Tree on TV that are 4000 years old, it has only been 4416 since the flood, can this be true about trees?

Question

If trees can be that age it began to grow 416 years after the flood. Egyptian time places building of the pyramids at same time Noah was building the ark. I am just an observer, I did not invent anything.

Dan!
Thanks so much. So interesting. Thanks to every one.

Answer 1

Some bristlecone pines are older than 5000 years. These dates are taken from counting tree rings. (one ring per year). Coring a living pine can give a narrow diameter core through the tree trunk that does not harm the tree. Also some dead brislte cone pine tree have more than 5000 tree rings. The trees are found in the American southwest living in very harsh climates and areas and growing very slowly.
The dates have been confirmed by the less accurate carbon 14- mass specrometer method. Incdentally Bishop Usher calculated that the Wotld was 5050+ years old, using the bible as his source material. (in the 1860's).
They are much longer lived than California sequoias (redwoods).
Dan.

Answer 2

This is definitely possible.There are several species known to grow very very old. The Cupressus Dupreziana is a living relict of the last ice-age living in North Africa. The exact age of some living species can only be estimated.Some have been examined.In some deserts in the U.S. very old pine-trees grow.In the Atacama desert in Chile as well.Some are estimated to be over 5000 years old.A lot remains to be investigated especially about tropical forest giants.Unfortunately we' humans' have the ability to chop something down in a day that took thousands of years to grow.There is also a tree-species on the Canary islands called the devil-tree.

Answer 3

I would not consider growth rings an accurate way to measure the number of years a tree has been alive. The growth rings occur as a result of spurts of growth, which may occur not at all or more than once in a given year depending on the conditions the tree was subjected to.

Answer 4

Perhaps the flood wasn't as widespread as thought. The purpose of the flood was to wipe out most of mankind, and certainly could have been localized to accomplish that.

Without knowing what a flood was, it would be pretty difficult to describe it.

There is also dating discrepancies. Carbon dating chemistry is presented as absolute truth, but has repeatedly been shown to be erroneous. Counting rings of tree growth as a method of dating has also been shown to be erroneous in temeperate environments where there could be freezing conditions in summer, or growing conditions in winter.

Answer 5

If you follow your own logic, that a tree couldn't survive a flood, they can be at least 4416 years old right? (Your own info...)