Originally posted by Segador
off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift
Originally posted by OldThinker
I am not trying to prove anything to you...it is all on you friend...
I'm simply asking a very logical question...
If you can't admit humans are very different from trees...I can't convince you
Originally posted by mr10k
Okay OP have you missed the any links others have posted that show you various tree systems and trees that are well over 1 million years old?
by Jerry Bergman and Robert Doolan
By far the tallest living things are redwood trees. Relatives of the sequoia, they can soar taller than a 36-storey building. Like all trees, redwoods and sequoias continue to grow as long as they are alive. Thus, the longer a tree lives, the taller and wider it becomes.
Except for men who cut them down for timber or earthquakes, fires and lightning—redwoods and sequoias have few enemies. Scientists have researched the redwoods carefully, and have not found even one that has died of old age, sickness, or insect attack. This latter is a common problem of trees. The Dutch elm disease killed and ruined thousands of the beautiful shade trees of many American small towns.
It is significant therefore that no redwood tree has been found older than about 4,000 years. There are, though, many sequoias and redwoods in the 3,000 year-old range. The most famous sequoia tree, ‘General Sherman’, located in the Sequoia National Park in California, is about as high as a 27-storey building. It has been around for something like 4,000 years. To support its height, its immense trunk is so large that 17 men stretching out their arms could just about reach around it. This single tree contains enough wood to construct 100 modern houses.
But as tall and old as many sequoias are, they are not the oldest tree. A bristlecone pine in the White Mountains of California has this honour. It is more than 4,000 years old.
As trees such as the bristlecone pines and the redwoods are still living after 4,000 years or more, and seem impervious to the normal problems of trees, it is conceivable that they could live another 4,000 years or longer—a total of 8,000 years! Why then, are none found much older than 4,000 years?
It would seem that if these trees grew before this time, it would take something like a catastrophic natural disaster to wipe them out. This is seen as strong evidence for Noah’s Flood having occurred a little more than 4,000 years ago.
A colony of 47,000 quaking aspen trees (nicknamed "Pando") covering 106 acres (Template:Rnd/c4dec0 |43|(0)]] ha) in Fishlake National Forest, United States is considered one of the oldest and largest organisms in the world. It has been estimated to be 800,000 to a million years old, although tree ring samples determine individual, above-ground, trees to only average 130 years. A colony of Huon pine trees covering 1 hectare (Template:Rnd/c4dec1 |2.5|(1)]] acres) on Mount Read, Tasmania is estimated to be around 10,000 years old, as determined by DNA samples taken from pollen collected from the sediment of a nearby lake.
How can the earth be millions of yrs old and we can't find a tree over 10K yrs old?,
Originally posted by kokoro
We may not have living trees over 10,000 years old but we do have fossilized amber (which is produced by trees) that date to 320 million years ago. So clearly trees have been around for quite some time.
Bray, P. S.; Anderson, K. B. 2009. Identification of Carboniferous (320 million years old) class Ic amber. Science. 326: 132–134.
Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
The oldest human to have ever lived was 122 years old, should we assume the Earth is no older than that?
The oldest tortoise was 188, should we also assume this is the oldest the Earth can be?
The fact we found a tree that has lived nearly 10,000 years is incredible, but shouldn't indicate the age of the Earth in any way. Trees from the "petrified forest" existed more than 3 million years ago (and repudiates the notion we can't find a tree over 10K yrs old).
Originally posted by defcon5