/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12759481]

https://conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_an_Old_Earth
>If each of the following 64 counterexamples to an Old Earth were to have merely a 10% chance of being valid, then the probability that the Earth is billions of years old is less than one half of 1%.
>In other words, the Earth must be young with a likelihood of over 99.6%.[2]
Uh... /sci/???? How the fuck do you refute this? There's probably even more counterexamples, too.

[Anonymous No.12759492]

>>12759481
>>If each of the following 64 counterexamples to an Old Earth were to have merely a 10% chance of being valid,
Unfortunately all of them have a near-zero chance of being valid.

[Anonymous No.12759506]

>>12759481
>cite the sumerian kings list as supporting young earth
>sumerian kings list says that human civilization has existed for hundreds of thousands of years
???

[Anonymous No.12759521]

>>12759481
yes anon, the earth is 1 second old

[Anonymous No.12759528]

>>12759481
light has a finite speed
there are billions of examples of objects measured to be from hundreds of thousands to billions of lightyears away from us

[Anonymous No.12759536]

>>12759528
>Earth

t. Brainlet

[Anonymous No.12759551]

>>12759481
How the fuck do you have "counter examples" to Old Earth? That's retarded, at best you have stuff that's dated to be very recent. You can have a trillion of those and it still means nothing.
Not giving them clicks though.

[Anonymous No.12759555]

>>12759551
They claim that radiometric dating is unfalsifiable and therefore invalid.

[Anonymous No.12759557]

>>12759536
It still invalidates a 6000 year old universe. "let there be light", remember?

[Anonymous No.12759564]

>>12759555
It's trivial to falsify, prove the decay rate of a specific isotope is highly variable under some circumstances.

[Anonymous No.12759569]

>>12759481
>Conservapedia
OP, I'm sorry to say, you're not even a midwit. You're a legit idiot.

[Anonymous No.12759574]

>>12759569
Not an argument

[Anonymous No.12759580]

>>12759574
why?

[Anonymous No.12759613]

>>12759580
Because it literally isn't

[Anonymous No.12759616]

>>12759613
it is

[Anonymous No.12759617]

>>12759616
No

[Anonymous No.12759621]

>>12759617
it is if i believe so, if you think different go fuck yourself

[Anonymous No.12759628]

>>12759621
Holy shit you're a retard and I hate you personally

[Anonymous No.12759636]

>>12759628
i think the same about you, go fuck yourself

[Anonymous No.12759669]

/x/ is over there creationism kun

[Anonymous No.12759775]

>Blue-eyed people are known to be only 6,000 to 10,000 years old. Moreover, the number of blue-eyed people is steadily diminishing, further suggesting that humans have not been in existence long.
I'm sorry what does it have to do with the age of earth

[Anonymous No.12759798]

>>12759775
Only people with blue eyes are human

[Anonymous No.12759807]

>>12759798
True, but what about the age of earth

[Anonymous No.12759815]

>>12759807
people without blue eyes are not human, the earth is blue, therefore, it was created for humans only

[Anonymous No.12760034]

I posit that the earth is destroyed every day at 12:00 Central Time and then is immediately reconstructed exactly as it was before. This has been happening for billions of years. In this sense, the Earth is very young.

[Anonymous No.12760438]

>>12759492
fpbp lol

[Anonymous No.12760465]

>conservapedia

[Anonymous No.12760473]

>Ancient cultures all over the world built ziggurat-like structures, such as the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Mesoamericans. This is strong evidence that they originated from one area and that the Tower of Babel was a real, ziggurat-shaped tower.
>Many different cultures throughout history have legends and realistic accounts from historians of dragons. There is very strong evidence that dinosaurs were alive and a very real part of ancient cultures (and even some more recent ones), affirming a young Earth and the biblical account of origins.[21][22] In fact, there have been some reports of dinosaurs living in the remote jungles of Africa today.
>The interior of the earth is as hot as the sun—far hotter than atheists thought—and such heat would have dissipated and the radioactivity decayed if the earth were old.
Some real gems in here. I love how they jump from random facts to "strong evidence"

[Anonymous No.12760494]

>>12759481
What's wrong with those people? I mean, I am mostly fine with people believing in big ol' salty Santa Claus in the sky, but at some point you also have to concede some irrefragable truth. Does being conservative also implies being a schizo?

[Anonymous No.12760499]

>>12759492
Just wait until Trump is inaugurated on March 4, you fuckers won't be laughing then.

[Anonymous No.12760511]

>>12759506
>>sumerian kings list says that human civilization has existed for hundreds of thousands of years
Is thsi real

[Anonymous No.12760528]

>>12759481
>>>/reddit/ is that way

[Anonymous No.12760532]

> this demonstrates that chimpanzees descended from a large initial population while humans have descended from a much smaller one, which indeed we know to have been two people.
This is gold.

[Anonymous No.12760541]

>>12760473
I'm really confused, how does the existence of dragons mean that the Earth is 6000 - 10,000 years old? Why are they talking about dragons at all? Also if they're finding dinosaurs in Africa wouldn't this just mean that dinosaurs aren't extinct? I don't understand any of this.

[Anonymous No.12760550]

>>12760541
>I don't understand any of this.
Don't worry anon, I think that the people who wrote that didn't either.

[Anonymous No.12760565]

>>12760511
>After the kingship descended from heaven, the kingship was in Eridug. In Eridug, Alulim became king; he ruled for 28800 years. Alaljar ruled for 36000 years. 2 kings; they ruled for 64800 years. Then Eridug fell and the kingship was taken to Bad-tibira. In Bad-tibira, En-men-lu-ana ruled for 43200 years. En-men-gal-ana ruled for 28800 years. Dumuzid, the shepherd, ruled for 36000 years. 3 kings; they ruled for 108000 years. Then Bad-tibira fell and the kingship was taken to Larag. In Larag, En-sipad-zid-ana ruled for 28800 years. 1 king; he ruled for 28800 years. Then Larag fell and the kingship was taken to Zimbir. In Zimbir, En-men-dur-ana became king; he ruled for 21000 years. 1 king; he ruled for 21000 years. Then Zimbir fell and the kingship was taken to Curuppag. In Curuppag, Ubara-Tutu became king; he ruled for 18600 years. 1 king; he ruled for 18600 years. In 5 cities 8 kings; they ruled for 241200 years. Then the flood swept over.

That's just the antediluvian rulers. The list then goes on to list 20 other dynasties after the flood. Some of the later ones (with less fantastical lengths of rule) have been verified with archaeological evidence.

[Anonymous No.12760583]

>The oldest star in the universe is only 6000 light years away from Earth, precisely as predicted by the Bible and a Young Earth model.

[Anonymous No.12760647]

>>12760565
those are clearly alien rulers with alien lifespans

[Anonymous No.12760655]

>>12760647
Dummy, it says that these rulers came AFTER the kingship descended from heaven, which is after the gods (aliens) gave their authority of rule to human kings.

[Anonymous No.12760677]

>>12759481
>conservapedia
lol

[Anonymous No.12760702]

>While critics like to say the biblical flood account is descended from other stories, in reality, it is the other way around, as the biblical flood account is far superior to any flood legend in multiple ways.[8] Creation legends also exist, but once again, the biblical account is superior.
>superior
What does that even mean?

[Anonymous No.12760719]

>>12760647
>>12760565
>>12759506

At the very least, I have a hard time imagining the exact brain we have now spent 90,000 years being cavemen scavengers then all of the sudden advanced into civilization in the last 10,000.

People are gonna solve problems no matter when they exist. There is almost no reason to believe people weren't sumerian tier for the last 100,000 years or more

>Egypt emerged with a full written language, building, and domesticated crops out of nowhere.

>sumerians had spelt grain immediately with no records of how they domesticated it.

[Anonymous No.12760767]

>>12760719
You don't need civilization to have domesticated crops, agriculture, animal husbandry or even construction. Humans had those things long before Egypt or Sumer, they just didn't settle into a complex urban system with them. There's even evidence of sewage systems in Catalhoyuk

[Anonymous No.12760823]

>>12760677
lowqual bait

[Anonymous No.12760923]

>>12760767
I would argue that IS civilization and ancient record that date kings and ages of man way back are real records regarding countless ancient civilizations.

Most evidence is gone, or wrongly accredited to more recent, but still ancient civilizations who built on top of the old ones.

Just my take

[Anonymous No.12760954]

>>12760655
I interpreted that to mean that the race of kings came from heaven. How could a human king have a lifespan that long? They are at least a hybrid race.

[Anonymous No.12760980]

>>12759481
>https://conservapedia.com
Thank you for reminding me this place existed.

[Anonymous No.12760991]

>>12760954
It's kingship (nam-lugal), not kings (lugal-le-ne) or gods (dijir-re-ne). It refers to the specific authority that the king had, derived from the gods who in turn had their power and authority derived from An. It is also important to note the difference between the king (lugal), who was the supreme authority in Sumer, and the city-leader or overseer (ensi).

As for the lifespans, it has to do with the degeneration of the human race. Over the different dynasties, the lifespans of the rulers continue to diminish until we reach spans that would make sense to us.

[Anonymous No.12761009]

>>12760991
I understand that kingship doesn't mean king. But there's really nothing there that explicitly says that these are human kings.
For example, when you talk about the degeneration of the human race, that could just be due to mixing of the alien genes within the pure human population and the gradual reduction of their lifespans as a result.
I thought the aliens ruled over the humans and then left hybrids to keep an eye on the human population anyway. I see no other plausible way to say that the human race just "degenerated" since there has to be a reason for this degeneration. Dilution of the alien genes in the human gene pool is the only thing I can think of.

[Anonymous No.12761029]

>first point in their list is ancient civilizations and their remnants
>jihau artifacts from China date back earlier than their civilizations, aboriginal Australian remains date back even earlier

Their first point was intellectually dishonest - why waste your time with the rest?

[Anonymous No.12761070]

>>12760823
low iq post

[Anonymous No.12761077]

>The interior of the earth is as hot as the sun—far hotter than atheists thought—and such heat would have dissipated and the radioactivity decayed if the earth were old.[61]

?????????

Is this what it feels like to have a brain aneurysm can I'm sure shit getting one reading this nonsense.

[Anonymous No.12761538]

>>12760565
why were people so retarded back then? something in the water they drank?

[El Arcón No.12761546]

[Anonymous No.12761565]

I'm surprised they didn't try using the second law of thermodynamics as evidence for a 10,000 - 6,000-year-old Earth.

[Anonymous No.12761570]

>>12759815
Humans aren't blue, the earth is blue, therefore humans aren't from earth

[Anonymous No.12761576]

>Fossils have been found, such as footprints, showing that dinosaurs and mammals lived together at the same time.
What? I don't think anyone was arguing that mammals and dinosaurs coexisted.

[Anonymous No.12761777]

>>12760702
It means the author of the article believes in that specific creation myth, so it's superior in his mind.

[Anonymous No.12761786]

>>12761565
That's on the Counterexamples of Evolution page, item number three.

[Anonymous No.12761902]

>>12761565
pseud retards love that one. Had a mutt on a different board claiming global warming violates the first law, kek.

[Anonymous No.12761939]

>conservapedia
The best bait thread in a while

[Anonymous No.12761951]

>>12760499
Trump isn't a fucking CIA-tier conspiracy theorist (flat and young earthers), he just shouts a lot.

[Anonymous No.12762281]

>>12761009
Or maybe they are talking about ruling dynasties and as we approach the present more are remembered?

[Anonymous No.12762409]

>>12762281
They say
>2 kings
here >>12760565
and
>Dumuzid, the shepherd, ruled for 36000 years.
then
>3 kings; they ruled for 108000 years
this seems to be clear about it not being a dynasty

[Anonymous No.12762532]

>>12759481
> The intelligence of humans is rapidly declining, whether measured by SAT scores,[38] music, personal letters,[39] quality of political debates,[40] the quality of news articles,[41] and many other measures. This means that if one goes back far enough, intelligence would measure at ridiculous heights, if humans were even tens of thousands of years old.
Holy kek.

[Anonymous No.12763781]

>>12759564
>nigger takes paternity test and finds out he spawned a niglet
>ya see uhhh
*smacks lips*
>aint meen shit cuz uhhhhhh
*steals purse*
>mans is unfalseifyable nigga
>mean tht tiny lil nigga aint mine bruh

[Anonymous No.12763993]

>>12760719
Egypt and Sumer didn't pop out of nowhere. Neolithic Revolution in the Middle East happened c. 10000 BC, seven thousand years before Sumer became the first human civilisation - consider that only five thousand years have passed since the beginning of Sumer until now. Lots of things happened during those seven thousand years. Also, consider that technology hasn't been developing at a constant rate throughot history, this rate has been exponentially rising as human populations grew and trade networks expanded - consider, for example, that the time gap between the construction of the Great Pyramids of Giza and reign of Cleopatra is bigger than the time gap between reign of Cleopatra and ourselves.

[Anonymous No.12764038]

>>12759775
I think that they're trying to say that all blue eyed people would have disappeared by now if the earth was older.
The argument might be saying that since evolution is wrong, then all blue eyed people had to exist with the original humans, as such the original humans had to have appeared recently, or else all the blue eyes (recessive gene niggers) would have died out.
Really weird circular argument, but whatever.

[Anonymous No.12764084]

>>12760583
>if the universe is older than 6,000 years, than how come we can't see light from stars that are more than 6,000 lightyears away? Surely there would be stars farther way than 6,000 lightyears that would have light that reached Earth by now?
What do, /sci/?

[Anonymous No.12764098]

>>12759528
>implying these objects are not CGI

[Anonymous No.12764100]

>>12764084
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_Galaxy

[Anonymous No.12764103]

>>12764084
Btw this post is a joke, I know that we can see light from stars farther than 6k ly, and that the distance between a star and the earth had nothing to do with it's age.

[Anonymous No.12764124]

>>12764100
It's satan's work

[Anonymous No.12764140]

>>12764103
>>12764084
There's a whole lot worng with that statement:
>Claiming that the methods scientists' use to estimate star age are wrong, and then using the oldest star (whose age has been estimated using said methods) in your argument without giving any alternative method to measure age, depriving your argument of any evidence.
>If most stars were created at the same time, wouldn't we be seeing a huge ammount of new star of a similar age every year. With every year that passes, we wouldhave access too stars tahat are a lightyears farther away.

[Anonymous No.12764148]

>>12764100
And of course:
>if the unvierse were only 6000 years old, it would be impossible for us to see objects farther than 6,000 lightyears away.

[Anonymous No.12764162]

>>12764148
>>12764140
>>12764084
I keep coming back to this post because I have no idea what argument he was even trying to make. I'm getting caught up in trying to figure it out.
It sounds more like gibberish the more I think about it.

[Anonymous No.12764207]

>>12759481
The chance of them being valid is way less than 10%, probably hovering near zero.

[Anonymous No.12766465]

https://conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_the_Bible
>There are no Counterexamples to the Bible. This is in contrast with:
>62 Counterexamples to an Old ?
>52 Counterexamples to Evolution
>50 Counterexamples to Relativity
>5 Counterexamples to an Ice Age
>3 Counterexamples to String Theory
>Numerous Counterexamples to Global Warming (article not organized the same way)

[Anonymous No.12766475]

https://conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_the_Bible
>There are no Counterexamples to the Bible. This is in contrast with:
>62 Counterexamples to an Old Earth
>52 Counterexamples to Evolution
>50 Counterexamples to Relativity
>5 Counterexamples to an Ice Age
>3 Counterexamples to String Theory
>Numerous Counterexamples to Global Warming (article not organized the same way)

[Anonymous No.12766486]

>62 Counterexamples to an Old Earth
>52 Counterexamples to Evolution
>50 Counterexamples to Relativity
This is very sad to read

[Anonymous No.12766518]

>>12759481
>conservapedia
oh shit is it 2007

[Anonymous No.12766521]

Does conservapedia believe in complex numbers yet?

[Anonymous No.12766597]

>>12766518
It still talks about current issues
https://www.conservapedia.com/Biden_junta

[Anonymous No.12766613]

>>12766597
this is great

[Anonymous No.12766620]

>>12766521
https://conservapedia.com/Complex_number

[Anonymous No.12766657]

>>12766475
>3 counterexamples to string theory
Based???