called glitching.

Say another reality game with space ships as its genre is running on the same system just like you run multiple games on a server and the memory bleeds this into our reality due to this effect and there you have a UFO in our timeline. Its not real and it disappears after a length of time but none the less it was viewed by someone.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: mazzroth

Having served in the military, I can say with all honesty that it doesn't matter what a mans rank is...in fact, the higher up you go, the more likely you are to encounter lies and fairy tales.

Can I rule out the simulation theory? Absolutely not.
Do I think it's probable? No, I don't.

I understand the bleeding and "glitch" effects of multiverse theory and simulation theories...but I simply feel like there are much more logical explanations.

Just try to imagine the type of computing power necessary to simulate this type of scenario........it would be beyond incredible....

A2D



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Agree2Disagree

I have long thought about this idea A2D and every anomaly there is can be explained using it. The clincher for me is the fact matter is nothing, I suspect the LHC primary objective is to find the underlying code beneath matter to expose the hologram generated. Don't get me wrong A2D it would be an immense Quantum Computer to generate this reality but I suspect its not only Quantum but Organic.
edit on 17-3-2016 by mazzroth because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:20 AM
link   
a reply to: mazzroth

You can't have thought that long and hard about it if your understanding of the lhc is so abysmally wrong.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 06:34 AM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

How did so much money get spent on trying to find just a "particle" ? it didn't - there is a longer game at play here and most people don't understand the profits to be made here.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 06:41 AM
link   
The bible was written by people who did not go to Yale, or Harvard, or any form of higher education, but had their heads stuffed with whatever thoughts came in to the teachers head, when asked a question, the teachers had to say something, otherwise seem stupid to the taught.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

Why would god need units of measure to gauge time in the first place? Especially since it is relative to velocity and gravity? Which I'm sure god has neither (or all?).
edit on 17-3-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Some religions teach that God is a master of Science, he doesn't live outside the laws, he simply understands them and is a master of being able to work within the laws. Think of it more like evolution on an extreme scale.

Others do not teach such things, so it depends on what you go with.

I didn't realize it was lineage that concluded a 6000 year old earth - I thought it was something else, like some revelation - and I wasn't sure why we concluded that time was always meant to be measured based on earth's rotation of all things.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope

If god is a master of science, he wouldn't need an inefficient variable length of measurement like time to describe or analyze things with. He'd use a more efficient concept. Likely one that humans haven't considered yet. That was the point I was trying to make.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:17 AM
link   
I think you are talking about establishing civilisation

it is basically around the time when hunter became farmer



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yeah that makes sense - I never did follow this line of thinking anyways, was just curious about it, but also wanted to understand what I did know of the concept in the first place. It does seem rather misplaced and convoluted like most of the Bible, though. I guess the Bible is consistent in its inconsistencies.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: deadlyhope
a reply to: Krazysh0t
I guess the Bible is consistent in its inconsistencies.


QFT. But that doesn't stop the believers from jumping through hoops to explain away those inconsistencies.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: deadlyhope




I guess the Bible is consistent in its inconsistencies.


So your book says rocks are billions of years old?
Neat
Care to share how that makes more sense?



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

Please explain how rocks being billions of years old doesn't make sense.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join