How Old Is The Earth, the Universe and our species?

[headheart]

How Old Is The Earth, the Universe and our species?

Earth, Universe and our species How Old.jpg

I know that I'm supposed to say that the earth is somewhere between 6 000 and 10 000 years, that the Universe is 4.55 billion years old and that our species has evolved over roughly 100 000 years.

I'd like to read some authoritative literature about this as the only books I have are really old. I trust that seeing as you Natural Science wizards have been posting here for years you'll be able to point me to the best possible books, literature and information on this.

1. The Earth
2. The Universe
3. Our species


Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking and Arthur C. Clarke - God, The Universe and Everything Else (1988)

Peace,
Eric

[phank]

If you want specific sources, I'd use Google just like anyone else. The earth and universe seem by now quite solidly dated to within 1% or less. The age of the human species has been difficult to determine, because biology is kind of messy. Last I read, a fairly long list of species within genus homo have been identified, with up to 6 living concurrently. But as has been hammered out on other threads, "species" is a hazy term. The evidence is pretty strong now that H. Sapiens interbred with H. Neandertalis, making it possible that the Neandertals were assimilated rather than went separately extinct. Anyway, estimates current are that H. Sapiens branched off and became a separate new species around 200,000 years ago (given that branching takes a long time by itself).

[magellan004]

How Old Is The Earth, the Universe and our species?

Earth, Universe and our species How Old.jpg

I know that I'm supposed to say that the earth is somewhere between 6 000 and 10 000 years, that the Universe is 4.55 billion years old and that our species has evolved over roughly 100 000 years.

I'd like to read some authoritative literature about this as the only books I have are really old. I trust that seeing as you Natural Science wizards have been posting here for years you'll be able to point me to the best possible books, literature and information on this.

1. The Earth
2. The Universe
3. Our species


Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking and Arthur C. Clarke - God, The Universe and Everything Else (1988)

Peace,
Eric

There is a good book that I got hold of which covers these topics. It's been a best seller for ages so it should be fairly easy to access a copy and as far as authoritative - there's none better. It's called The Bible. I suggest that as a starting place.

Magellan

[phank]

No kidding, it taught clownie everything he knows about science.

[headheart]

There is a good book that I got hold of which covers these topics. It's been a best seller for ages so it should be fairly easy to access a copy and as far as authoritative - there's none better. It's called The Bible. I suggest that as a starting place.

Magellan

That's cute but not at all helpful. I am referring to a book which takes into consideration all the up-to-date research that we as a people have done concerning these matters. If you are going to make sport in this thread, I suggest you find another place to play.

Goodbye.
Eric

[headheart]

If you want specific sources, I'd use Google just like anyone else.

I have found that sort of research tends towards the same as jumping off a bridge without your bungy chord properly fixed. Google it ain't an answer to anything at all. It's like saying 'Go to your library' or 'Ask someone else I don't know' So which is? Let's play 'The Weakest Link'

The earth and universe seem by now quite solidly dated to within 1% or less.

Yes, I read that at TALK ORIGINS too. I'm interested in books by Geologists and the like who've actually done the work and can describe the dating processes involved. I'm in earnest here and would prefer you find another thread to play on, if are not.

The age of the human species has been difficult to determine, because biology is kind of messy. Last I read, a fairly long list of species within genus homo have been identified, with up to 6 living concurrently. But as has been hammered out on other threads, "species" is a hazy term. The evidence is pretty strong now that H. Sapiens interbred with H. Neandertalis, making it possible that the Neandertals were assimilated rather than went separately extinct. Anyway, estimates current are that H. Sapiens branched off and became a separate new species around 200,000 years ago (given that branching takes a long time by itself).

Now this is a bit better but I'm more interested in reading from someone who's up on the details and who has some grounding in Anthropology not what I learned from Google and picked up from reading the forum posts.

I reiterate my o.p. questions: (with a few adds for emphasis)

I'd like to read some authoritative literature about this as the only books I have are really old. I trust that seeing as you Natural Science wizards have been posting here for years you'll be able to point me to the best possible books, literature and information on this.

1. The Earth
2. The Universe
3. Our species

I've basically read and studied the literature from Kent Hovind and some of the book by Henry Morris about Creation Science and would like to move up to some current reading on the subject, so if you have anything that might be useful to this ex-YEC'ist then I'd greatly appreciate that. I'm not convinced that books with that sort of flavor can help me as too the ID type agenda, so anything which is a thoroughgoing deal with the type of question regarding age, dating and fossils will be greatly appreciated.

So, 'Let's play the weakest link'


The Weakest Link - Puppets Special - 28th December 2007

Peace,
Eric.

[magellan004]

That's cute but not at all helpful. I am referring to a book which takes into consideration all the up-to-date research that we as a people have done concerning these matters. If you are going to make sport in this thread, I suggest you find another place to play.

Goodbye.
Eric

I see from another thread that you are not anti-Bible. I'm guessing you think the Bible needs to play second fiddle to what 'we' discover.

I won't bother you again in this thread. I think you are sincere, so that's ok with me.

Magellan

[headheart]

I see from another thread that you are not anti-Bible. I'm guessing you think the Bible needs to play second fiddle to what 'we' discover.

That's correct, I'm certainly not anti-Bible and I don't believe that the Bible should play second fiddle to what 'we' discover. As I have said in the past, it's not that kind of book/s.

It's certainly becoming clear to me that those who want to push the Bible to one side and just talk Science often do so for reasons that are based on prejudice rather than a mature understanding of the function of sacred texts, though clearly not all.

I used to be a King James Only-guy and BOOM!!!! how messed up was that, but after critical study of the text and years of plunging into the depths of Theology and Christian Philosophy I think I've emerged with a strong sense that the Bible needs to be read contextually and as Science was not as developed (or outspoken) as it is in our time, we need to approach it very differently. It's much too complicated to unpack this in detail here, suffice to say I enjoy reading and studying my Bible as too studying Biology and Physics etc. etc. etc (anything that grabs my interest - I tend to listen to a lot of lectures from the Faraday Institute of Science and Religion, but am open to reading anything that has a good peer review and is not just some pseudo scientific unsupported jibber-jabber) In short, I like reading really GOOD books!!!!

I won't bother you again in this thread. I think you are sincere, so that's ok with me.

Magellan

Your thinking is as welcome as the next guy as long as you are open to the thoughts of others and don't lock down on a view and spoil the thread. It's a common problem when folks have their beliefs and their thought processes too tightly locked together.

Peace,
Eric

[magellan004]

That's correct, I'm certainly not anti-Bible and I don't believe that the Bible should play second fiddle to what 'we' discover. As I have said in the past, it's not that kind of book/s.

It's certainly becoming clear to me that those who want to push the Bible to one side and just talk Science often do so for reasons that are based on prejudice rather than a mature understanding of the function of sacred texts, though clearly not all.

I used to be a King James Only-guy and BOOM!!!! how messed up was that, but after critical study of the text and years of plunging into the depths of Theology and Christian Philosophy I think I've emerged with a strong sense that the Bible needs to be read contextually and as Science was not as developed (or outspoken) as it is in our time, we need to approach it very differently. It's much too complicated to unpack this in detail here, suffice to say I enjoy reading and studying my Bible as too studying Biology and Physics etc. etc. etc (anything that grabs my interest - I tend to listen to a lot of lectures from the Faraday Institute of Science and Religion, but am open to reading anything that has a good peer review and is not just some pseudo scientific unsupported jibber-jabber) In short, I like reading really GOOD books!!!!




Your thinking is as welcome as the next guy as long as you are open to the thoughts of others and don't lock down on a view and spoil the thread. It's a common problem when folks have their beliefs and their thought processes too tightly locked together.

Peace,
Eric

You asked for a book and I suggested a book.
I didn't lock down anything. You did.
Can I stay in your thread?

Magellan

[firstfloor]

Re. orginal question. Wikipedia a perfectly good place to start. Easy to find pages give this information and links to further reading.
The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years (4.54 × 10^9 years ± 1%).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
The age of the universe is the time elapsed since the Big Bang. The best current estimate of the age of the universe is 13.75 ± 0.11 billion years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe
Humans (known taxonomically as Homo sapiens, Latin for "wise man" or "knowing man") are the only living species in the Homo genus. Anatomically modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago, reaching full behavioral modernity around 50,000 years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

[headheart]

You asked for a book and I suggested a book.
I didn't lock down anything. You did.
Can I stay in your thread?

Magellan

That's correct:

You wrote:

'There is a good book that I got hold of which covers these topics. It's been a best seller for ages so it should be fairly easy to access a copy and as far as authoritative - there's none better. It's called The Bible. I suggest that as a starting place.'

Then you need to show how your book choice answers the three questions that are in my opening post, that is if you can actually show the age of the earth, the universe and our species from it's 66 books?

Good luck,
Eric.

[headheart]

Re. orginal question. Wikipedia a perfectly good place to start. Easy to find pages give this information and links to further reading.
The age of the Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years (4.54 × 10^9 years ± 1%).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
The age of the universe is the time elapsed since the Big Bang. The best current estimate of the age of the universe is 13.75 ± 0.11 billion years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe
Humans (known taxonomically as Homo sapiens, Latin for "wise man" or "knowing man") are the only living species in the Homo genus. Anatomically modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago, reaching full behavioral modernity around 50,000 years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

Okay, so we gonna do W.O.E. Now tell me how many of the books and articles referenced there have you actually read and which one's do you recommend I should begin with? Remember, I'm the novice here and you're the one who's guiding me to peer-reviewed and scholarly works that will help me get a better understanding of this. Okay?
I'm not saying I mind going to W.O.E, it's just that it's not often the most reliable place to get one's facts from. You know what I mean?

Thanks anyhow.

Peace,
Eric.

[phank]

You've been given a good starting point, although even this much is expecting others to do your homework for you. Now you demand they do even more of your homework. What you should do is what others do who are curious - start reading. One source leads to another. Eventually you understand. Or do you expect others to do your understanding for you too?

[headheart]

firstfloor,

I'll take each W.O.E reference one at a time and starting with the age of the Earth:

The Earth.jpg
From: Journey To The Center of the Earth by Susan Kruglinski (Discover Magazine)

1. "Age of the Earth". U.S. Geological Survey. 1997. Archived from the original on 23 December 2005. Retrieved 2006-01-10.
2. Dalrymple, G. Brent (2001). "The age of the Earth in the twentieth century: a problem (mostly) solved". Special Publications, Geological Society of London 190 (1): 205–221.
3. Manhesa, Gérard; Allègre, Claude J.; Dupréa, Bernard; and Hamelin, Bruno (1980). "Lead isotope study of basic-ultrabasic layered complexes: Speculations about the age of the earth and primitive mantle characteristics". Earth and Planetary Science Letters 47 (3): 370–382.

That's certainly a healthy collection.
Now how many of these have you read and which one's do you think would be most helpful in my journey from YEC and Creation Science to good understanding of the age of the Earth.

Universe to follow, in a bit.

Peace,
Eric

[phank]

Why not read them yourself? What if someone else's idea of a good source is different from yours?