How old do you think the Earth is, about 6,000 years like the Bible teaches, or billions of years: evolution?

Answer 1

Evolution is built on lies and deceptions. Only people that refuse to open their eyes and see the truth can believe in it.
Here is a small part of that truth...

Evolution teaches that we came from animals.
Evolution teaches that animals came from Amphibians.
Evolution teaches that Amphibians come from sea life.
Sea life from single-cell life.
Single cell life from chemicals.
Chemicals from rocks that were rained on for years.
Conclusion, all live came from rocks.
Which is more likely, that an intelligent created life, or that nothing did, and what about bio-genesis?

The Evolutionist base their belief in Evolution on the fact that “Micro-evolution” is true. What they do not tell is that there are 6 different meanings to the word Evolution, and only “Micro-evolution” has ever been observed.
1) Cosmic Evolution (Never Observed) The creation of time, space and matter. (The Big Bang)
2) Chemical Evolution (Never Observed) Production of heavy elements from hydrogen.
3) Steller Evolution (Never Observed) The formation of stars, planets, and solar systems.
4) Organic Evolution (Never Observed) Life from random chemical.
5) Macro-Evolution (Never Observed) One animal mutating into another.
6) Micro-Evolution. (Observed) Slight changes in a species. A better name for this would be “Adaptation”

The Sun is Shrinking.
o.1% would mean a half-life of 10,000 years, so 10,000 years ago, it would be twice as big as it is now, 20,000 years, 4 times as big, 30,000 years, 8 times as big...
The inverse square law means the gravity would be 64 times then what it is now. What would it be in 65 million years?

Carbon dating is based on 3 assumptions that can not be proven.
1. The amount of carbon-14 in the body is the same as in the air.
2. The amount that was in it at the time of death is the same as in the air today.
3. Nothing has removed or washed-out any of the carbon-14
4. The rate of decay is a constant.
1,3,and 4 are assumptions. There is no way to prove them.
2 was proven wrong at lest twice, never proven right. The amount of Carbon-14 in the air is still increasing.

The Geological Columns.
Evolutionist believe that the Geological Columns prove that the Earth is millions of years old because each layer is a different age. What they do not tell is that the layers are not even. There could be 50 layers in 1 spot, 30 layers a mile away. And 80 layers another mile.
Also they do not tell that there are trees and animals buried in the layers crossing dozens of layers and some time upside down.
There is only 2 possibilities for this...
1) The plant or animal was there for centuries waiting to be buried before it decayed. Many of the trees would have to balance upside-down, and many animal, such as whales, would have to balance on their tail fins against wind, rain, and vibrations from other animals walking/running for centuries.
2. The plant or animal was buried quickly. This would require that they be under water since only water makes dirt settle in layers quickly.

The Van-Allen Radiation Belt.

The Earths Magnetic field is slowly getting weaker. It has a half-life of 1450 years. This means that it is losing ½ of its strength every 1450 years.
Time Magnetic strength
2,000 AD 1
555 AD 2
900BC 4
2,350BC 8
3,800BC 16
About 6000 years ago (The time of Genesis) it would have been about 16 times as strong as it is now. A magnet field of that power would stop the venom of snakes from being harmful.
About 4000 to 4500 years ago (The time of The Great Flood) it would have been about 8 times as strong as now.
About 2000 years ago (The time Of Jesus, The Christ) it would have been about 3 times as strong as now.
Now, lets see how strong it would have been just 50,000 years ago.
5,250BC 32
6,700BC 64
---
50,200BC-68,719,476,736

Sixty eight Billion, Seven hundred and nineteen Million, Four hundred and seventy six thousand, seven hundred and thirty six times what is it now.

What would it have been 65,000,000 years ago?

Many Evolutionist claim that the reason the Earths magnetic field is getting weaker is because it is reversing. They say that it has reversed several times in history. If this was true then that would mean that every time it reversed, there would be a time of neutral magnetic field. This would mean that there was no magnetic field at these times. If there is no magnetic field, then there is no Van-Allen Radiation belt, and all the X-Rays, Gamma-Rays, and other forms of radiation from the sun would hit the earth directly, destroying all life on the land, and making the oceans hot enough to boil cooking all life in the waters. Evolution would have to start all over after every reversal.

How do stars form?
There are many ideas about this subject, but no way to know for sure.
Some believe that stars form from clouds of gases collecting together. As they compress closer together, they get hotter and finally ignite into a star.
This has been proven to be impossible. As the gases collect, there would be 2 forces at work. The gravity pulling them together, and the pressures pushing them apart. The pressure pushing them apart would be between 50 and 100 times stronger then the gravity pulling them together. This would be like a balloon inflating itself from the gravity of the air inside pulling more air in with no help from a outside source.
Another possible explanation would be that a star or supernova explodes close to the gas cloud.
The problem with this idea is that the shock wave would not compress the gases, it would sweep then away and scatter them even more then they are so that they can not collect. Look at a leaf blower.
Another possible explanation is that 20 stars explode at the same time all around this gas cloud.
The problem with this idea is that 20 stars would have to die for 1 to form. 400 stars would have to die for those 20 to exist, and 8,000 would have to die for those 400 to exist, and 160,000 to make them. How far back can it go, and how did the first generation of stars from?

The several stages of evolution have all been proven to be wrong.
1) Lucy.
A 3 foot skeleton of a chimp, the “evidence” that she was becoming human was her knee joint, which was found more then a mile away, and over 200 feet in the earth.
2) Heidelberg Man.
Built by a jaw bone that was considered to be quite human.
3) Nebraska Man.
Built from a pigs tooth
4) Piltdown Man.
The jaw was a modern ape
5) Peking Man.
Lived 500,000 years ago, but no remains were ever found.
6) Neanderthal Man.
Old Man with arthritis.
7) New Guinea man.
? I have never been able to find any info except that this one was found in New Guinea.
8) Gro-Magnon Man.
Skeletal Structure is exactly the same as modern man.

PS: the only diploma Darwin got other then Highschool was a docteran of divinity..
Your GREAT SCIENTIST was not a scientist at all, he was a preacher.

Answer 2

The Bible NEVER says how old the earth is! That 6000 year figure was determined by some wrongly-thinking MEN who claim to use the bible as a source of scientific truth. The Bible IS NOT a science text book, and your science books are NOT books of philosophy and theism! The story of Creation in Genesis Chapter 1 closely parallels the Big Bang, but adds one feature that the best of scientists cannot explain: WHat was BEFORE the Big Bang? GOD was before the beginning and will remain after the end; He is the Alpha and the Omega. But scientists don;t want to admit this because of their own pride in what they think is THEIR ideas! Science can tell us HOW the universe began, but they will NEVER be able to explain WHY -- That is God;s Work, and will be explained to us later. But the Bible DOES speak against evolution. The bible clearly state that each animal was made "according to its kind". This means that chickens were created as chickens, not "feathered lizards". Dogs were created as dogs, cats as cats, and some gilled FISH did not crawl up on land and become the first dinosaur. Man did not evolve from monkeys, but exists in parallel as a different "kind". Note that this "in kind" does NOT preclude different TYPES of the same animal. For example, poodles and beagles are different types of dogs, but they are BOTH still dogs -- of the same "kind". BTW: We now know the answer to the question "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" it was the chicken. An egg is NOT a "kind", but is the unborn form of the kind, the kind we call "chicken". The chicken was created first, male and female, and the egg came second after the male and female mated.

Answer 3

First off, the Bible does not mention an age for the Earth.

The silly idea that the Earth is 6000 years old comes purely from when Bishop Usher counted up the totals of the figures for ages listed in the Bible for men (who it says regularly lived to be over 700 years old, some even over 900 years). He had to guess on the gaps in the ages that weren't listed, and even though he did that in the 1600's, he was off by several years just back to when Jesus was supposed to have been born.

I accept the figures that many thousands of objective and well trained professionals from numerous scientific disciplines (including many from every major religion) have independently verified countless times by many different procedures. It is as trustworthy as DNA testing. Somewhere around 4.56 billion years old. Technology and understanding have come a long ways in the 400 years since some bored Bishop decided to guess how old the Earth was, it's up to you which one you trust to be more accurate. I bet you don't have much trouble deciding when it comes to a headache if you want to try blood letting or an aspirin though.

Answer 4

There's little to do here with evolution. Only idiots believe the 6000-year-old Earth. The age of the earth can be shown through radiometric dating. The most common one heard about is radiocarbon dating and its applications in paleontology. But in general it's just about finding time elapsed based on ratios of radioactive isotopes. Through radiometric dating it has been shown that the Earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. There's also an enormous amount of evidence to show that the rest of the universe is over 6,000 years old and in reading the bible literally one probably believes that the earth and the universe were created almost simultaneously.

Answer 5

The arguments 'against' the earth being more than 6000 years old amaze me. As far as Darwin is concerned, much of what he wrote has had to be modified, and why wouldn't it? Scientific understanding has advanced a long way since then. I wonder if the objectors have even READ Darwin?
We have NOT evolved from the apes; any more than domestic cats evolved from tigers.

You cannot 'disprove' something by merely advancing unsubstantiated arguments to support your view. Why does science have to defend itself against nonsense? Why are the creationists so intent on 'disproving' a theory that is outdated anyway?

It reminds me of the arguments against Galileo, when he supported the Copernican model of the solar system, and worse, tried to assert that there were more than eight heavenly bodies by discovering that there were satellites orbitting Jupiter. This was absolute heresy, and against the word of the bible. Are we still saying that the sun revolves around the earth?

Please people, learn to let go a little. Science is trying to come closer to religion through understanding, yet it is continuously being rebuffed by ignorance. There is no reason why science and religion cannot co-exist. To some people who wish to retain a power base, ignorance is bliss; because their power base cannot then be challenged.

Science has to adapt, and theories modified to fit the facts. At one time, not all that long ago, it appeared that the age of the solar system could only be some hundreds of thousands of years; because the sun would have burnt up all its hydrogen fuel in that time. Yet it appeared that there were rocks on earth millions of years old. How could that possibly be? Then along came a fellow with a keen sense of religion, and a simple theory that explained it: e = mc2.

Incidentally, I would like someone to prove to me that the sun is only 6000 years old.

Answer 6

Billions of years. Lots and lots of evidence shows this is true.

As a side note, I don't see why people can't believe in God and generally in the Bible and still believe in science and evolution. I don't see why some folks feel they need to take every single last word in Genesis absolutely literally. Why not take Genesis as a beautiful metaphor, and believe that a supreme being set the process of evolution in motion billions of years ago? (Heck, maybe I should post that question.)

Answer 7

Evolution has nothing to do with the age of Earth. It has to do with the rise of life. So I don't even know why you mentioned it.

Also, the Bible does not "teach" Earth is that old. Some random dude decided to calculate generations to get that number. We won't even go into how many things are wrong with that method.

The planet is 4.55 billion years old. The evidence is overwhelming.

There is nothing that says one cannot believe in God and geological evidence. I am a Christian geologist and I have yet to burst into flames for heresy.

Answer 8

Scientists estimate the Earth to be 4.54 billion years old.
This was determined by combining the interpretations of oldest-known terrestrial minerals (such as 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.

Answer 9

The Bible is not about science, it's about myth - nothing more.

For the age of the earth, listen to geologists. Trust the Bible only for morality questions.

Answer 10

4.544 billion years old.
God is truely amazing. from what i believe (and what should be most cases) is that God created everything and how it would happen. science could not disprove God because God created things FOR science. ex. he created 'the cell' of animals and plants and everything. how does science know that? they study. they're just there to explain and solve or understand the world and everything that exists. they think we came from monkeys. maybe we did. God could have created evolution. you don't know. they don't know. it's faith, not evidence. God could have created that evidence too. and then you think who created God...well your brain can't process that information because it's already hard enough for you to fathom God right? it's faith and your belief. science can only go so far. science cannot disprove God.

Answer 11

Dinger. wash both your mind and your mouth with soap.
I have seldom seen such lies and stupidity put in print.
The purveyors of that sort of insanity are a prime example of what is wrong with humanity.
FOR SHAME, FOR SHAME.