Complex Life May Have Started on Earth Much Earlier Than We Thought

a reply to: cooperton

FFS, I'm not asking what other people think, I asked YOU directly what YOU think.

How old is the earth?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: cooperton

FFS, I'm not asking what other people think, I asked YOU directly what YOU think.

How old is the earth?

I trust the Hebrew account. First man probably walked the earth 6000-some years ago. The Jewish scribes took their job very seriously, and devoted themselves to recording the truth. For example, Around the time of Christ many Jews could trace their lineage back to Abraham over 2000 years ago. Given there is no major evidence that can falsify this, I believe them.

a reply to: cooperton

So you're a YEC. Explains a lot.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: cooperton

So you're a YEC. Explains a lot.

Thanks... not thinking you're the result of mutated pond goo tends to open your eyes to the universal truths.

Once again, the evolution time line doesn't fit so the origins of life are set farther back to compensate.

originally posted by: Quadrivium
Once again, the evolution time line doesn't fit so the origins of life are set farther back to compensate.

Without a reliable starting concentration for isotopic samples, the entire practice is inherently speculative and unscientific. The theory perpetuates because people continue to blindly believe without understanding the (lack of) evidence which is at hand.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: DeathSlayer

Don't think you can carbon date rocks , scientists use radiometric dating for dating rocks that works on the radioactive decay of elements in the rocks , they're like a clock as the decay is constant and measurable.

the use radion decay marks in crystal formations to date rocks

originally posted by: cooperton
Thanks... not thinking you're the result of mutated pond goo tends to open your eyes to the universal truths.

Ok. Have fun thinking stuff just popped into existence 6,000 years ago.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: cooperton

So you're a YEC. Explains a lot.

i think you mean YUCK

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Ok. Have fun thinking stuff just popped into existence 6,000 years ago.

Our world was intelligently designed, it didn't just come to be by random chance.

a reply to: cooperton

Ok. Like I said, have fun thinking the earth is 6,000 years old. Maybe some dude built a giant boat too.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
My 95 yr old dad is a scientist. He is a super genius with multiple titles. He has been summoned to the White house before by a VP for private meetings. He built a PC from scratch when Intel produced their first batch of 3 small chips. He used a paper floppy drive like NASA used in their moon shot. He went to Stanford to become a Bacteriologist, Microbiologist, Parasitologist, and Chemist. He was also Director of Research for a Fortune 500 company. He is also like a mathematician
He said this is all nonsense. He said Earth is far younger then they suggest, and the tests they use are not just inadequate and flawed, they are straight up foolish, and fanciful nonsense. There is an agenda. People can believe what they want, and pretend its pure science, but it most certainly is not.

This is the decade all will be revealed. You will know the truth by 2030. Keep watching

I don't how old the earth is, but I do believe it was created, as was life and man, in the beginning. How long ago that was, I know not. I don't question it, I don't try to find it, but I firmly do NOT believe anything science tells us about the age of something that is older than a thousand or two years old. There is no way for them to physically know. You dad is correct.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: DeathSlayer

Don't think you can carbon date rocks , scientists use radiometric dating for dating rocks that works on the radioactive decay of elements in the rocks , they're like a clock as the decay is constant and measurable.

While that sounds good, how can they really know that radiometric dating is accurate? Wouldn't someone have had to be there to prove how old it really is? I'm not bashing your post by any means, you always have top of the line posts from the ancient times.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: visitedbythem
My 95 yr old dad is a scientist. He is a super genius with multiple titles. He has been summoned to the White house before by a VP for private meetings. He built a PC from scratch when Intel produced their first batch of 3 small chips. He used a paper floppy drive like NASA used in their moon shot. He went to Stanford to become a Bacteriologist, Microbiologist, Parasitologist, and Chemist. He was also Director of Research for a Fortune 500 company. He is also like a mathematician
He said this is all nonsense. He said Earth is far younger then they suggest, and the tests they use are not just inadequate and flawed, they are straight up foolish, and fanciful nonsense. There is an agenda. People can believe what they want, and pretend its pure science, but it most certainly is not.

This is the decade all will be revealed. You will know the truth by 2030. Keep watching

You forgot to add he is also a religious creationist. Did he tell you why rocks and many things measured so old, but everything was made 6000 years ago?

Where does that 6,000 come from? I'm a religious creationist as well and the book I read has never mentioned a timeline.

originally posted by: LSU2018

Where does that 6,000 come from? I'm a religious creationist as well and the book I read has never mentioned a timeline.

“Young Earth” creationists interpret the Genesis account to mean that the universe was created 6,000 years ago. This age is determined by counting the generations of biblical figures recorded throughout the Bible, starting with Adam in the Garden of Eden.

Do you believe the universe is 14+ billion yeas old and earth is 4.5 billion years old and man is maybe a few 100k as we are today?

originally posted by: LSU2018

Where does that 6,000 come from? I'm a religious creationist as well and the book I read has never mentioned a timeline.

There's enough information with lineages in the Bible that we can estimate the Jewish history puts humankind at around 6,000 years old.

Regarding the age of the earth, this one is tough because it doesnt say how long it took for God to create the earth when He did it in Genesis 1:1

"In the beginning of God creating heaven and earth - the earth existed waste and void"

To date the earth from Biblical evidence does not seem possible.

originally posted by: pfishy
a reply to: DeathSlayer
For something like this particular sample, they don't even consider carbon dating. There are other well-known isotopic decay chains they can analyze to determine the age of truly ancient geological specimens.

Not without being there when the geological specimen were new, and since time travel to the past isn't reality, neither are any types of dating methods.

originally posted by: Ohanka

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Ohanka
Sounds kinda religious to me.

It's amazing how insecure the these people are with their own religion that in a very interesting thread about a scientific discovery they need to come in an bloviate about their religion. It's almost like they do it to convince themselves into thinking their beliefs aren't comical. Even if you ask them a simple question you won't get a straight answer most of the time.

Watch....

It seems near every thread about science, space, UFOs or ancient civilisations has at least a few people making posts about God or just random bible quotes.

To be fair, the Bible does mention and explain UFOs and "aliens".

Ezekiel 1: 4-28
Zechariah 5: 1-2
2 Kings 2: 11

Some very good and interesting reads to be honest.

originally posted by: chr0naut

Extraterrestrial intelligent beings are mentioned several times in the Bible.

... and as for UFO's, just give Ezekiel's accounts a read!

Beat me to it. There are also mentions of flying scrolls, or what we've seen here and call "tic-tacs".

a reply to: LSU2018

Here's the scientific explanation of how it works from the Materials Research Laboratory , it's all Greek to me but I'm sure they know what they're doing.

Yes, radiometric dating is a very accurate way to date the Earth.We know it is accurate because radiometric dating is based on the radioactive decay of unstable isotopes. For example, the element Uranium exists as one of several isotopes, some of which are unstable. When an unstable Uranium (U) isotope decays, it turns into an isotope of the element Lead (Pb). We call the original, unstable isotope (Uranium) the "parent", and the product of decay (Lead) the "daughter". From careful physics and chemistry experiments, we know that parents turn into daughters at a very consistent, predictable rate.

For an example of how geologists use radiometric dating, read on:

A geologist can pick up a rock from a mountainside somewhere, and bring it back to the lab, and separate out the individual minerals that compose the rock. They can then look at a single mineral, and using an instrument called a mass spectrometer, they can measure the amount of parent and the amount of daughter in that mineral. The ratio of the parent to daughter then can be used to back-calculate the age of that rock. Pretty cool!

The reason we know that radiometric dating works so well is because we can use several different isotope systems (for example, Uranium-Lead, Lutetium-Halfnium, Potassium-Argon) on the same rock, and they all come up with the same age. This gives geologists great confidence that the method correctly determines when that rock formed. Hope that helps, and please ask if you'd like more details!
scienceline.ucsb.edu...#:~:text=Yes%2C%20radiometric%20dating%20is%20a,some%20of%20which%20are%20unstable.