How old is the Earth?

[Skipper]

The assumption that decay rates have remained the same is based on sound science; namely, that we have done numerous things to radioactive materials (increased pressure, temperature, etc) and the decay rates has stayed the same.

What we should be asking is what evidence you provide that suggests the Earth is 6,000 years old (or however old you think it is). I only say 6,000 since you mentioned you believe God made it in 6 days, and when someone says that, they are usually a YEC.

I should also point out that you seem to misunderstand what an Ad Hominem attack is. If you insult someone in the middle of discourse, it is an insult, not an Ad Hominem. An Ad Hominem only occurs when you attempt to use the insult to somehow attack your opponent's argument (i.e. "You can't believe what he says because he's a moron.").

Well if the Earth is really 4.5 billion years old then you cannot "observe" that decay rates are constant because yoru observation is vastly too small and insignificant compared to the whole time period. Even if you could observe it for 100 years it would still only be 2.2X10^-11 percent of the total time. Even a curved line looks straight when you only observe an insignificant portion of it. So you're going to have to provide some other backing as to how you know those rates are constant.

How old do you think the earth is?

Between 6000 and 7000 years.

You could argue a margin of error from the methods we use to date the earth, but not a near 4.5 billion years margin of error. You claim to want proof before you'll except the age of the earth as billions of years old yet I assume (and it is just an assumption, but I'd guess an accurate one) that as a Christian who is claiming the earth is between 6000 and 7000 years old you believe in god creating the universe in a 6 days and on the 7th he rested...yet you believe this without the tiniest piece of evidence, proof or demonstrable science. The only reason you fail to except the age of the earth is in the billions and not the thousands is because of the blind ignorance that comes with being part of your close minded faith. There are many methods used that point to the earth being billions of years old all created, developed and refined over years of scientific advancement yet only one that points to it being thousands of years old, a book written thousands of years ago by superstitious fools who knew no better.

You and the ignorance your faith breeds are a discredit the advancements of the human race.

[LastPoet]

I will rehiterate my conclusion, this guy is a troll, his stance, his sheer tone and posts starting with "Haha..." ending with "... LOL", really says it all. He is not iterested in what we have to say, just interested in provoking.

A Highschool teacher and a YEC? I require evidence. He is no more a graduate than kent hovind.

[Tiberius]

Well which team appears better to you? It's the same argument schools use to not play Boise State. They put out an open invitation to play anyone anywhere in 2011 and nobody took them up on it. Why? Well it was not because people thought Boise State was "too crummy of a team", even though some said that. It's obvious they are worried about losing to Boise State- so they would rather just avoid them. It would also be a huge embarrassment to them if they lost to Boise State because they get more funding and have more students than Boise Stete.

It may be "obvious" to you but this is only your belief, and it is not any form of knowledge. From the facts you have, you cannot justify in any logical way that what you say is true. It *could* be that all other teams are scared of losing, or it *could* be that they are all being honest and only want to focus on playing better teams, or any other possibilities that aren't in the realm of impossibility.

It's the exact same situation here. Evolutionists get way more funding and there is way more of them, but for some odd reason they are afraid to death to debate Creationists. They know they could lose that debate and this would be a HUGE embarrassment.

Wha...? I don't know how many Evolution vs Creation debates I've seen, both in real life and online, but I can tell you that I wouldn't be able to count them all on all of my digits (including my toes). You shun YouTube, but seemingly have never searched for any creation vs evolution debates...maybe you should, you'll be surprised at how many have actually taken place over the years.

Also, who "wins" and who "loses" a debate is entirely subjective; it depends on the audience (which includes everyone watching the recording too) and is largely biased due to our nature. Creationists in the audience will think the creationist won, and evolutionists in the audience will think the evolutionist won. Occasionally you get some people switching sides, but it is a rarity and in these cases they do not switch sides permanently (i.e. they admit that the opposition did better in the debate, but they still believe that he is wrong). Debates aren't used to determine truth, they are displays of who has better reasoning when put on the spot.

[Cego_Colher]

I will reiterate my conclusion, this guy is a troll, his stance, his sheer tone and posts starting with "Haha..." ending with "... LOL", really says it all. He is not interested in what we have to say, just interested in provoking.

A Highschool teacher and a YEC? I require evidence. He is no more a graduate than kent hovind.

haha, yeah, pretty sure his students wouldn't get whatever he said they did on the standardized test. unless of course he taught them what was going to be on the test... well, yeah. I just had to say the thing that I said. I'm not going to go farther with that, because it's pointless and I have to get to class. I just needed to see his response. and he might say something like I'm scared.

[Zen Badger]

SaW, ALL the evidence,not just radiometric dating, the fossil record, archeology, geology, astronomy, plate tectonics, biology, etc,etc,etc, blah blah blah points to an old universe. None indicates a young one.

P.s jesus is a fictional character. Don't bother believing in him either.

[Ace Otana]

You and the ignorance your faith breeds are a discredit the advancements of the human race.

The two biggest insults to human intelligence is 1. Terrorists, and 2. Creationists.

With so many fools like these around, it makes you wonder what age were in. I could of swore we were in the 21st century.

[Zen Badger]

"..using the observational definition of time, the speed of light depends on its direction of propagation relative to the observer. (Again, this is a property of spacetime, and not a property of light. All relativistic particles such as neutrinos would also move at different speeds in different directions.) Light travels at the canonical speed of 1,079 million km/hr only when moving tangentially relative to an observer. It moves at half the canonical value when moving directly away from the observer, and it moves infinitely fast when travelling directly toward the observer—travelling instantaneously from point A to point B."

Interesting, but not supportive of your case, even if it were true( and according to relativity it isn't) the speed of that lightbeam is still constant. It still takes time for the light to traverse the interval to reach the observers eye.

Imagine this, the same beam of light is observed by three different people, one from behind, one from the side and one in front. According to what you've stated the light will have three different velocities at the same time.

I don't think so.

[Thor]

How old do you think the earth is?

Between 6000 and 7000 years.

So, as Sam Harris put it, you think the Earth was created at about the time the Sumerians invented glue?

[Zen Badger]

Let's throw in the (not so) Great Flood.

That's always good for a laugh.

[Dotard]

....a literal view of Scripture should be taken for many reasons ...

1. If you don't take the book of Genesis literally then why take any of the rest of the Bible literally? Maybe Jesus didn't actually rise from the dead. Maybe he was not actually born of a Virgin? If you start compromising on all of these cornerstones of the Faith then you start believing in something that is not Christianity at all.

2. Why compromise on it to begin with? It will not help anyone come to the Faith. "Well I just can't except a Young Earth because Science does not back it, but I will accept Virgins giving birth." You see my point?

3. Jesus seemed to take the Genesis account literally, so if the Son of God did, then so too must His followers.

Fr0d0 and Watson, what say ye?