How can someone say that the Earth is 6,000 years old when evidence shows otherwise?

Question

For example, scientists have discovered rocks that are 3.8 to 3.9 billion years old by means of radiometric dating. Even some mineral diposits in these rocks date back to 4 billion years. How can rocks be older than the earth on which they lie? How can the Earth possibly be 6,000 to 7,000 years old as some claim? Here's my source: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html#howold

L.C. you obviously have no idea what radiometric dating is, do you? look it up on wikipedia. I don't have time for that BS.

JesusFreak: wow that was a convincing argument. So I should just assume all scientists are part of a conspriacy? Get a life.

Answer 1

The Earth has been proven to be billions of years old. I don't believe anyone is debating this fact anymore. In the only court case between the ideas of intelligent design and evolution, the people backing intelligent design allowed for the idea that the world was not created in 7 days of 24 hours rather 7 days of longer time periods.

Answer 2

Too bad virtually all means of dating have at least some flaws, minor and major. I bet the "Evolutionist times" and secular school doesn't teach you that molten rocks due to recent erupts (as in 200 years or younger) have been "dated" to be millions of years or older.

And there is a difference between unwillingness to accept the possibility of evolution being true, and knowing it's just an outlandish fraud, because it's so ridiculous I even thought it was a joke when I first heard about it. Think of all the natural processes that would be extremely worn out by this time as well, such as the sun, the gravitational field of the earth, plus the moon should be MUCH farther away than it is now given the current rate of tidal recession (it should be at least 3-4 times farther away from the earth than it is now, if the earth were really 4.5 billion years old)

Answer 3

Early indoctrination usually makes it hard for a person who depends on a certain interpretation of the scriptures to form their spiritual expression to learn anything new. The thing of it all in the evolution/intelligent design/creationist dilemma is that there is some truth to all sides of the argument.

Zecharia Sitchin's books called the "Earth Chronicles" offer a profoundly enlightening take on how the hairless ape known today as Homo Sapien was "created" from the Nephilim (people who came from the sky). There is a bit of a missing link and a branching even where Neanderthals are concerned. Our species appeared too quickly for standard evolutionary models. My God is a scientist and keeps holding out the torch to all sentients who would know first themselves and become gods.

Answer 4

Well.....you say rocks are 3.8 to 3.9 billion years old....but how accurate are your methods for dating those rocks???

"There are various....radiometric dating methods used today to give ages of millions or billions of years for rocks. These techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in radioactive decay chains. For example, potassium-40 decays to argon-40; uranium-238 decays to lead-206 via other elements like radium; uranium-235 decays to lead-207; rubidium-87 decays to strontium-87; etc. These techniques are applied to igneous rocks, and are normally seen as giving the time since solidification.

The isotope concentrations can be measured very accurately, but isotope concentrations are not dates. To derive ages from such measurements, UNPROVABLE [emphasis mine] ASSUMPTIONS HAVE TO BE MADE such as:

1. The starting conditions are known (for example, that there was no daughter isotope present at the start, or that we know how much was there).

2. Decay rates have always been constant.

3. Systems were closed or isolated so that no parent or daughter isotopes were lost or added."

Answer 5

well first of all carbon dating is worthless, becuase yes carbon 14 does decompose at a definate rate but you have to know how much was originaly in the rock which is impossible to tell unless you already know how old it is in which case you dont need to carbon date it, also they date rock layers by what kind of bones are in it and they date he bones by wha rock layer its in. and also th moon is slowly moving awa from the earth and less that 100,000 years ago it would have ben a part of earth. and comets break down continualy because they are partaly made of ice and are blasted with more heat that we can imagine because of the sun, and they would have had to be almost twice the size of jupiter to have survived eve 3,000,000,000yrs.
and 11 year old rocks from mt sain helens have been dated from 0.5-300milon yrs old

Answer 6

The Bible does not say that the earth is 6,000 years old.
The existence of God's creation of man is about 6,000 years old.
God created the earth, and everything else, long, long ago. When God was "drawling up the blue prints" so to speak, for man, satan was paying close attention. He decided, before his fall, he could create man and animal just like God could.
After his fall, when God cast him to the earth, satan gave his hand at creation. Hence, the dinosaurs and the first form of "human."
God left it go for a long time. Then, when God said: "ok, it's my turn" he destroyed what satan created and then created his own form of animal and human. Hence, the Adam and Eve thing. That is where the Bible comes in in reporting history.
That does not mean that the world is only 6,000 years old.

We have proof that it is much older than 6,000 years. There is no denying it.

Answer 7

because is false, the bible doesn´t say that the earth is 6000 years some Evangelical groups don´t use logical in the way they read the bible, I am Jehovah ´s witnesses and we believe that the universe and earth are million years old , of course we believe that Adan was cretead by God 6000 years ago , cause cronological, but the term "day" not always is referred in the bible as a period of 24 hours sometimes is a not deined amount of time that can be millions years.

Answer 8

Blind obedience to their religious teachings. Don't forget that the Vatican stood by it's teachings that the world was the center of the universe, that the sun rotated around the earth, and that the earth was flat, until the mid 1500's.

Answer 9

Because they don't believe the evidence is reliable, wheras the fact that people have believed something for 2000 years makes it more reliable.

There's really no helping some people - especially as they are often so mistrustful of intelligence.

Answer 10

Catholics don't say this. The current Pope and prior Pope acknowledged evolution as well - even with the gaps in the theory of evolution..