TED Conversations

Obey No1kinobe

TEDCRED 50+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

How old is planet Earth?

My understanding from Science is that planet Earth is about 4.6 billion years old.

The current universe is about 13.6 Billion years.

Some claim Earth and the universe is between 6,000 and 10,000 years old.

This is not a trivial difference.

My understanding is the young earth theory is the view of some creationists. Other theists take a less literal approach to holy books and are comfortable with an older universe and even evolution.

Do YEC have it right and various radiometric dating techniques are completely flawed or are they relying on a few bogus results and ignoring what is valid science on the whole.

Is this a huge blind spot for science? Or a conspiracy? Or a bit of both?

I have to admit that it would surprise me if radiometric dating was completely misleading. I would have thought these issues would have been worked through, that there would be continuous improvements in techniques and methodology and more accurately estimating the age of the Earth.

What do you think?

Topics: God belief evolution religion science
0
Share:

Closing Statement from Obey No1kinobe

Thank you everyone who contributed. You'd think the age of the earth is something we could follow the science and agree on. Apparently not.

Science indicates 4.6 Billion years. Bible inspired young earth creationist below say between 5700 and 13000 years. This is a huge difference.

To believe this you need to ignore or disagree with the science in many fields:
Geology - plate tectonics, sedimentary rock formation,
Biology -evolution
Astronomy - star and galaxy light distances
Physics - radiometric dating

Also each different creation myth or interpretation conflict.

Some of the science is ignored based on divine intervention which could make a world that looks 4.6 billion years ago 6,000 or so years ago.

Looking into some of the Christian materials, they state up front that the bible is the truth. Any apparent conflicts between the bible stories and science, then the bible trumps.

I guess no one has changed their minds. But the discussion has helped me better understand some of the issues.

I'm going to stick with science. I see no evidence for any god or that the bible is anything special.

If Bible literalists want to stick with the apparent mythology of a post Canaanite tribe as described in the bible, that is their choice. I would suggest the bible is not a great scientific resource - it says pi is 3, bats are birds, whales are fish and that displaying striped patterns to a pregnant cow will make it give birth to striped cats. Burning bushes and talking donkey's.

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof. But I almost admire the creatively and arguments developed to counter the science. Although the ones I looked at appeared flawed or relied on supernatural intervention of the type we never see now that we have mobile phone cameras.

Thanks for the discussion.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb

    edward long 100+

    • 0
    Jul 20 2012: The Holy Bible (come on, keep reading) gives a non-self contradicting timeline from creation to today. The book of Genesis, chapters 5 and 11give a genealogical record which accurately accounts for each year from Adam (creation) to the Flood (Noah) and beyond. By overlaying world history on this timeline it is clear that God created the heaven and the Earth in the year 11,013 B.C. Add 2,012 years and you get a Biblical age of the Universe of 13,025 years.

    • John Dunbar 10+

      • 0
      Jul 20 2012: Edward, why then does the bible not describe interactions with species like dinosaurs? You would think there would be some mention of this as humans existing simultaneously with predators that weigh 6.8 metric tons might make for some regular difficulty.
      • thumb

        Peter Law 30+

        • 0
        Jul 20 2012: Job 40:15-18 (NIV)
        “Look at Behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. [16] What strength it has in its loins, what power in the muscles of its belly! [17] Its tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of its thighs are close-knit. [18] Its bones are tubes of bronze, its limbs like rods of iron.

        :-)

        • John Dunbar 10+

          • +1
          Jul 20 2012: Peter, although I enjoy the passage i hardly think this clears up the whole idea of humans being able to live next to velociraptors and tyrannosaurus rex. If you were writing an account of earths history don't you think you would include the vast array of dinosaur species that have existed? Or would you write a couple light descriptions about a grass feeding behemoth. You would think existing with dinosaurs would be rather perilous and therefore you would include some sort of history of their existence and extinction. I hope this passage doesn't "seal the deal" for you in regards to the obvious gaps of earths history found in the bibles account.
        • thumb

          Stewart Gault 30+

          • 0
          Jul 20 2012: Your behemoth sounds like a rhino.
      • thumb

        edward long 100+

        • 0
        Jul 20 2012: Hello Brian-
        The Holy Bible is not a comprehesive physical history of the Earth or the Universe. There are some specific mentions of some things and events, but, as you point out, there are many "gaps" between the account of the beginning (Genesis) and the end (Revelation) of all things temporal. It would require a massive, multi-volume set of books to document a complete history of the universe with exhaustive scientific explanations of Everything. Of course the Holy Bible is not such a work.--Edward
      • thumb

        Peter Law 30+

        • +1
        Jul 21 2012: Hi Stewart.

        Have you seen the tail on a rhino? Hardly a Cedar..

        :-)
        • thumb

          Gabo Moreno 100+

          • +1
          Jul 21 2012: Only that the cedar on other translations do not refer precisely to the tail ... but let's look at King James':

          "15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
          16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly."

          A reptile with a navel?

          "17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together."

          A reptile whose "stones" are wrapped together like the "stones" of lots of mammals?

          Hum, seems like hardly a dinosaur.

          :-)
        • thumb

          Stewart Gault 30+

          • 0
          Jul 22 2012: Would it be the first time ancients have exaggerated? And I think you've got to be consistent in your trust of text. If you grant this behemoth as a dragon do you also accept every other account of dragons and even other monsters which are myths?
      • thumb

        Peter Law 30+

        • 0
        Jul 21 2012: Hi Brian.

        Swop dinosaur (name only invented a couple of centuries ago) for Dragon, & you will have loads to read about.

        :-)
    • thumb

      Obey No1kinobe 50+

      • 0
      Jul 22 2012: Hi Edward. First time I recall hearing 13,000 years. I've heard 6,000 before, some around 10,000.

      6 to 13 thousands is double. Not quiet as bad as tripling 4 to 13 billion.

      But I guess with science we update as we improve our understanding. Suggest this is a strength.
      • thumb

        edward long 100+

        • 0
        Jul 22 2012: You are correct sir! I have always considered it to be a sign of intelligence to alter one's knowledge base when it is proven to be false. I do think there is a tendency on the part of non-scientists to accept everything the scientific world says as fact. I also think most scientists enjoy this elite status and do little to emphasize the tentative, often mutable, nature of their theories. About the 13,025 years. Ussher made an error in his analysis of Genesis 5 and 11. His number was 4,004 years from creation to the birth of Jesus, which led to the 6000+ year age of Earth. Using the patriarchal geneaologies properly yields the number 11,023 years from Adam to Jesus. Be well.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.