4.4 Billion Year-Old Zircon on a 6,000 - 10,000 Year-Old Earth??

then explain polonium halos in granite.

I've no problem with this concept. This is from a thread I did about 6 years ago.

THE EARTH IS 6,000 YEARS OLD

It's a sad thing that many Christians have an appalling lack of biblical understanding, that at times enables our enemies to run rings around us. To take one example: You often see or read of mockers in the media saying words to the effect that: "The bible is inaccurate because it says that the earth is only 6,000 years old."

But the bible also says...2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

You can easily work out for yourself that if you multiply 360 days (lunar years) x 6,000 x 1,000 that you get a figure of well over 2 billion years. Which also leaves plenty of room for quite a few 1,000 year periods to pass as single days.

No doubt some carping evolutionist will start whingeing that "the bible is still inaccurate because the earth is 6 billion (or whatever) years old. And I've got two good answers to that one.

Firstly: Just because you have blind faith in (a) the inherent accuracy of their scientific instruments. (b) The true scientific integrity of those doing the laboratory work. (c) That they cannot be fooled by false readings and/or assumptions. Pleeeeeeeeze do not expect me to take your shaky assumptions at face value. I know for a fact that false science is being used to bamboozle everyone into believing what they say about 'global warming', so why should I give you the benefit of the doubt.

Secondly: Try and explain this one away. We are told in the story of creation that the earth was formed from the small stuff that was left over after the creation of the universe. Therefore it should be quite reasonable to expect that for instance one group of about 500 million cubic miles of rock that outcrops on the earth's surface is perhaps 6 billion or so years old. Another outcrop of perhaps 200 million cubic miles could be 3 or 4 billion years old. And so on.

To sum up. If the material that was used to make the earth was in existence before the earth was formed, then obviously it is older than the earth.

So if in the future you hear some idiot spouting off about "the bible being inaccurate because it says that the earth is only 6,000 years old," you can correct them.

Debunked a long time ago, you bibletards need to read more than one book.

Cool story bro. How did they prove that the lead atom in the zircon originated here on earth when it cooled off?

6,000 years is NOT a required christian belief or teaching at all. The first time it was popularized was by Bronowski in The Ascent of Man.


Now Christ haters and bigots bring it up all the time. Please do something harmful to yourself. Oh you already did by promoting that lie.

:angry_face:

More ignorant creationist smoke and mirrors.


"Gentry's polonium halo hypothesis for a young Earth fails, or is inconclusive for, all tests. Gentry's entire thesis is built on a compounded set of assumptions. He is unable to demonstrate that concentric haloes in mica are caused uniquely by alpha particles resulting from the decay of polonium isotopes. His samples are not from "primordial" pieces of the Earth's original crust, but from rocks which have been extensively reworked. Finally, his hypothesis cannot accommodate the many alternative lines of evidence that demonstrate a great age for the Earth. Gentry rationalizes any evidence which contradicts his hypothesis by proposing three "singularities" - one time divine interventions - over the past 6000 years. Of course, supernatural events and processes fall outside the realm of scientific investigations to address. As with the idea of variable radioactive decay rates, once Gentry moves beyond the realm of physical laws, his arguments fail to have any scientific usefulness. If divine action is necessary to fit the halo hypothesis into some consistent model of Earth history, why waste all that time trying to argue about the origins of the haloes based on current scientific theory? This is where most Creationist arguments break down when they try to adopt the language and trappings of science. Trying to prove a religious premise is itself an act of faith, not science.

In the end, Gentry's young Earth proposal, based on years of measuring discoloration haloes, is nothing more than a high-tech version of the Creationist "Omphalos" argument. This is the late nineteenth century proposition that while God created the Earth just 6,000 years ago according to the Genesis account, He made everything appear old. Unfortunately, because Gentry has published his original work on haloes in reputable scientific journals, a number of basic geology and mineralogy text books still state that microscopic discoloration haloes in mica are the result of polonium decay."

[link to www.talkorigins.org]

[link to www.csun.edu]

Could have come from space.
hell everything is/was stardust ultimately

I invite you to come to Utah and visit the Museum of Ancient Life. It has one of the largest collections of ancient fossils in the world, and it is laid out in an incredibly informative manner.

You can look at fossils taken from slabs of granite, or entire slabs of granite, in chronological order of the the time these creatures lived and died on this earth. You never see dinosaur bones being mixed in with the fossils from the Cambrian or Ordovician periods. This is because there were no dinosaurs then, they hadn't evolved yet. You can see with your own eyes the changes that took place over hundreds of millions of years.

It's quite extraordinary.

Actual artifacts, dug from the earth, layer by painstaking layer - not thrown about haphazardly like leftover pieces of a newly forming universe - things you can touch and see.

Much more convincing than a book written by fools.

This is an interesting leap of faith. I was digging in my garden and found some insect carcasses in there, but did not find a deer, elephant or bear skeleton. Does that mean that deer, elephant and bear do not exist right now, or does that mean that none died and were fossilized in the locations I have looked at yet?

another boring thread and yes I took the time to write in it...

It would be a leap of faith if not for the quantity of fossil digs that have been done and the pattern of absolutely NO fossils from later periods being found intermingled with those of earlier periods.

It's all layer upon layer, oldest at the bottom.

It makes for a fairly compelling case.

Unlike religion, though, if something were found that changed our vision of the distant past, that turned our current theories on their heads, the science books would be rewritten.

Those of us seeking true knowledge would not cling to falsities just to lay claim to some make-believe status that zealots seem to believe makes them super duper special.

If some kind of evidence comes along that changes the game and the story, then the game and the story will change and we will continue digging and trying to refine our knowledge.

That's the beauty of science.

Much as in this instance - the finding of this single specimen may fundamentally change what is understood about the formation of our planet and even the development of life.

It's amazing to live during a time when discoveries like this are being made and shared openly, as opposed to in the Dark Ages when religion reigned supreme and knowledge and discovery and curiosity were punishable by torture and death. All in the name of preserving the integrity of a book of fables so fraught with inaccuracy that even medieval scientific efforts could disprove its validity.

...the science books would be rewritten.
{/quote}

That's what you believe.

Your thought processes are no different than a religious persons when it comes down to it.

The labels may be different, but the faith is unmistakable.

And what you put your faith into, OP, may be shinier and still has that new car smell, but the blind spots are all the same.

You do have a religion.

is the Book of Morman still okay?

I find it amusing of those who think either The Bible or science can exist.....but not both.

Making up your typicle BS, since you flunked math, and biology?

But then you wouldn't get to have the whole religion vs. anti-religion religious battles and Bill Nye teepee specials…

6000 years of white history. Google it. You johnny come lately's crack me up.

Did I say tp?

[link to www.youtube.com]

You can use a particle accelerator to "age" something.

OP, I'm not religious but you're the tard. Human beings need to wake up. Governments have technology that can already manipulate objects.

Earth is couple of billion years old, the dinosaurs was there fertilize the Earth.. Just because the Genesis was written just over 6000 years ago does not mean the Earth is 6000 years old. Prehistoric pre-human had been on earth some 800,000 years. They was there before the last few dinosaurs died like the wooly mammoths. When Atlantis sunk because of some inept scientists in that time was playing with fire which shook the very foundation of Earth tectonic plates that did sink mountains and raise the sea bed into lands.

The Lord reprimand ... you know which race ... so we had nudges us from 3.6 if not 3.7 max technologies straight back to 3.0. At the same time inflicted with leprosy from the destruction straight back to prehistoric ages.

The white race arrive before Atlantis was build and there was many primitive races on Earth and due to malfunction on one of our Mothership that the other Mothership acknowledge the problem and promised to come back to rescue us. At first we were having trouble with the Sun and so we only come out at night because our Sun was blue and gave us energy that we did not need to eat. The Indian Hopi can tell you about the White race from the stars. Over time and generation some had become unruly and forgotten our ancestors and became sceptic and so they start to indulge the fruits, then vegetables and generation later lead to meat.

The unruly lots became arrogant and they sort of became scientists and experiment cruelly with animals with primitive pre-human is why you see the like of a human like minotaurs with bull head and such was real and then the other went further to experiment with some sort of thing which I cannot tell you for the sake of repeating the pattern that did blew up Atlantis that the Earth wobbled and the Axis Shifted with lands submerged and raise. Other did come to help us for a while before they depart.

This is why you have Bermuda Triangle doing weird things today. this is part of Atlantis underwater. Fast forward, we are now at 3.2 technologies. This is what happen as though we came here to help other primitive advance into human on some sort of mission. Now tptb is repeating the same crap but this time with materials weapon of mass destructions and weather manipulations.

Nether the less we are near the end of the final chastity that the sinners will stay on 3rd dimensions universal planets depending how dense theirs burden, and the the rest will proceed into 5th dimensions and that is the gift and a great leap from the 4th.

They had theirs chance.

I love your defence but has one or two holes in it.

Uranium has a known life and will turn to lead but geological turmoil will mess with the age results on that .
Zircon has same problem but the clock resets under similar conditions and the evil scientist have found the oldest to be 4.4 billion years .
The age of earth is taken as the combined results of both materials age tested .

There is another dangerous idea on rocks and it involves the earth recycling it by volcanisim and subduction but no mater what the oldest rocks so far test to the dates given.

How long does it take for uranium to turn to lead and have we been around long enough to watch. Just wondering.

[link to geology.about.com]

Tech stuff in the link above