Discussion on 'How much time has elapsed since Creation?'

(3) On February 08, 2008 at 10:07 am Quirkyquantummechanic [624] said:

Here's another idea, as written, but not posted owing to possible editing for being off-topic:

How much time has elapsed since Creation?

If the question deals with the creation of “everything” we see, the universe as a whole, the answer is about 13.7 billion years. The earth has been around for 4.5 to 4.6 billion years. Scientific data supports the ideas, and links are provided. But we need to look at a few things.

First, it has been suggested in another answer that abiogenesis is wrong. It cannot be! We are here, and life didn’t used to be! Something happened! We just disagree (or flat out don’t know) about the mechanism that animated the mud that jumpstarted life. Additionally, it is suggested in another answer, and in so many others on this topic, that the scientific community is pretty much behind the numbers offered here. They are. There is a reason. Actually a ton of them. The data compiled by radiographic dating are facts. But along with that it has also suggested that the majority of the scientific community has been behind something else that turned out to be dead wrong. And this, too, is absolutely correct. Yes, the majority of the scientists have been wrong before. Not about the sun and all the planets revolving about the earth. They were wrong about that, but we need to look at something else. We need to look at that same damn question: the age of the earth. So let’s look.

Earth’s accepted age was pretty much in line with Biblical thinking. (At least it was in the West. In India they had a “better” perspective). Scripture held that the earth was a few thousand to, maybe, ten thousand years old or so. And “everybody” was on board with this. The majority of scientists and scholars agreed. Then along comes this Scotsman named James Hutton. He looked at some layers of sedimentary rock - that were standing on end. And they had been “sedimented over” by more layers of sedimentary stuff. Ooo, snap! It took a looooog time to do this! Many tens of thousands, maybe (many) hundreds of thousands of years! A million! More! He brought his finding to the scientific community. You can imagine what happened.

In the late 1700's when Hutton made his pitch, he was met with a wall of resistance. Particularly from Bible-loving Christians. They were angry. Outraged! They had a problem with his ideas. He was damned by the Faithful. But it turns out that the “majority of the scientific community” was wrong. It has now been suggested that once again that the majority of the scientific community is wrong. Why? Because a book, the Bible, a text that has literally been “pieced together” from bits of this and bits of that, and, throughout its life has been the subject of translations, interpretations, edits, meetings, arguments, agreements, more edits, and -finally! - a written text that we can - what? - accept as cold, hard fact? Get real. Consider an idea.

Look at all the brouhaha over the word “unicorn” in the King James Version of the Bible. The Hebrew word reem must have been misinterpreted, yes? How much of the rest of the text is screwed up? The word is actually “edited out” of some other “versions” of the Bible. So what’s the deal? How much more editing is going to be needed to “bring the Bible into line” with “reality” as we know it? If some paleontologist dugs up a skeleton of a unicorn, complete with its single horn, could we please have our “unicorn word” edited back into the Bible? Please? And some Believers just play it (the unicorn) off as metaphor. Why can’t “Creation in seven days” be metaphor? Tell me!

So now we have the universe and the earth as very old things. Very old. And after all this time, who is it that’s objecting to the ideas? You guessed it. It’s the fundamentalist Christian. Again. Why? Because these people have an agenda this time. They want something. Creation, their “sacred cow” and a cornerstone of their belief, is something that should be taught in public school. That’s what they want. And the only way they can do that is 1) by making Creation “scientific” and 2) by posting it up as something other than an extension of theological ideology.

These radical fundamentalists are dangerous. Normally a few radicals are good for a healthy society, in general. But an open question exists about this group. With them clinging to the foolish notions about a “young earth” and such, their blind zeal can be compared to the kind of “faith” practiced at Jonestown. And in a time when another group of radical fundamentalists want to set the world on fire, these home grown hooligans want to divide the country. Their timing could not be worse. Angry, mindless shouting accompanied by lies and deceit for “political and social” objectives. God must be hiding His eyes.

When does the nonsense end?

(2) On January 28, 2008 at 6:45 pm Quirkyquantummechanic [624] said:

And I edited the first posted answer to get it to "fit" the format. The point was valid and well presented. But it didn't need to be "shouted" at the reader. Bad form and all that.

Certainly my edits are done with an eye to retaining the work of the original post(er) and, thereby, giving that one due respect. I work at editing because the honest answer and its poster deserve no less. It is my belief that I have succeeded to that end here. If you feel I haven't, edit away. Or you can bust my chops on the message boards. That's what they are for.

Never lose sight of the reason for the Q&A here. It isn't about the person answering the question, is it?

the Mechanic

(1) On January 28, 2008 at 6:10 pm Quirkyquantummechanic [624] said:

The Creation of what? The earth? Come on. Stop dancing....

:)

the Mechanic

Sign in to add your own comment. (This only takes a few seconds.)