6000 year old earth theory taught to kids - is it right?, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 04:18 PM by flare
reply to post by karl 12



When did the start teaching this? Even with "Scientific Proof" of our Earth being more than 6000 years old and still they go on teaching it?


.......................................hopefully those children drown or atleast dont mate giving this trash a new generation to spread through.


That's a little too much but let them forget it or get the real deal drilled it to their heads.


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 06:48 PM by spy66
reply to post by karl 12



I have a question to the quantum theory. I have read somewhere that some also sagest that quantum is just noise from other matter or energy.

Could there be a reality to that!






[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]


reply posted on 30-1-2009 @ 04:51 AM by noobfun
Originally posted by spy66
Well i think it is wrong to teach kids about the Big Bang as the right beginning. When we know that there are older galaxies then our own. Meaning there must have been a beginning somewhere else before ours.
you do relise they like our galaxy were formed in the same big bang

its not a big bang for our galaxy and 1 for every other galaxy

if you mean other universes, its theoretical but the maths is good, and still the big bang is what formed our universe

as Karl said if the M hypothesis is correct, two brains collided and thats what kick started the bigbang on our brain (and by brain no i dont mean the thing in your head)

What do we really know about the beginning. Not a whole lot if you ask me.
what we know about our beginging is reasonable until we reach the event its self, when our ability to further ends

lots of evidence and correct predictions point to the bigbang happened, what casued it ...were not sure but its bieng worked on

But there is a lot of opinions and theories.
your misusing the word theory in a scientific context again

theory in science is not just having an idea its somthing thats proven to happen or hold at least a reasonable if not highly detailed description of an event or events

If scientists turn the Clock back on their own thoughts and theories they start to meat difficulties explaining.
only at the first split second, quantum deals with the very small, general relativity deals with large masses

the singularity was both very small and had great mass, quantum and general relativity dont work well together which is why string and other quantum models are an effort to bridge the differances so they work together

The beginning is still a philosophy within science there is no proof of it. We cant repeat it and we didn't observe it when it happened.

the begginging yes until we can find the bridge between quantum and general relativity it is more philosophical science then actual science

what happened after it began to expand and spread out we understand(to a degree) and theres more then enough evidence to suggest we got it right

no we cant repeat it we wouldnt want to, and no we didnt observe it either

you cant repeat killing a specific person, and if it wasnt observed your left with the evidence to piece together how they died when they died and who killed them, the big bang is a huge murder mystery one we have the victim the culprit the actions of both during and after the incident, its just the motive and what happened prior we want/need to find out


reply posted on 30-1-2009 @ 11:32 AM by noobfun
reply to post by spy66



got any links?

id like to see who's saying it, why, when and what exactly they are saying

i dont think quantum been under question since Einstein lead the last charge of scientific debate against it

i kow string theory went through a couple of rough patches with its doughters and still is, but thats a seperate issue to quantum as a whole

[edit on 30/1/09 by noobfun]


reply posted on 8-3-2009 @ 07:10 PM by CaptainCaveMan
Where do they get the 6000 year old lie from?
Because it isn't in the Bible.
Someone has clearly made this rubbish up.
How on earth would we find remains and fossils of people who are 1 million + years old

en.wikipedia.org...

Origins
Some YECs have claimed that this view has its earliest roots in Judaism, citing, for example, the commentary on Genesis by Ibn Ezra (c. 1089–1164).
However, Shai Cherry of Vanderbilt University notes that Jewish theologians have generally rejected such literalist interpretations of the written text, and that even Jewish commentators who oppose some aspects of Darwinian thought generally accept scientific evidence that the Earth is much older.


reply posted on 8-9-2009 @ 09:13 AM by karl 12
reply to post by Funkydung



So I take it you don't agree with the actions of the two men in the video?
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



Interesting conspiracy website: WHALE
  Posted 7 days ago with 3 member flags
RSOE EDIS alert map not loading. Is it just me?
  Posted 7 days ago with 2 member flags
The Power Principle : Eye Opening, Blood Boiling Documentary
  Posted 2 days ago with 1 member flags
What Is Reality
  Posted 0 days ago with 0 member flags