How old is the Earth? ( old as dirt of course :-)

[KI4BNC]

ok-from my perspective of limited intelligence and unmentionable IQ:

I think someone told me a "galactic day" is somewhere in the neighborhood of 680,000 years.so six days?I can see that.Earth days?no.
So,bearing in mind the original question of how old is the earth,I would say-
I have no clue.
Ask God.
(lights fuse,runs away)

[Anti-Globalist]

ok-from my perspective of limited intelligence and unmentionable IQ:

I think someone told me a "galactic day" is somewhere in the neighborhood of 680,000 years.so six days?I can see that.Earth days?no.
So,bearing in mind the original question of how old is the earth,I would say-
I have no clue.
Ask God.
(lights fuse,runs away)

There's ''no need'' to ask God.

God already told people how old the Earth is Genesis 1..... So why dosen't Alex believe God?

[lamourlady]

There's ''no need'' to ask God.

God already told people how old the Earth is Genesis 1..... So why dosen't Alex believe God?

Maybe he believes in the Gap Theory, which is basically the belief that there was a space of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, which accounts for the rebellion of satan who corrupted the original earth, hence why the earth was still void and without form and God's spirit 'moved' upon the face of the waters, forcing them to sit in utter darkness.  Angels are creatures of light and it would have been quite the horrible thing for them as they awaited to see what God had planned for their treachery.  The main theory does not account for this, but some believe it also accounts for the dinosaurs, creatures satan and his minions possessed and which were destroyed from the darkness.  The idea is that God creates only perfection and the first verse is the earth in that perfect state.  The theorist don't believe the earth described in verse 2 is that perfect earth and was under curse. Then when God was ready He then 're-created' it and the next command was for there to be light.  The amount of time in which God made satan and his rebels sit in darkness is unknown, if you so agree; again it is just a theory.  It would account for some aspects of the earth to be/seem older than 6,000 years and the presence of dinosaur bones and the event that could have killed them all at the same time.  Google it for more specifics of language and such.  Please don't debate me as I am just passing along the theory as I understand it.  I don't know how I personally feel about it yet.

2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Genesis 1

Wiki

Because there is no specific information given in Genesis concerning the proposed gap of time, other scriptures are used to support and explain what may have occurred during this period and to explain the specific linguistic reasoning behind this interpretation of the Hebrew text. A short list of examples is given below:

The word "was" in Genesis 1:2 is more accurately translated "became". Such a word choice makes the gap interpretation quite easier to see in modern English.[9][11][13]

God is perfect and everything he does is perfect, so a newly created earth from the hand of God shouldn't have been without form and void and shrouded in darkness. Deuteronomy 32:4, Isaiah 45:18 1 John 1:5[10][11][13]

The Holy Spirit was "renewing" the face of the earth as he hovered over the face of the waters. Psalms 104:30[11][13][14]

Angels already existed in a state of grace when God "laid the foundations of the Earth", so there had been at least one creative act of God before the six days of Genesis. Job 38:4-7[11][14]

Satan had fallen from grace "in the beginning" which, since the serpent tempted Adam and Eve, had to have occurred before the Fall of man. Isaiah 14:12-15, Ezekiel 28:11-19, John 8:44[10][11][14]

Space, time, water, and the rock which constitutes the main body of the earth, existed before the period of six days began in Genesis 1:3.[12]

[Anti-Globalist]

Maybe he believes in the Gap Theory, which is basically the belief that there was a space of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, which accounts for the rebellion of satan who corrupted the original earth, hence why the earth was still void and without form and God's spirit 'moved' upon the face of the waters, forcing them to sit in utter darkness.  Angels are creatures of light and it would have been quite the horrible thing for them as they awaited to see what God had planned for their treachery.  The main theory does not account for this, but some believe it also accounts for the dinosaurs, creatures satan and his minions possessed and which were destroyed from the darkness.  The idea is that God creates only perfection and the first verse is the earth in that perfect state.  The theorist don't believe the earth described in verse 2 is that perfect earth and was under curse. Then when God was ready He then 're-created' it and the next command was for there to be light.  The amount of time in which God made satan and his rebels sit in darkness is unknown, if you so agree; again it is just a theory.  It would account for some aspects of the earth to be/seem older than 6,000 years and the presence of dinosaur bones and the event that could have killed them all at the same time.  Google it for more specifics of language and such.  Please don't debate me as I am just passing along the theory as I understand it.  I don't know how I personally feel about it yet.

 God says Adam is the first man, the Scriptural Geneologies verify this. Alex is saying that there were men before Adam by over fifty thousand years. Alex is disagreeing with Gord's Word about Adam being the first men......... Read the Scriptures where is ''states'' that there WAS NO MAN TO TILL THE GROUND until Adam was formed.

Another thing,after the flood there was many races who came from Noah's Sons.So the Blacks,Redskins,Celts,Caucasians and Yellowskins came about after the Great Flood while some remain the original bloodline of the Hebrew Adam........ The Archaeologists who say the bones of Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal are tens of thousands of years old are bogus corrupt Scientists. I have the Scriptures that prove it beyond doubt.

[citizenx]

Anybody that rigidly adheres to a literal interpretation of the sciptures lacks the wisdom to understand the symbolic, allegorical and parabolic language in which they were written and through which they transmit wisdom.

But as the good lord said:

Give not that which is holy to dogs, and cast not pearls before swine lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

and

To him who has much, much will be given. To him who has little, even that little which he hath shall be taken away.

Or, as a secular author, Alexander Pope, once wrote:  "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

[tritonman]

And he never really did know how many Angles on the head of the pin  good friggin grief batman this is goind beyond silly.  Just lick boots and turn off your radio.

[poncho]

There's ''no need'' to ask God.

God already told people how old the Earth is Genesis 1..... So why dosen't Alex believe God?

God wrote the Bible?

Otherwise, its other 'men' telling us things via the Bible. 
Do you claim to really know GOD? 

I would never in this lifetime, claim to know GOD and all that he represents.  Alex doesn't claim to know all about GOD either.
Doubting Alex's faith is just wrong.

[Dok]

The Dinosaurs are what then,a Hoax? or made and placed there in the rocks by the Devil.

God says all the animals were brought before Adam. So did Adam and Eve see the Dinosaurs?

I beleive that it was the Devil's doing by making ''counterfeit fossils'' of creatures that God had no part of. I believe the Fossils were put there by the Devil to break people's faith about the Earth being created in Six Man Days. For the Scientists have their way in teaching the young that the Bible was a fable made up because the Fossils in the Rocks prove it. The Scientific Dictatorship is winning the war for Man's Mind.

I really cant believe you said that. Before the word "dinosaur" was invented in the 1800's they were called dragons. The Bible speaks a lot about dinosaurs. Not to sure what game your playing, but please stop.

Part 3 - Dr. Kent Hovind - Dinosaurs and the Bible
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6833722951687298593#

[Anti-Globalist]

I really cant believe you said that. Before the word "dinosaur" was invented in the 1800's they were called dragons. The Bible speaks a lot about dinosaurs. Not to sure what game your playing, but please stop.

Part 3 - Dr. Kent Hovind - Dinosaurs and the Bible
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6833722951687298593#

The Devil is called the Dragon... And the False Prophet is said to ''speak'' like a Dragon.

Dragon is not a Dinosaur.

[Dok]

The Devil is called the Dragon... And the False Prophet is said to ''speak'' like a Dragon.

Dragon is not a Dinosaur.

When the Bible refers to the Devil as a Dragon it is a metaphor. want some great dinosaurs, read Job.

[Dok]

Some dinos are still around.

Dinosaurs found on Papua New Guinea
http://globalgulag.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,274.0.html

[Dok]

Part 1 - Dr. Kent Hovind - The Age of the Earth

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8463129851563631666#

Part 1---The Age of the Earth Video This session introduces the creation/evolution debate, demonstrating that creation and evolution are irreconcilable worldviews. It also illustrates the impossibility of the Big Bang, and reveals a multitude of evidences that the world simply cannot be billions of years old. It concludes with a demonstration of brainwashing, and how many have been brainwashed by evolutionary theories.

[Michal Ptacnik]

Change the Evolution vs. Creation to Materialistic vs. Christian and we are mostly on the same page with the guy. Evolution and Creation are mutually supporting, or can be, Materialism and Christian is not. Therefore the problem is Materialism + Evolution. If it was Spirituality + Evolution, there can be an intelligent design and yet genetics and paleonthology does not have to be "a lie from the Devil" or something.

Alright, few minutes into it, pure demagogy about the stars. It is a theory, and the math adds up. Thermodynamics is also a theory and it adds up. If you deny one (stars forming up), you have to have a good excuse about the rest of science and why it does not work in the implication.

Life from the rock again. Scientists don't KNOW if evolution occurs, okay, they do know it on bacterial scale and on drosophila scale, but not with men or dogs. But the theory so far adds up. Scientists are also humans, I don't think they would MIND if they found out there is a god or even God as you define Him because they don't want to be blobs of protoplasm. But so far, intelligence does not show according to the scientific method that is used by those scientists. This generation seems to have ideas that might change it, but so far, if you mix supperstition and science, you get a dangerous nonsense.

[Michal Ptacnik]

Philosophically we know there must be an eternal element superior to time, and most likely a ladder of such "transcendences" until there is something that elegantly unifies all of those, e.g. God. BUT I can't prove it, and neither can you. Bible is a very alegorical book and it also does not bring proof that is not tautological, therefore unacceptable to science. Change the scientific method you change the thing that brings us toilets and washing machines, so tread carefully. If you change it with guesswork, supperstition and tautology at best, you will probably turn it into worse.

[ex_nihilo]

The flood of Noah is the reason for most fossils, not "a trick of satan".

[Michal Ptacnik]

Planets spin backwards because the universe is like a big game of carambol, things hit each other and change each other velocity and direction. If the scientist in question could not answer this one, I would not want to study under him.

Finally something meaningful. Yes, information negates entropy, yes, the information must come from somewhere. Now kids who is about to make the mistake of not investigating this most interesting happenstance that might perhaps bring you to a greater understanding and a perhaps an indirect proof of God's work? Apparently the creationist.

[Michal Ptacnik]

Creationism is not a scientific theory, it is a religious doctrine that tries to use objects in the world to explain itself and the world. It is not based on observation first, therefore it is not scientific. I would never want anyone to teach my kids that "there is absolutely no chance for intelligent design" because that is not science, but so is the opposite.

Teaching evolution has much to do with putting satelites up because evolution is based (more or less but more than creationsim) on the scientific method that produces the maths behind satelites.

Moral relativism and "teaching kids they are animals" is bad, but it is also true; we are all animals, unless we come in contact with the spiritual side of us. Those who don't believe in spirituality and chose to adhere to materialist doctrines believe they are animals correctly for the most part, since the only non animal side (the true man) of them is being suppressed. That spiritual side will give you all the morality you want and in fact make you more liberal and free (yet moral) than any doctrine. With it, you need nothing. Without it, nothing can be done for you.

If you impose doctrine on people who have moved beyond that, they will feel oppressed and in fact you WILL oppress them. People now know there is something animal to them which should be a blessing to all Christian because that is what Paul said. Imposition and oppression never worked and the conservatives are finding this out with every apostate kid they alienate from everything and antything Christian by it. People now, realizing they don't want to be just animals as per science want spirituality. Great! Where are the Christian and other groups working together in order to develop a truly spiritual science without prejudice and THEN changing the paradigm of thus far secular science into something more spiritual and subjective, yet elegant and logical? No, all we see is doctrine and literalism, Pharisees indeed.

Science will win hearts over dogmatic religion because one reflects reality, the other normativity and people see that the world is real and not normative.

"Why didn't God stop the Colombine shooting? Because God is not allowed in schools anymore!" Brilliant!

[Michal Ptacnik]

Truth be told, I wouldn't want to be created in the image of a god that condemns 99% of people into Hell over an excuse (Sorry! You got free will! Hell awaits!). Excuse me, YES I would like to be, better than to be wiped by him into nonexistence, but that is not Christianity, that is pure selfish fear and maltheistic egoistic cult; Christianity is about living off of Holy Spirit and fear and that don't mix. Sorry for the off topic.

[MonkeyPuppet]

Part 1 - Dr. Kent Hovind - The Age of the Earth

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8463129851563631666#

Part 1---The Age of the Earth Video This session introduces the creation/evolution debate, demonstrating that creation and evolution are irreconcilable worldviews. It also illustrates the impossibility of the Big Bang, and reveals a multitude of evidences that the world simply cannot be billions of years old. It concludes with a demonstration of brainwashing, and how many have been brainwashed by evolutionary theories.

Dr. Hovind rocks!!

I'm not on board with the religious stuff (faith in something is good enough for me), but his video series is very enlightening for a great many lessons about life in general.

+1 ^.^

[Michal Ptacnik]

Perhaps the Earth is 6 000 years old. It does not (so much) collide with my belief, but science seems to show otherwise, and if that science is sound, I'd bet God would not cheat on us by putting confusing facts and "creating the Earth to look billions of years old" to do... what?

[Dok]

Perhaps the Earth is 6 000 years old. It does not (so much) collide with my belief, but science seems to show otherwise, and if that science is sound, I'd bet God would not cheat on us by putting confusing facts and "creating the Earth to look billions of years old" to do... what?

and HOW? Does science show the Earth is billions of years old? or the age of anything for that matter?

[Michal Ptacnik]

The good ol' Carbon dating methods for one, and then pattern analysis, aka. the matter in universe is scattered (unlike what the presenter of that movie states) much more like in a universe that would be billions of years old than a universe that is 6 000 years old. Of course, I can imagine the billions being easily millions, or few billions and not fourteen billions but that's beside the point.

It's the same problem as with the thermodynamics. If you state a result that is a result of equasions that work according to the same system that produces something obviously funcional, you better give a good explanation why there is a divergence or why the entire system is completely wrong. Of course, God is a great explanation but that would be a problem because God would have to confuse us and that is kinda impossible.

Though, if I were to be smug, a god that allows 99% of people to burn forever, well, I wouldn't think it is all that beyond him to put a little confusion to the mix as well, since he already allows demons to operate and it is not a big problem... come to think of it, the allowing of murder on this scale... don't you think your god could also lie to you? And there you have it...
/off topics


It's as the guy states. Shifting the burden of proof, but it's what the Creationists do. Science brings facts and formulates theory out of them, while you take them, shove away those you don't like (scientists sometimes do this too) and squeese the rest into your dogma.
Btw. Most of those things he points out about cosmology are explainable by the sun and other stars, e.g. the magnetic fields or the temperature; I've yet to see his rebuttal of carbon dating. The moon and Earth rotating problem is solvable by the fact that the progression is not linear; I am not a geologist but this is quite obvious and intuition would tell us that it should not be linear because the forces of gravity and others don't come by linear.

[Dok]

All radiometric dating suffers from the same fault, and by its very nature cannot be used to date anything.

All radiometric dating is 100 % acurate if you do not know how old somethiing is.

AND

All radiometric dating is 100 % wrong, if you know how old something is.

Thats a fact....  enjoy

[Anti-Globalist]

Some dinos are still around.

Dinosaurs found on Papua New Guinea
http://globalgulag.freesmfhosting.com/index.php/topic,274.0.html

lol

[Dok]

lol

laugh it up, guess those are devils flying around? 

[Anti-Globalist]

laugh it up, guess those are devils flying around? 

Really only feathered birds not Dinosaurs with wings. What an imagination you have incorperated.

[Dok]

Really only feathered birds not Dinosaurs with wings. What an imagination you have incorperated.

there arent any feathers.  your a joke know that.

[Anti-Globalist]

@Dok. So was there any other flesh man before Adam wich took place about 6000 according to Scriptures?

Don't fret,Alex won't get angry with you for correcting his wild imagination about his ''tens of tens of thousands of years''.

[Dok]

@Dok. So was there any other flesh man before Adam wich took place about 6000 according to Scriptures?

Don't fret,Alex won't get angry with you for correcting his wild imagination about his ''tens of tens of thousands of years''.

Nope, not a one.

[Anti-Globalist]

Nope, not a one.

So even you agree with the Scriptures about the existance of man about 6OOO years ago?

[Anti-Globalist]

The flood of Noah is the reason for most fossils, not "a trick of satan".

And what fossils would that be,the Dinosaur Hoax?

[Dok]

So even you agree with the Scriptures about the existance of man about 6OOO years ago?

uhm, YA, im on record here for that.

[Dok]

And what fossils would that be,the Dinosaur Hoax?

How do you believe this is a hoax? Almost all Dino fossils are found in ancient spill ways, from a flood. Are you saying the flood didnt happen?

[Anti-Globalist]

How do you believe this is a hoax? Almost all Dino fossils are found in ancient spill ways, from a flood. Are you saying the flood didnt happen?

Was T-Rex and his Mate on the upper deck of the Ark? Two by Two they entered the Ark.

And what about Big Brontosaurs,did he stay outside on the Deck or the lower deck for ballast? Do you know how much hay it would take to fed him for breakfast?

[Anti-Globalist]

Is this how the Dinosaurs became extinct?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZLcN0vQhmc

[Dok]

Was T-Rex and his Mate on the upper deck of the Ark? Two by Two they entered the Ark.

And what about Big Brontosaurs,did he stay outside on the Deck or the lower deck for ballast? Do you know how much hay it would take to fed him for breakfast?

 

Why would Noah need adult animals?

All hed need is 2 babies, a pink and a blue one. Same as all the other animals. 


Could you explain your Satan theory please.

[Anti-Globalist]

Why would Noah need adult animals?

All hed need is 2 babies, a pink and a blue one. Same as all the other animals. 


Could you explain your Satan theory please.

Do you know how big a baby bronto is? lol. So where's the records or pictures of Big Bronte?

[Anti-Globalist]

Also Dok where did Noah store all the food for 10 months to fed the animals . How big was the Ark? And who was scooping the dung up. Baby Bronte's poo rather large. 

[Dok]

Also Dok where did Noah store all the food for 10 months to fed the animals . How big was the Ark? And who was scooping the dung up. Baby Bronte's poo rather large. 

AH, now you just exposed your self, you claim to belive parts of the Bible, yet you are in fact ridiculing the beliefs. I believe that was your whole mission here, well we are onto ya now. I believed you were here once before and banned, and i believe you have just verified that belief. thanx...

[Dok]

Do you know how big a baby bronto is? lol. So where's the records or pictures of Big Bronte?

do you?