Re: Need some assistance

r norman wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:19:13 GMT, "Feather Forestwalker"
<feather@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"r norman" <r_s_norman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:lvt7831uoha431hi0a1kjolge8houh2b66@xxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:31:20 -0700, "Feather Forestwalker"
<feather@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I need information from either side of
the ongoing (over 100 year) debate

. . .my pastor has put me on the trail of some articles relating to the
study of Deep Time.

His old school buddy, recently found, is a scientist at an extremely
well-accredited University here in the states. He is a geologic evolutionist
and is asking my pastor to intelligently debate the topic of Deep Time
(ancient planet theory) vs. Creationism, (younger planet theory).

We are looking for links to articles - I have Googled some. I am not seeking
debate on the subject; merely information from various locations which would
support the theory as well as debunk it, without heated debate, anger or
name-calling. Just a good few articles on the subjects from both sides.

Thanks in advance; I will be checking back regularly.

Feather

You indicated you have already googled, but here is just a single
instance of many on the age of the universe:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/age.html

One of the most important concepts in this kind of science is that
there are a tremendous number of ways of knowing that the universe,
our solar system, and our planet is billions of years old (the exact
number of billions depending on which system you look at). The age of
material samples on earth is generally now determined by various
techniques of radioactive dating. The age of the universe is based on
various theories of star formation and evolution (yes, I used the word
deliberately; there are kinds of evolution other than biological).
And there are cosmological theories. And there are all sorts of
validation for the theories other than the circular argument based on
age. But most important of all is the extremely important concept
that many very different types of measurement of age, all totally
independent of each other, tend to agree quite accurately on the
result. Yes, there have been arguments about the exact age and the
number has changed over time because of refinements in technique and
theory. But those arguments and adjustments are minor; whether the
earth is 13 billion or 14 billion or 13.7 billion or exactly what is
not the argument. The argument is whether it is over 10 billion or
under 10 thousand and that is a million-fold difference.

It really is hard to give you specific details. Any elementary
geology or astronomy or cosmology book will have a lot of details. But
the evidence is so widespread, so consistent, so overwhelming, that
all of modern science simply goes with the multi-billion year fact.
There is nowhere I know where you can find a "discussion" or
"alternatives" because there is nothing to discuss. On one hand, you
accept science, in a form which is also perfectly consistent with a
liberal interpretation of scripture and with the belief of most modern
religions. On the other, you reject reason, evidence, and
"materialistic reductionism" outright and accept purely on faith a
literal interpretation of translations of texts that are then claimed
to be the literal, unalterable, words of God. So-called "scientific"
claims for a young earth are simply untenable by all accepted science.
I appreciate the link.

Your comments are also interesting; however, I am looking for articles on the subject which will give both sides of the argument.

I will copy and print your comments with your permission, of course

Feather

You have my permission to use anything I say with or without
attribution. However note the corrections pointed out by Mike
Dworetsky -- I miswrote that the "earth" is 13.7 billion years old
when, of course, it is the entire universe that is that old. The
earth itself is considerably younger, only some 4 billion but the
oldest rocks that we can find (except for extraterrestrial objects)
are less than one billion.

This didn't seem right, since I know that some of the rock in the Canadian Shield (greenstone, I think) is several billion years old, and was at the root of some large mountains. (If you know the Canadian Shield, you will know that that was a *long* time ago.)

Being as how we are on t.o., perhaps a reference to the t.o.org faqs would be in order:

"The oldest rocks which have been found so far (on the Earth) date to about 3.8 to 3.9 billion years ago (by several radiometric dating methods). Some of these rocks are sedimentary, and include minerals which are themselves as old as 4.1 to 4.2 billion years. Rocks of this age are relatively rare, however rocks that are at least 3.5 billion years in age have been found on North America, Greenland, Australia, Africa, and Asia."

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

And for you, Feather, you might want to see how the 'sides' in this 'argument' deal with correction. In my experience, old earth types are generally happy to be corrected with better information; young earth types tend to try to explain away the information that would seem to contradict them.

<snip>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Need some assistance
    ... and is asking my pastor to intelligently debate the topic of Deep Time ... We are looking for links to articles - I have Googled some. ... instance of many on the age of the universe: ... all of modern science simply goes with the multi-billion year fact. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Need some assistance
    ... and is asking my pastor to intelligently debate the topic of Deep Time ... We are looking for links to articles - I have Googled some. ... instance of many on the age of the universe: ... all of modern science simply goes with the multi-billion year fact. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Need some assistance
    ... and is asking my pastor to intelligently debate the topic of Deep Time ... We are looking for links to articles - I have Googled some. ... instance of many on the age of the universe: ... all of modern science simply goes with the multi-billion year fact. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Need some assistance
    ... and is asking my pastor to intelligently debate the topic of Deep Time ... instance of many on the age of the universe: ... there are a tremendous number of ways of knowing that the universe, ... earth is 13 billion or 14 billion or 13.7 billion or exactly what is ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Need some assistance
    ... and is asking my pastor to intelligently debate the topic of Deep Time ... We are looking for links to articles - I have Googled some. ... instance of many on the age of the universe: ... earth is 13 billion or 14 billion or 13.7 billion or exactly what is ...
    (talk.origins)