s0000 if we were to believe the logic of math. It would lead us to science of physics which prooves the earth would have been destroyed. Hence the earth couldn't possibly be older than around 10,000 yr's . Which coincedently is the approximate age of the earth according to the figured timeline of the bible. .............Lack of others comprehension aggravates me so. I must appologize.
2006-12-01 11:36:37 · 16 answers · asked by . 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Ok so explain how archaeologists have found artifacts that are older then 10,000 yrs????????????
2006-12-01 11:40:38 · answer #1 · answered by harmony moon 3 · 6⤊ 0⤋
And you know this because you’re a mathematician or because your preacher told you that bullsit when you were 12? Give me the exact mathematical equation that puts the moon colliding with the earth 10,000 years ago. You can’t because you don’t know, because no such equation exists. If you’re going to say this ignorant stuff, you better be able to back yourself up.
PS: Oh… and also you do not have any understanding of science. It’s not like religion. Even if you are right and there was such an equation (which there isn’t) that would simply mean that the equation is wrong and needs modifying and study. It’s not like the bible – if one thing is wrong you have to throw the whole book out. Scientists are actually happy when their theories are proven wrong because that just gets us one step closer to greater understanding.
2006-12-01 19:45:10 · answer #2 · answered by A 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Show us the maths.
Your logic is flawed. Assuming your math is correct, just because the decaying orbit says the moon should have hit the earth 10000 years ago doesnt mean that the earth is only 10000 years old. In fact, that would mean that the moon doesn't and never should have orbited the earth, it should have collided before the earth even existed. The earth is about 5 BILLION years old.
2006-12-01 19:44:14 · answer #3 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what website you got that information from, but that website is lying to you. I hope you can comprehend what legitimate scientists say about the moon's orbit.
"...the Moon is known to be moving away from the Earth at approximately 4 cm a year"
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/astronomy/q0262.shtml
"The moon is slowly getting farther from the earth. This is a result of the earth losing energy because of the tides...The distance is currently increasing about 3.74 cm/year."
http://www.jimloy.com/astro/moon0.htm
"The average distance from the Earth to the Moon is 384,399 kilometres"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon
Let's do the math. 10,000 years x 3.74 cm/year =374 meters, or .374 km. That means 10,000 years ago, the moon was less than 1/2 km closer to the Earth than it is today. I hope you can comprehend that in a way that doesn't aggravate you.
P.S. The Bible timeline declares that Earth is about 7,000 years old, not 10,000.
2006-12-01 19:59:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Show me the math it sounds interesting but coliding 10,000 years ago still means 4.5billion minus 10,000
please write out your question right.
anyhow there is nothing to suport an age of 4.5 billion, thats just how long they think ti would have took for evolution to take place a
flawed dating scheme
. and how they date those older artifiacts is kinda funny to say the least. heres how they do it first they take years required for evolution an asumpution it even happened.
#2 then they look at the layers and make up time periods for the layers using time divided by # of layers. then when they find something in the layer they date it from the time period it was in.
Great reasoning I gotta tell ya.
then to date other layers they use the artifacts depth that was dated using a flawed theory. Circular reasoning.
OOOh and the grand canyon thats the best part. A slow process they think Right? Wrong have you ever heard of Mount St. Hellens. big volcano created a canyon 113 feet tall in a matter of hours. stratified hundreds of different layers.
but my favorite thing about both of these canyons are the trees sticking through three geologic layers that took about a million years, well you can tell it didn't take millions of years to form those layers or it would of rotted.
Another interesting thought. the sun burns up billions of tons of hydrogen each second. it is decreasing in size, if the earth/ universe was 4.6 Billion years old the sun size would be big enough to touch mercury. Clearly we see that there was an Ice age in the past. But no ice age could have occurred if the sun was that close in the past.
2006-12-01 20:11:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Of course you are wrong. Physics indicates no such thing. Don't believe everything you are told. The moon is receeding very very slowly, not getting closer, because of tidal friction. Don't believe every stupid thing you read on creationist web sites. They LIE a lot. Fortunately I have the necessary Math and Physics background to check these claims for myself, and their lies are very transparent.
2006-12-01 19:44:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
Wow, the currently accepted theory for the moon is that it came OUT of the earth, as it was being formed, and that it is moving away...
- Atmadeepo Bhava -
2006-12-01 19:42:36 · answer #7 · answered by Shinkirou Hasukage 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No there was a loosened planet or something and it colidied with earth splurting matter where the moon is and actually the moon is slowly drifting away
2006-12-01 19:41:01 · answer #8 · answered by msim225 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, it absolutely does not. You are completely and totally wrong. The moon is moving away from us in all reality, albeit very slowly. This has been confirmed countless times.
2006-12-01 19:42:56 · answer #9 · answered by The Wired 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I can't say I agree with something I have not intensely studied....but I will agree with this "Those that really know, really know that they know nothing at all" There is too much data and unknowns for us to figure things out. We can have theories and hypothesize, but, in the end....what matters?
2006-12-01 19:42:01 · answer #10 · answered by TCFKAYM 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The Grand Canyon says otherwise. Do you have a question?
2006-12-01 19:42:04 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋