The Earth cant be billions of years old...

Hey, I'm open minded and used to believe the stories myself. Albeit, I was about ten years old and didn't know better. Then I learned.... I have read some of the articles on there and some have actually debunked "young Earthers", such as the one about T-Rex soft tissue and blood.



Indeed, but being open minded doesn't mean you believe anything you read. It is also inaccurate to describe yourself as "open minded", when you blatantly will not accept any ideas coming from the other side of the argument, despite there being insurmountable bodies of evidence for it, whereas the evidence for the Earth being "young" is either misinterpreted or even bogus.

I believe we have a bit of a problem on this thread.

I don't know how you evaluate the human being as a species and start counting time in order to access the expected reproduction rates.

If you want to play it simple lets assume we can consider Homo Sapiens as the first "human" species. I had my anthropology lectures many years ago but I still know the basics, and as a scientist (Developmental Genetics) I do try to keep myself up to date.

The "modern" human appeared in Africa 200'000 years ago.

I will not discuss reproduction rate, as we are not bacteria where we can calculate an exponential growth rate, nor we can assume the historical setbacks slowing down human race development.

Do keep this in mind... "we" are quite young. Planet Earth is thought to be 4-4,5 billion years old. And I do stress out IT IS THOUGHT TO BE.

I do think the evolution from a "basic" primate to the first Neandertal was way to fast and the appearance of the 'Sapiens Sapiens' lead to the Neandertal extinction (there might be some left, who knows).

Are we just a genetic experiment from someone else? Possible.

Are we a rather crude life form? Definitely

Will we ever be able to live for ever? Not as material beings

Is the human thought the only proof of our existence? Possible

Can a thought "live" for ever? Not if we believe a thought is the result of a chemical reaction leading to synapses formation.

Does this make any sense to you?

The information on the website has been numerous times on episodes of The History Channel's "The Universe" series. Reading and watcing tv is a good thing when you read and watch the right things. Word of mouth is a bad way to transfer information. It all gets slightly changed as each person communicates what they think is the same information.

You can keep your believe system...it's not up to me to try to change it. However, why don't you make an amendment to Wikipedia while you're at it? Anyone can do it. But that's what makes it unreliable.

Well if old age was 30 years old and only 1 baby in 10 made it to the age of two we would not have more than the 6 billion (not 10 billion, but what is 4 billion between friends)

Also it is believed that we were almost extinct during the ice age with only about 10,000 humans on the planet to survive at one point.

I think that another thing that you have overlooked is wars and pestilance (hope I spelled that right) Modern medicine makes human beings live longer because plagues have not been doing the death numbers like they have in the past. Also, modern agriculture lets more food grow for the masses. Feed the world..right?!?
The age of the Earth and when "we" got here will be debated foreever (espically by those whos reasearch grants depend on this) and it all just a guess, don't you agree??
Good post though, Thanks for the thought.

cataclysmic occurances must also be considered. think about it.
man has reached as far as he has (technologically) in little than
200 years. what about all those preceding years. there only one
explanation. read velikovsky!!!

stuff happens and when it does, it can take multi-millions.
it is known that several times in recorded history things have
happened. what about time before ??

"there is nothing new under the sun"

reply to post by AD5673

---

For the earths exact age please read the AngloSaxon Chronicles. It is stated there no guess work involved.

How would there be more people?

The death rate is higher than the birth rate and has been since the dawn of man.

Untill recently, in terms of the earths lifespan, people were dying of things as simple as colds, flu and diorrhea. People in undeveloped countries are still dying of these things but before the last century there was no cure at all.

The plague, two world wars and countless other global events have wiped millions of people out.

The first generations of humans were vulnerable to wild animals due to lack of weapons.

Untill recently a great number of people were dying of diseases that are now curable.

now that these problems have been solved there mayl be a population growth, as you said there should have been, but this will however present more problems such as overcrowding; providing food and water for more and more people, as well as fuel and accomodation; and the spread of more diseases as more and more people gain access to global transportation.

Transportation not just of humans but also of fruit, vegetables, meat, plants and livestock, all of which could carry life-threatening diseases.

Immigration and importation introduces lifeforms to an unfamiliar enviroment, not only reintroducing diseases that have already been irradicated, but also exposing the newly introduced lifeforms to diseases common to the new enviroment that they may not have encountered, so have no immunity against.

In otherwords, what I am saying is that disease and war are a constant threat to humans, as well as other lifeforms, and will always deplete the population.

Wth bubby humans only really started picking up 10 000 years ago and then its has never had anything to do with the time period. Its all about advancements, the mortality rate was probably almost even to the birth rate and there were just litrtle tribes with no medicine. There werent even any wars there would be loike 20 people killing 20 different people and that would like end two tribes. As soon as humans stop the mortality rate then there will be like doubles in the population ever generation instead of every century like 5000 years ago...... buddy your a moron for arguing that long with that one guy

There are flaws in both arguments, i dont beleive that the earth was created in 7, 24 hour days only 5000 years ago and that dinosaur fossils were planted by satan, nor do i put much credence in the early egyptologists who used the bible to put the dates of the pyramids at approz 5000 years. The incan and aztec civilisation was aged at only 500 years old when the spanish arrived for their killing spree because they beleived that these civilisations could not possibly be more advanced than they were. so i think the majority of scientists are full of # as well. as far as the population goes there is evidence of global climate events that occur at regular, widely spaced intervals that could well reduce the earths populations dramatically, after the last ice age there were only a few people left but who is to say that before that ice age the world was just as overcrowded as it is today. admittedly there are only a few places on earth that could be old enough to indicate civilisation (pyramids, neolithic sites and aztec/inca buildings) so the previous group probably werent as destructive as us. as far as the magnetic stuff goes, is it at all possible that as the magnetic flux decays below a certain point there is a dramatic magnetic shift which possibly (i speculate) could trigger these global events.

just a thought. but lets try to take the blinkers off, i dont think that there is such a thing as a universal truth. Blind faith only reduces our ability to think for ourselves, to me it would be a tragedy if everyone blindly beleived the same thing.

run that by me again please

what do scientists have to do with the conquistadores ?

In the spirit of Denying Ignorance, I wish to point out that until around the first half of the twentieth century, Mesoamerican civilizations were considered by many scientists to possibly predate the Ancient Egyptians.

So, no, you are simply incorrect.

Harte

My family grew up with a strong christian background,as far as humans go we were taught that there were several other civilizations that inhabitied the earth,never once were we told we were only humans to walk the earth I think too many read too much in the bible,and same goes with UFO's always told that God had many worlds and we were just another one of them,and ooh lol we are Masons too

Howdy Harte there you go again being logical, this is ATS, be emotional, and speculate your opinions into undenialable facts!

what i find interesting about this topic and man in genral is..

some people do not choose to beleive in god, the bible or anything to do with religion which is at max 6000 thousan years old but can beleive in a scientist who tells them that a rock is 3.5million years old.

how can any one scientist prouv that dating methods are correct?

they cant analyse the weather properly at times they are going to tell us how old a rock is?

to many people criticse religous people on the basis " the bible says so"

well what kind of belief is on bc the scientist said so?

many people dont beleive in god bc they can not see him or were not there in the period of time he showed him self, fair enough

then it is the same when a man tells us a rock is 3.5 years old

unless you were there how can you really know?

not saying im right

but thats my observation ..

the earth can be billions of yrs there is a theory that there is a gap btwn the first 2 varses of the bible the same earth that lucifer rebelled against God on is the same earth we are living on now but the race that lucifer ruled was destroyed then man was made againwith adam researc this theoory and post what you think about it

hey will you put some stuff out on the masons i dont understand WHY they do things ps yes there were other civilizations on the earth