There was a Bishop Ussher who, by following the time line of the Bible genealogies, determined that the earth to be about 10,000 years of age. What you are taught in school is a point of interest. The age of rocks are determined by the types of bones found in them. The age of the bones by the rocks they are found in. Who was there in the beginning in order to give the first age. Modern ages are all guesses. Yours is probably better than theirs - can't be worse.
2006-06-20 12:55:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
No one knows the exact age of the earth (at least I don't) but it's about 4.5 billion years. I also know a way that helped prove this idea. Ok, it has to do with niagara falls.
They found out that the niagara river took a certain amount of time to carve through an inch or a foot or rock and reach a cliff where the falls now strand. So they took how long it would take it to carve through, like, a foot or fock and figure out how long it would take to get from the starting point to the finishing point. The answer? About 5 million years, which proved that the previous idea of the earth being only 4000 years old was put in the dust.
2006-06-19 11:03:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by picsnap 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Earth was formed around 4.57 billion (4.57Ã109)[1] years ago.
Based on extensive and detailed scientific evidence, geologists have determined the age of the Earth to be around 4.55 billion years (4.55x109 years). This age represents a compromise between the oldest-known terrestrial minerals – small crystals of zircon from the Jack Hills of Western Australia – and astronomers' and planetologists' determinations of the age of the solar system based in part on radiometric age dating of meteorite material and lunar samples.
The radiometric age dating evidence from the zircons further confirms that the Earth is at least 4.404 billion years old. Comparing the mass and luminosity of the Sun to the multitudes of other stars, it appears that the solar system cannot be much older than those rocks. Ca-Al-rich inclusions – the oldest known solid constituents within meteorites which are formed within the solar system – are 4.567 billion years old, giving an age for the solar system and an upper limit for the age of the Earth. It is assumed that the accretion of the Earth began soon after the formation of the Ca-Al-rich inclusions and the meteorites. Since the accretion time of the Earth is not exactly known yet, and the predictions from different accretion models vary between several millions up to about 100 million years, the exact age of the Earth is difficult to define.
In the centuries preceding the scientific revolution, the age of the Earth was determined from the accounts of creation by religious authority. Today some religious groups continue to accept only theological accounts regarding the age of the earth, rejecting scientific evidence which contradicts their beliefs.
2006-06-19 03:09:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by sikandar 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
How Old Is The Earth, And How Do We Know?
he generally accepted age for the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about 4.55 billion years (plus or minus about 1%). This value is derived from several different lines of evidence.
Unfortunately, the age cannot be computed directly from material that is solely from the Earth. There is evidence that energy from the Earth's accumulation caused the surface to be molten. Further, the processes of erosion and crustal recycling have apparently destroyed all of the earliest surface.
The oldest rocks which have been found so far (on the Earth) date to about 3.8 to 3.9 billion years ago (by several radiometric dating methods). Some of these rocks are sedimentary, and include minerals which are themselves as old as 4.1 to 4.2 billion years. Rocks of this age are relatively rare, however rocks that are at least 3.5 billion years in age have been found on North America, Greenland, Australia, Africa, and Asia.
While these values do not compute an age for the Earth, they do establish a lower limit (the Earth must be at least as old as any formation on it). This lower limit is at least concordant with the independently derived figure of 4.55 billion years for the Earth's actual age.
The most direct means for calculating the Earth's age is a Pb/Pb isochron age, derived from samples of the Earth and meteorites. This involves measurement of three isotopes of lead (Pb-206, Pb-207, and either Pb-208 or Pb-204). A plot is constructed of Pb-206/Pb-204 versus Pb-207/Pb-204.
If the solar system formed from a common pool of matter, which was uniformly distributed in terms of Pb isotope ratios, then the initial plots for all objects from that pool of matter would fall on a single point.
Over time, the amounts of Pb-206 and Pb-207 will change in some samples, as these isotopes are decay end-products of uranium decay (U-238 decays to Pb-206, and U-235 decays to Pb-207). This causes the data points to separate from each other. The higher the uranium-to-lead ratio of a rock, the more the Pb-206/Pb-204 and Pb-207/Pb-204 values will change with time.
If the source of the solar system was also uniformly distributed with respect to uranium isotope ratios, then the data points will always fall on a single line. And from the slope of the line we can compute the amount of time which has passed since the pool of matter became separated into individual objects. See the Isochron Dating FAQ or Faure (1986, chapter 18) for technical detail.
A young-Earther would object to all of the "assumptions" listed above. However, the test for these assumptions is the plot of the data itself. The actual underlying assumption is that, if those requirements have not been met, there is no reason for the data points to fall on a line.
The resulting plot has data points for each of five meteorites that contain varying levels of uranium, a single data point for all meteorites that do not, and one (solid circle) data point for modern terrestrial sediments.
2006-06-23 23:01:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by cgdchris 4
·
0⤊
0⤋