|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jun 13, 2015 17:54:41 GMT -5
Wally, go and sit on the edge of the Grand Canyon, dangle your legs over the edge and look down, have a wee think about that river down below that used to be somewhere where your toes are and question how long did it take to achieve the wearing away of so much sandstone?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jun 13, 2015 17:55:36 GMT -5
On what basis though do you determine when a scientist is wrong? What about trees that are shown to be over 10,000 years old? Is that wrong too? There is so much out there that gives us clues that the earth is very very old so how do you determine that all of those 'clues' are somehow wrong? I honestly don't understand with all the data from so many different areas of science that anyone can dismiss them all as wrong or an error? I believe the earth to be 6,000-13,000 years old based on the bible a 10,000 year old tree fits well within that range... Trees, do you know how coal is formed Wally?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2015 17:59:54 GMT -5
Wally, go and sit on the edge of the Grand Canyon, dangle your legs over the edge and look down, have a wee think about that river down below that used to be somewhere where your toes are and question how long did it take to achieve the wearing away of so much sandstone? God created the grand canyon from the beginning not some river...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2015 18:13:02 GMT -5
I believe the earth to be 6,000-13,000 years old based on the bible a 10,000 year old tree fits well within that range... Trees, do you know how coal is formed Wally? vaguely yes...peat, heat, compression and time
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 14, 2015 0:05:33 GMT -5
Doesn't make that God any less powerful does it? These are all questions I have wondered about when I hear people say the earth is 6000 years old. We have trees that are alive today that are over 10,000 years old. Is it possible you have given the age in 'tree years'? One tree year must be about 1/ 2 actual years! Check your numbers.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 14, 2015 10:56:29 GMT -5
Doesn't make that God any less powerful does it? These are all questions I have wondered about when I hear people say the earth is 6000 years old. We have trees that are alive today that are over 10,000 years old. Is it possible you have given the age in 'tree years'? One tree year must be about 1/ 2 actual years! Check your numbers.Clonal trees have existed for even longer in some instances. Pando, Jurupa Oak, Old Tjikko, with Pando being the oldest that I can find. 80,000 - 1.000,000 for Pando clonal so even if you have that, it's still over 13,000 years in age.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 14, 2015 11:14:10 GMT -5
Is it possible you have given the age in 'tree years'? One tree year must be about 1/ 2 actual years! Check your numbers.Clonal trees have existed for even longer in some instances. Pando, Jurupa Oak, Old Tjikko, with Pando being the oldest that I can find. 80,000 - 1.000,000 for Pando clonal so even if you have that, it's still over 13,000 years in age. I wonder how a tree is determined to be 1,000,000 years old. Be right back . . .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2015 11:21:35 GMT -5
Clonal trees have existed for even longer in some instances. Pando, Jurupa Oak, Old Tjikko, with Pando being the oldest that I can find. 80,000 - 1.000,000 for Pando clonal so even if you have that, it's still over 13,000 years in age. I wonder how a tree is determined to be 1,000,000 years old. Be right back . . . I believe its the root system that is allegedly 1,000,000 years old the actual trees sprouting from the root system are only a few hundred to a few thousand years old
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 14, 2015 11:23:15 GMT -5
Clonal trees have existed for even longer in some instances. Pando, Jurupa Oak, Old Tjikko, with Pando being the oldest that I can find. 80,000 - 1.000,000 for Pando clonal so even if you have that, it's still over 13,000 years in age. I wonder how a tree is determined to be 1,000,000 years old. Be right back . . . I'm back. "Tree experts also note that the organism's age cannot be determined with the level of precision found in tree rings; some claim Pando's age is closer to 1 million years.[5] Its current 80,000 year designation is based on a complex set of factors including the history of its local environment such as: the evidence indicating that there are few if any naturally occurring new aspens in most of the western United States since a climate shift took place 10,000 years ago and eliminated favorable soil conditions for seedlings; the rate of growth (including the differences of rates in distinct climates when accounting for its local-climate history; the fact that that males grow more slowly than females; and, the fact that aspens grow more slowly at higher elevations – Pando is at 2,697 m, or 8,848 ft, above sea level); its size; and its genetic code in comparison to the mutations found among aspens born in the modern era." - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)Well, that does not help me understand. I was hoping someone had found something like a seed package with a note written on it "Planted spring 993,247BC."
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jun 14, 2015 11:24:35 GMT -5
I wonder how a tree is determined to be 1,000,000 years old. Be right back . . . I believe its the root system that is allegedly 1,000,000 years old the actual trees sprouting from the root system are only a few hundred to a few thousand years old From the same site: "The average age of Pando's stems is 130 years, as indicated by tree rings."
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 14, 2015 11:47:29 GMT -5
I wonder how a tree is determined to be 1,000,000 years old. Be right back . . . I believe its the root system that is allegedly 1,000,000 years old the actual trees sprouting from the root system are only a few hundred to a few thousand years old Yes, it is the root system, you are right. It is referred to clonal trees where the root system has existed for thousands of years giving birth to many trees over that period of time. The Pando root system is the oldest that I have heard of and it is also considered to be the heaviest known organism weighing in at 6,000 tons.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 14, 2015 11:49:39 GMT -5
I wonder how a tree is determined to be 1,000,000 years old. Be right back . . . I'm back. "Tree experts also note that the organism's age cannot be determined with the level of precision found in tree rings; some claim Pando's age is closer to 1 million years.[5] Its current 80,000 year designation is based on a complex set of factors including the history of its local environment such as: the evidence indicating that there are few if any naturally occurring new aspens in most of the western United States since a climate shift took place 10,000 years ago and eliminated favorable soil conditions for seedlings; the rate of growth (including the differences of rates in distinct climates when accounting for its local-climate history; the fact that that males grow more slowly than females; and, the fact that aspens grow more slowly at higher elevations – Pando is at 2,697 m, or 8,848 ft, above sea level); its size; and its genetic code in comparison to the mutations found among aspens born in the modern era." - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)Well, that does not help me understand. I was hoping someone had found something like a seed package with a note written on it "Planted spring 993,247BC." Ha! no, as I posted to Wally, it is the root system that has existed for a very long time, giving birth to trees over and over again. In that case it is not the tree rings as it's not the actual individual trees themselves, but the root system they grow from.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 14, 2015 14:11:17 GMT -5
Is it possible you have given the age in 'tree years'? One tree year must be about 1/ 2 actual years! Check your numbers.Clonal trees have existed for even longer in some instances. Pando, Jurupa Oak, Old Tjikko, with Pando being the oldest that I can find. 80,000 - 1.000,000 for Pando clonal so even if you have that, it's still over 13,000 years in age. I see. I was thinking of trees, the above ground part.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jun 14, 2015 14:23:58 GMT -5
Clonal trees have existed for even longer in some instances. Pando, Jurupa Oak, Old Tjikko, with Pando being the oldest that I can find. 80,000 - 1.000,000 for Pando clonal so even if you have that, it's still over 13,000 years in age. I see. I was thinking of trees, the above ground part. No, I'm not aware of any 'trees' that are as old as their root systems can be.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 14, 2015 22:43:57 GMT -5
True, there are a lot of unbelievables in the Bible too. But you are taking it to the next level and trying to get people who think the bible is the 'only truth', to accept stuff that's not in the bible. That's like getting someone who believes the earth is 6000 years old to understand about evolution and a universe that is billions of years old. You're just hitting your head against a brick wall. I get the same feeling talking to atheist and agnostics...
Wally, I suppose that you mean that atheist beliefs are as solid & foundational as Vishnu Basement Rocks. Right?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 14, 2015 22:50:21 GMT -5
Bubbles, thanks for the reminder about fossils, they tell a story that cannot be denied. The other interesting item and one that is related is how limestone came to be limestone. In high inland valleys. Go down a cave, look at the stalactites, stalagmites and limestone flows and think of the time and chemical and physical actions that went into producing them. Look at how rivers cut through hard rock such as the sandstones in the Grand canyon of the USA and think of the time that it took. Look at mountain uplift, how high the mountains are, and some have been worn away by wind and rain such as in the Grampians of Australia. See the layers of rock that are bent upward by mighty forces of nature. After you have looked at this evidence of earths making, those of you who still believe in the 6000 year myth come back and start talking to me again about how and why you believe this is the case. if you believe in an all powerful God, then he could create all of that in an instant and set it in place without breaking a sweat. The great big question is, IF! The next question would be why would He do that? Why would He create such an illusion? And don't tell me that it is to "test our faith!" Have already heard that one!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2015 22:53:14 GMT -5
I get the same feeling talking to atheist and agnostics...
Wally, I suppose that you mean that atheist beliefs are as solid & foundational as Vishnu Basement Rocks. Right?
funny, but no talking to an atheist about the bible is like trying to push a feather through brick wall or Vishnu Basement Rocks if you prefer...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2015 22:55:57 GMT -5
if you believe in an all powerful God, then he could create all of that in an instant and set it in place without breaking a sweat. The great big question is, IF! The next question would be why would He do that? Why would He create such an illusion? And don't tell me that it is to "test our faith!" Have already heard that one!
maybe its not an illusion maybe your just reading the data all wrong or using improper methods...
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jun 14, 2015 22:57:13 GMT -5
Trees, do you know how coal is formed Wally? vaguely yes...peat, heat, compression and time A +, Wally!
Yes, - time Wally, - lots & lots an d lot's of TIME!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jun 15, 2015 10:02:51 GMT -5
not everyone believes the radioactive decay(or whatever they call them) readings are accurate... Can you name a couple of people in this field that do not believe that radioactive dating is accurate? It would be interesting to look at their publications. Thanks.
|
|