question

[Vardai]

what do yall have to say to all the historians who say the world is millions of years old?? and according to the Bible,... thats not so...

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

"Pove it"

or maybe..

"So."

 

[Reader Nilus]

I know of nothing in the Bible that claims any age whatsoever of the earth.
Jeff the Finn

 

[Brimshack]

Actually geologists have long since provided more than adequate evidence regarding this. Creationists choose to ignore it. And Jess is right, the Bible does not contain any claims regarding the age of the earth. Conservative Christians have chosen to read such claims into the Bible. Yet another example of their own lack of literalism.

 

[woodstock]

Its ussaly not the historians that Question the age of the earth it is the sience geeks who try and prove otherwise

 

[Mr.Cheese]

Here's my take on it...
Science goes by observable facts.
What science observes is that the earth is really old.
It's not trying to prove anybody or anything wrong.
I agree that the bible doesn't say the the earth is "so" old or "not so" old. But if you want to interpret it as saying such, then what is that between you and me?
Can God push the fast forward button and make the earth only a few thousand years old?
I suppose he could.
But that doesn't change the fact that science observes a planet that is millions of years old.

 

[Ryder]

I don't think the earth is that old really, but how old exactly... you got me. I don't think the evidence is that good though for 'millions & billions' of years. From a historical perspective it doesn't matter much, there's only a few thousand years of human history to study, before that Woodstock is right, it's the science departments' problem.

 

[foolsparade]

Here is the website for the United States Geological Society.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

 

[Yitzchak]

Actually there are inconsistencies in the scientific data concerning the age of things. A fact that seems ignored by those holding to an old earth theory. Key word being theory.
In order to prove that the earth is really that old they would need more than just circumstancial evidence.
First of all, since the bible records God creating Adam as a grown man, Why is it not also conceivable that God also created stars and the earth In their grown from as well?? Adam would have appeared on the very first day of his creation to be a grown man, not a one day old baby. If science came on the scene the day after Adam was created, would thye have assumed his age to be older??
Secondly, just for one example of the inconsistency in the methods of dating things. I learned in my Oceanology class that the oceans are 170 million years old. This was determined by the changes in magnetic anomolies in the strips of lava on the oceans surface. By determining that the earth's poles shift periodically and thus change the magnetic "signature" of the ocean floor. Much like tree rings for determining the age of a tree. Anyway, then I learned in a seperate class that every year the amount of salt and other minerals in the ocean change each year as it is washed in from rivers and other such sources. Extrapolating back makes the ocean 60,000 years old. Quite a contradiction in the date of the ocean. 60,000 or 170 million.
The earth may appear older than it is since it was created as Adam was "full grown". But I also am of the opinion that science greatly exagerates the numbers.

 

[tcampen]

Here is the website for the United States Geological Society.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

Foolsparade,

Great website. Just lays it out there. Tho I'm sure somebody will try to show how these radiometric dating techniques are "unreliable," but you can't please everyone.