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.

 

6,000 years: can someone explain this to me?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2005 @ 11:39 PM
link   
I've been seeing a lot of religious arguments lately coming to something about something being more than 6,000 years old, so the bible must have been inaccurate about it. What's with 6,000 years, and why is everyone suddenly believing that the bible says the earth is only 6,000 years old?




posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
I've been seeing a lot of religious arguments lately coming to something about something being more than 6,000 years old, so the bible must have been inaccurate about it. What's with 6,000 years, and why is everyone suddenly believing that the bible says the earth is only 6,000 years old?


Only christian literalists believe the earth is 6000 years old. They tell us that it is basically faulty science that leads us to other conclusions. Even though there are hundreds of different ways to verify the age of the earth, and they all say the same thing.

The age is derived from the old testament of the bible. Basically they count backwards from Jesus through described time periods. They then add 2005 years and whalla! The earth is 6000 years old. The problem that needs to be recognized is that those people had no idea that the earth would someday be so technologically advanced. They didn't knwo they would have had to account for about 4 billion more years.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Archbishop Ussher came up with the orginal proof from Genesis and some fancy figgerin' that the exact birthday of the Earth was October 23rd, 4005 BC and that remained undisputed dogma for centuries. Depsite all evidence to the contrary now though, it's still quite feverishly pushed today in varying forms and fashions.

Example Google Return:

6,000 Year Old Earth

Scriptural Timeline (from a pastor)

You may note in some arguments there's a general anger directed toward all science and intellectualism in general. Not that scientists don't return that hostility in kind to 'young earth' creationists, but where it gets real interesting is the anger of literalists against intelligent design hybrid theorists. Like you can't be a Christian and believe in science or evolution at all.

Check it out Herman. I'd be interested in your thoughts.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   
let me get this strait.


From 1800 until now we have increased the population times 6 from 1 billion to 6 billion.


thats 200 years.

So if the world was 6 billion years old shouldnt we need about 1,000s of planets to hold all of the people?


Its insane.


We have managed to increase the growth of the planet in 200 years that equals out the age of the earth according to evolutionist.

I think everybody was sleeping the first 5,999,998,000 years.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Truth, are you under the impression man is as old as the Earth or even universe for that matter? Your proof seems to contend so.

Of course, evolution would correct for your flawed assumption entirely.

There are places on earth with giga trillions of life form fossils in tact going back 100's of thousands of years. They're called coral and organic reefs with observable formation rates we can see. They weren't made yesterday.

Thoughts?

Are you familiar with the speed of light? The universe would be a starless place if it was only 6,000 years old wouldn't it?



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
The miracles ive seen in the last 5 years is proof enough, I don't need any. I was just using logic, something that is an
obstical to people whose brain overflows sincerity. Not pointing at you, just other people ive ran into.


About those fossils. How are those fossils dated? by the layer of rocks they are found in?


Also I have no clue what the speed of light is, ive only been educated up until the 9th grade, never went to school after that. So im not too familiar with the speed of light.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Truth,

Tell me about Sanduleak 69 202. How is this possible with your contestment that the earth and universe are (a small) thousands of years old?

Tell me about these miracles YOU have personally seen. How can we verify them? Rant was right by the way. Your misguided thoughts are only possibly correct if evolution does not exist, and even at that, they are still not a sure thing.

Again, Sanduleak 69 202, your thoughts.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:56 AM
link   
There's sooo many sites on reef age. It's a common discussion among young earth creationists and long ager evolutionists.

This site is a decent (and simple) one stop shop for long age proofs that happens to deal with prevalent young earth claims on reefs.

Earth History -Reef

He first discusses "rapid reef growth" claims, and their sources, then delves into...


How Fast Can Reefs Really Grow?

By far the most contentious isse here is the rate at which reefs can grow. Studies of reef growth in the modern Pacific show that even under ideal conditions, the growth of the actual reefs is only on the order of 8-10mm a year (see below). Note that individual corals can grow a bit faster than this, but this cannot be used to estimate the growth rate of the *reef* itself, since the reef is not one giant coral, but is largely composed of billions of coral fragments that are broken by waves and cemented to the growing mass (see below).

So, assuming an average 10mm per yr growth rate, the Eniwetok Reef would require 140,000 years to grow to its present thickness. And this assumes no compaction, no destruction by storms, no temporal breaks in growth, continuous optimal growth rates, and adequate subsidence rates. All of these assumptions are entirely unreasonable, and thus any estimate based on extrapolation of optimal reef growth rates is clearly a minimum.


Just food for thought.

Also, the speed of light = 299 792 458 m / s CONSTANT

Not a very useful number without considering the distances between objects like other stars.


The Light Year: A Measure of Distance

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The distance that light travels in a year is so large that it is a useful unit of distance in astronomy:

Light Year: the distance that light travels (through a vacuum) in one year (9.46 x 10^17 cm).

The nearest star (other than the Sun) is 4.3 light years away.

Our galaxy (the Milky Way) is about 100,000 light years in diameter.

The distance to the galaxy M87 in the Virgo cluster is 50 million light years.

The distance to most distant object seen in the universe is about 18 billion light years (18 x 10^9 light years).


If the universe were to be created in a single blow (or week as per Genesis), the first star wouldn't appear in the sky for the first 4.3 years. That's probably all we'd still see now if creation was under 6,000 years old. To see the rest of the stars in our galaxy alone would take 50,000 years with a 100K diameter (assuming we were in the middle).


Also did you catch the part about how we can stand on Earth and see light coming from objects (now dead) 18 billion light years away?

Again, just food for thought.

I certainly don't "witness" science to shake real faith. I just don't get what some aspects of faith (like believing in young earth creationism) have to do with Religion? Or being a good Christian for that matter? Stubborn is all it is.


[edit on 10-2-2005 by RANT]



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
sanduleak 69 202 is irrelevant, I just read about it and the scientists made one point.


" Creationist believe that the stars were created intact for the light of the earth, however this would involve a super natural miracle "



thats the difference. We believe in miracles, evolutionist do not. Thats the whole basis of the arguments. miracles.



Also what about the honey bee? Ive heard that it can make calculations far greater than the smarter computer in the world? I also heard that granite was created in less than 1 second by the Polonium halos found in it.



" what are the miracles you have seen personally "


You know some on your own too.

taste buds.
The amazing creatures that exist.


The creation is too incredible for nothing to do this, it just is, from how animals all have a specific task, to natural medicines
that can be found in the earth, to the beauty of nature.


It sound corny and childess to you learned souls, but its true.


Why would evolution desire us to have all this beauty and good fealings and taste of food?


evolution is nothing, it doesnt desire for us, but our nature seems like it was made for us and for our desires.


I can get into the miracles ive seen on another thread, as a matter of fact im writing down all the miracles that my family has seen and i have seen and im going to post them one day. Some of this stuff you guys will just shake off as nothing, but
its truly remarkable some of the stuff ive seen God do with me and other people. Amazing.



peace.


[edit on 10-2-2005 by Truth]



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Truth

sanduleak 69 202 is irrelevant, I just read about it and the scientists made one point.


" Creationist believe that the stars were created intact for the light of the earth, however this would involve a super natural miracle "



thats the difference. We believe in miracles, evolutionist do not. Thats the whole basis of the arguments. miracles.


Well, and deception apparently. For you to believe God created extinct stars (yes I said extinct) with their light already about 18 billion light years on their way to earth at the moment of creation only a few thousand years ago, then He engaged in deliberate deception to make the Earth seem MUCH older didn't he?

Just like he did with dinosaur bones, those of primitive man and coral reefs.

And listen to the rest of your arguements. They presume intelligence.


Why would evolution desire us to have all this beauty and good fealings and taste of food?


"It" wouldn't. Did you ever consider lots of things aren't "beautiful" or don't "feel good" or taste bad?

Like rocks. They taste like crap, right? And jumping off cliffs? Hurts doesn't it? What about living with your head up an elephants butt? Not too beautiful. Well there's this thing called natural selection....

Bah. Nevermind. I can't believe you people run the world.


Democracy blows.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 02:36 PM
link   
For me to sum up my entire thought-process on the creation of the earth and it's relevance to science would take up way too much time and space for me to type out. I'm not stubborn enough to actually believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old, but I do believe in God. I'll admit that I haven't read the whole bible, but as far as I know, the bible and specifically the old testament doesn't mention anything about dates. Specifically, dates that are measured in the same terms that we measure dates. The point of God, to me, IS the impossible. Science only goes so far. Far enough until it comes to something could not have come from absolute nothing. Nothing meaning NOTHING. No oxygen, no singularities, no chemicals, NOTHING. That's as far as science goes in my mind. People then ask, "What about God? He couldn't have come from nothing either". But to me, that's the point. God's beyond our comprehension of time and space. God's bigger than us; infinitely more intelligent. (Sorry, went off track for a minute). God goes beyond our comprehension of impossible. This is why the 6,000 years argument is irrelevant to me. I think RANT actually said it quite well:


I just don't get what some aspects of faith (like believing in young earth creationism) have to do with Religion? Or being a good Christian for that matter? Stubborn is all it is.


I think I understand now where the 6,000 years argument came from. That was the main point to my post. The other one was just to point out the irrelevance (Again, to me) of that argument. I saw a forum where some people were talking about Noah's ark, and how scientists are testing the wood they found to see if it's really 6,000 years old, thus confirming that it was Noah's. I just though that a date was a stupid thing to base the reality of Noah's ark on, since not all Christians (Or even most for that matter) believe in the "Young Earth" theory, and I wanted to know where it came from.

Thanks

[edit on 10-2-2005 by Herman]



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Oh God rant, we do not run the world. Freemasons do. they hate Christ. They are a much bigger threat than we are because they also embrace technology as their God. They also could care less about the leftovers and our freedoms as they
devise their sick one world order plot.



" Rocks don't taste good "


Yea because they are not food.


And also, God did not do that to decieve us, Hes probably seeing if we have any faith in miracles. Thats what it all comes down too anyways, and ive seen them, and millions
around the globe have too.



I guess we can argue all day about science, but ill still believe from what ive seen not from what ive heard. What I heard only confirms it.


peace.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   

originally posted by Truth
Why would evolution desire us to have all this beauty and good fealings and taste of food?

evolution is nothing, it doesn't desire for us, but our nature seems like it was made for us and for our desires.

You are right evolution does not desire for us. It is not a creature so how could it desire anything.

Evolution gave us taste so we know what to eat. Over time taste evolved so we prefer to eat certain things. People like fatty and sugary foods because we evolved to like them back before food was industrialized.
In the past man needed to gorge on fatty and sugary foods when ever we could for survival.
This is what evolution is about, Survival.
Every Evolutionary adaptation we have is in the name of survival. This includes:
Getting food
Getting Water
Not getting eaten.
Reproduction.
Not getting our offspring eaten.
Every single living thing on Earth shows these adaptations. You may ask your self one day,"Why does this creature have this characteristic?" The answer lies in the six things I listed above.
It has taken us billions of years of adaptive evolution to bring us to this point. Humanity and Earth is not only 6000 years old.



[edit on 10/2/2005 by Umbrax]



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Very well put Umbrax, I wanted to say that, but I got too frustrated with the nonsense I keep hearing.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I love you guys and will always pray for your souls, but this whole argument is truly baised on miracles. One tiny miracle disproves the biggest theory of all time.

I truly think I know what it is, even when you hear of miracles, you don't want to see it. you don't want there to be a God. I bet if he came down now out of heaven made the earth disappear as if we were standing on space,
would you still not believe?

what ive seen is not a theory, its only seen to those who want to see it and believe.


Thats how its always going to be.



posted on Feb, 10 2005 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Truth

I love you guys and will always pray for your souls, ...

Thanks



...what I've seen is not a theory, its only seen to those who want to see it and believe.

By definition evolution is a theory.
So is all religion. The theory of evolution is solid.

"One tiny miracle disproves the biggest theory of all time."
There is one miracle that we can't explain. It's How did the very first life come to be?
We know what is needed for life but we do not know what that spark was.

Every one believes something. I prefer to question it and find my own answers. If the evidence is solid. Then I will believe it. But believing just because someone told me do, I can't do that.



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth
I truly think I know what it is, even when you hear of miracles, you don't want to see it. you don't want there to be a God. I


why would anyone not want there to be a god? why would anyone want to die an athiests death??? die and go into a never-ending rest and be gone and forgotten when time goes on?
ofcorse i want a god, i wonna go to heaven and live forever, i use to try and lie to myself and try and convince myself that there was a god... but ive gotten over my fear, and accept certain things.
It kinds remind me of the matrix, *ignorance is bliss* back many centuries ago when there wasnt the current scientific knowledge and theories we have today, people probably werent so depressed and AS scared of death, because the majority of people believed that they would die and go to heaven.



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth

I love you guys and will always pray for your souls, but this whole argument is truly baised on miracles. One tiny miracle disproves the biggest theory of all time.

I truly think I know what it is, even when you hear of miracles, you don't want to see it. you don't want there to be a God. I bet if he came down now out of heaven made the earth disappear as if we were standing on space,
would you still not believe?

what ive seen is not a theory, its only seen to those who want to see it and believe.


Thats how its always going to be.


Well then, I suppose when I did my volume calculations, that was only a theory...... Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division are only theory! This gets better every day. Thanks truth for amusing me on that one.



posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
I prefer to question it and find my own answers. If the evidence is solid. Then I will believe it. But believing just because someone told me do, I can't do that.


But didn't someone tell you about evolution? Have you actually gone to the places Darwin visited, and whitness evolution and seen the fossiles yourself? Who compiled your evidence and varified everything for you? Was it a textbook, or does Darwin finally have a competitor?



posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman

But didn't someone tell you about evolution? Have you actually gone to the places Darwin visited, and whitness evolution and seen the fossiles yourself? Who compiled your evidence and varified everything for you? Was it a textbook, or does Darwin finally have a competitor?


I think I know what you are getting at, and what you are really asking. You do bring up a good point.
Why believe what one person says over what another person says? When I said I prefer to find my own answers I didn't mean that I scour the Earth digging up evidence. Trust me if I could I would.
The way I take in information is by not believing it. I need to prove it to my self. Be it by text book, Internet, or whatever. I'm not going to believe something just because some one says it's true or because it is in print. I believe them based on credibility and logic.

Which book should I believe is factual? The book made thousands of years ago in a different language that has been translated and rewritten who know how many times, or the book that has been written by scientists who have dedicated their life to finding the answers by hands on research?

The bible was written way before we discovered Radiometric dating. People needed explanations to things back then too. Just like in the past we believed the Earth was flat.
Who knows maybe down the line we will find proof discrediting evolution. But for now there is endless evidence of evolution. So again what book should I believe to be more factual?




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join