It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


How can the earth be millions of yrs old and we can't find a tree over 10K yrs old?

page: 17
<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 02:11 AM
reply to post by OldThinker

trees older than 10k years turn into rocks, thats why you see so many rocks and so little

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 02:34 AM
Wow, another half-witted question from the usual ignorant religious folk. Your question was answered in the first few replies, so all that is left is to laugh at the ridiculous title question. HAHA!

edit on 25-11-2010 by john124 because: really 17 pages!!?

edit on 25-11-2010 by john124 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 12:06 PM
Still trolling and we're on page 17 with 150+ replies.

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 12:25 PM

Originally posted by GhostLancer

ATS is here for a civil discussion of ideas. Generally, we are all here because we have OPEN MINDS, right? The *average* person doesn't even know about ATS. The *average* person is wined, dined and entertained by mainstream media in all it's colorful, alluring forms... right?

The fact that someone posts an idea on ATS and invites discussion, debate, clarification and ultimately *ILLUMINATION* should be celebrated. No one knows it all; it's impossible. The truly enlightened minds of our day KNOW this. There's simply too much out there for any ONE person to know; to think otherwise is, well, simply ignorant. Wise people KNOW this. And the fact that we're on ATS at all is evidence of some measure of wisdom, right?

I wish everyone was as open minded as you, but it seems to be the human instinct to protect your beliefs with an iron grip.
I may not have many posts but I have been lurking here for a while, but I think you have truly captured the essence of ATS. It's all about discussion, debate, clarification and illumination. If we just tear each other down anytime someone comes up with an idea that is against mainstream belief than we would be no better than the ignorant sheepies out there who do the same to us.
edit on 25-11-2010 by freedish because: meh

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 12:28 PM

Originally posted by mr10k
Still trolling and we're on page 17 with 150+ replies.

This is exactly what im talking about.
Stop with the *im so smart and everyone else is so dumb attitude*.
nobody can know everything.
And besides you don't like the length of this thread go to a different one, complaining about it
doesn't add any continuity to it.

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 12:40 PM
reply to post by freedish

I think you need to calm down. I'm not acting like I'm so smart, you need to calm down. I'm referring to the fact that back somwhere before page 8, when OT first started this thread, the amount of answers he got was ridiculous, and he doesn't want to recognize any one of them. I'm not complaining about the size of the thread, i am complainging about the fact that OT has gone on 17 pages full of trolling. It is amazing. You need to stop standing up for him and look at pages 1 & 2 where we debunk him.

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 02:42 PM
reply to post by mr10k

/what he/she said!

This is the central problem here.
We are debating with folks, who basically dont know or accept the rules of rational reasoning itself.

posted on Nov, 25 2010 @ 10:11 PM
Just saw a video on cnn today about some trees that were found, carbon dated to be around 50,000-60,000 years old. They were preserved in clay over 100 feet below the ground.

posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 05:52 PM
reply to post by OldThinker

there is plenty of evidence for tree's before the 10 thousand year mark, how do you explain amber or fossilised tree's otherwise? I cant even believe I'm responding to this!

posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 06:48 PM

Originally posted by OldThinker
How can the earth be millions of years old and we can't find a tree over 10K yrs old?

I don't know how old the earth is...neither do you friend.

But can't you skeptics just admit this is puzzling to your worldview? I mean many of those that believe in a young earth put it around 10K years old...right in line with the age of this tree in Sweden...

World's Oldest Living Tree -- 9550 Years Old -- Discovered In Sweden
ScienceDaily (Apr. 16, 2008) — The world's oldest recorded tree is a 9,550 year old spruce in the Dalarna province of Sweden. The spruce tree has shown to be a tenacious survivor that has endured by growing between erect trees and smaller bushes in pace with the dramatic climate changes over time.

For many years the spruce tree has been regarded as a relative newcomer in the Swedish mountain region. "Our results have shown the complete opposite, that the spruce is one of the oldest known trees in the mountain range," says Leif Kullman, Professor of Physical Geography at Umeå University.

A fascinating discovery was made under the crown of a spruce in Fulu Mountain in Dalarna. Scientists found four "generations" of spruce remains in the form of cones and wood produced from the highest grounds.

The discovery showed trees of 375, 5,660, 9,000 and 9,550 years old and everything displayed clear signs that they have the same genetic makeup as the trees above them. Since spruce trees can multiply with root penetrating braches, they can produce exact copies, or clones.

The tree now growing above the finding place and the wood pieces dating 9,550 years have the same genetic material. The actual has been tested by carbon-14 dating at a laboratory in Miami, Florida, USA.

Previously, pine trees in North America have been cited as the oldest at 4,000 to 5,000 years old


I want to highlight this line...

The discovery showed trees of 375, 5,660, 9,000 and 9,550 years old and everything displayed clear signs that they have the same genetic makeup as the trees above them.

Notice that the various-aged-trees had the "same genetic make-up" meaning that the basic substances that the each tree were extremely why haven't we found older ones with the same make-up....could it be something as simple as the earth wasn't here then?


they don't use trees to date how old the earth is, simply because trees live and eventually die. their results would obviously be inconclusive. that's why they use rocks. rocks stay around alot longer than trees and are harder to destroy. they're the oldest things on the planet. they definitly outlive trees and we know that the rocks came before trees. some of the oldest rocks date from 3.8 to 4.28 billion years old.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 01:25 AM
Nothing lives forever!!!! Everything dies, even trees. So just how is it the fact that a living tree over ten thousand years old has never been found, prove that the earth is ten thousand years old. It doesnt, it just proves that there dead, and long rotten.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:24 AM

Fossilised tree for you.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:29 AM

Originally posted by Shadowfoot
reply to post by OldThinker

Are you trying to posit some judeo-christian world view with this? Well the basic nuts and bolts can be explained by for instance...THE ICE AGE
there have been countless. Now hows about the fern? they have been proven to be around for more then a couple 100 million years.

Here's my question to you....what test did they use on the tree in Sweden? carbon dating...ok well in at least as far as that method is valid AND since it is from the same parameters...Radio Carbon dating has found any number of biological life forms that date back 100's of millions of years....yes from right here on this ol earth.

Is it possible carbon dating is flawed?...sure but the inverse of your conjecture subjects itself to the same parameters.

Actually, carbon dating is only good, using counting techniques, back about 50,000 years. With accellerators, you might get 100,000 years. But in no event hundreds of millions. For that you would need rubidium/strontium dating.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 09:46 AM

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
Because when the earth is rock, and lava and toxic gasses, trees cant grow.......

2nd line

So if this tree is here in one thousand years...would you reply/logic/worldview still fit?

When does your assertion "trees can't grow" start to become a reality?

You are talking about the living trees... But there are tree fossils from much further back than 10,000 years... In fact they go back 3 million years

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:46 AM
OP: 'How can the earth be millions of years old and we can't find a tree over 10K yrs old?'

Can I ask, if you believe the world is no older than 10K (I dont think you do). Why isnt everything 10K years old?

This appears to be your reasoning. Please explain.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 11:52 AM
Tectonic subduction.

The earth replaces it's skin periodically just like we do.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 12:03 PM

Originally posted by defcon5
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

There is evidence of trees dating much further back then 10K years, but as any organism on earth, they have a lifespan. With the oldest living tree listed as being 6000 years old (Sunland Baobab). There is plenty of evidence of petrified trees dating back millions of years:

Petrified National Forest
The Petrified Forest is known for its fossils, especially fallen trees, that lived in the Late Triassic, about 225 million years ago.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

edit on 11/23/2010 by defcon5 because: (no reason given)

Ha! I found an article describing even older tree fossils:

Scientists say they have pieced together the world's oldest known tree from two fossils dating back 385 million years, a discovery they say could help explain the role early forests played in climate change.


Everything else is hearsay or should I say heresy?

What the ancient trees may have looked like:
edit on 27-11-2010 by Nicolas Flamel because: Here's another link with images of what the ancient trees would have looked like.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:55 PM
Wow! 17 pages.

Thanks for giving me the tip on how to create a lot of response.

My next thread will be: "If humans rarely live past 100 years old, how can we be sure the earth is really more than 100 years old? Why are there no witnesses?"

Now that I have nailed the "old earthers" coffin shut with that logic, I am moving on to curing cancer.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by OldThinker

Back again OT. I see you are questioning your faith again and looking for answers that your religion fails to answer throughly enough.

If you have faith there is no need for you to try to use science to back your belief system. Again, many have shown you evidence of trees existing for millions of years but you dismiss this evidence and only grasp on the evidence that you feel helps to verify your own belief system.

I'm sorry that you are so lost and looking for answers. Remember that all YOU need is faith, no need to try to use science to prove what you believe to be true.

You make it more clear, every time you create a threat that you are only trolling. You only accept what verifies your belief system and you dismiss solid science that contradicts what you are attempting to prove.

posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 03:40 PM

Originally posted by OldThinker

Originally posted by thedeadtruth
So because the oldest person alive is only about 115, and all our genetic material is almost identical, then I could claim ( using your logic ) that humans have only been around for about that long.


My young you grow older you'll find you will become less-confident in your once-held beliefs...mark my words...

And no it is not a joke... it a a simple question...a question man

Put your 2 cents in, bookmark the the old computer....and laugh at yourself in 30 yrs>>>

It seems that it is you that who is less confident in their beliefs. You are the one here trying to use science to justify a belief. You have to accept your religion on faith and faith alone. You attempting to use pick and choose science to verify that faith, is proof that you are questioning your faith.

Why cant you just accept your religion on faith alone? If you truly want answers, accept the presented science. Its clear that your religion has left you empty and wanting more. Dont worry its natural that when you reach a certain age you will start to question the faith you have held onto for so many years.

Good luck

new topics

top topics

<< 14  15  16    18 >>

log in