Technically they are all right. They are just answers based on observations.
2007-04-27 05:40:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Sashia B 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
The date of 6000 years is used by a small group of remarkably vocal fundamentalist Christians who believe in strict, literal interpretations of the Bible, including all the scientifically impossible parts of Genesis.
Oddly enough, the date of 6000 years is never mentioned anywhere in the Bible, nor even hinted at.
It was a Biblical interpretation done up by an Anglican Archbishop named James Ussher in 1654. He did it by counting up all the 'begats' and generations listed in the Bible, as well as careful attention to actual recorded history, and using some creative interpretation of the events listed in the Hebrew version of the Old Testament.
Despite the fact that there are hundreds of pieces of evidence from a wide variety of fields that disprove this chronology, there are a number of religious folk who vehemently insist that for some reason, their personal spiritual salvation somehow rests in the infallible truth of this date. Yet for some reason, they have no problem accepting that the Earth goes around the Sun, which is also incompatible with a literal interpretation of Genesis.
Unfortunately, there are some influential and powerful people who are counted amongst that small, vocal minority of Bible literalists, including the current President of the United States.
2007-04-27 06:16:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
The earth's crust is comprised of igneous rock. It is possible to ascertain how long ago this rock solidified from the molten state, by radio-isotope dating, as the half-life of a given radioactive element is universally constant for a given inertial reference frame, and can thus be considered to be indisputable. By this method, much of the earth's crust can be dated, and is accordingly found to be many millions of years old. It is reasonable to suggest that the earth cannot be younger than the rocks of which it is composed. This is not the only justification for the ca. 4 billion year estimate; there are countless many. It is merely an easily comprehended example.
2007-04-27 05:55:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Ian I 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
The earth is 4600 million years old or 4.6 billion years old. Not you, not the wold, not me. But this is the right answer. How can the earth be 6000 years if the dinosaurs became extinct 65.11 million years ago. Cockroaches were the first insects to be born. They started around 420 million years ago.
2007-04-27 05:54:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I believe that the earth is 4.6 billion years old. The evidence is incontrovertible.
2007-04-27 06:28:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Spilamilah 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
i develop into taught in a private christian elementary college that the earth is about 6,000 years previous. We had to respond to questions like this randomly for our instructor. I instructed my dad about it, and he gave me a touch technological expertise lesson. He worked for Exxon and knew lots about geology. He stated that it develop into extra in all probability the earth develop into about 4 billion years previous. the subsequent day in college, i develop into suggested as upon to respond to how previous is the international. I suggested, "about 4 billion years." everyone laughed at me. I defined to the instructor that my father worked with medical records and records that instruct a a lot older heritage than what we were being taught. the instructor instructed me that develop into positive, yet for the sake of the curriculum we were being taught, we had to respond to the questions the way they wanted really than what we believed in my opinion. considering that then, I really have come to understand extra of what my dad were speaking about. to boot, my dad has develop into extra non secular over the years and now denies the technological expertise he once knew. i ought to finish that that is fairly a be counted of stupidity or willful lack of comprehend-how. someone might want to be too stupid to understand medical approach or merely go with to push aside it. So even as answering your question, it really is significant for the guy to declare no matter if their answer is in accordance to truly technological expertise or personal concept in accordance to non secular training.
2016-12-04 23:20:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not me. I think it is about 4 billion years old.
2007-04-27 05:40:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old but there is no strong evidence to prove it is that old.
2007-04-27 05:48:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by joysam 【ツ】 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
I'm pretty keen on the 4.3 billion years thing.
2007-04-27 05:47:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by Brian L 7
·
2⤊
0⤋