back to article Come off it, Moon, Earth. We KNOW you're 60 million years OLDER than we thought

Geoboffins have cracked open some ancient crystals to discover that the Earth and the Moon are actually 60 million years older than previously thought. Giant impact, common at the end of planet formation You’d imagine that figuring out the age of the hunk of rock right under our feet would be something that scientists had …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

that'll be ignored by the creationist then

15
7
Bronze badge
Big Brother

Unfortunately, there's more than one of them.

20
2
Bronze badge
Headmaster

I thought that, by definion, there would be only one Creationist.

0
0
Trollface

Years or revoltions around the Sun?

Wasn't the Earth's orbit a little shorter back then?

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Years or revoltions around the Sun?

Earth never wanted to be a Stormtrooper!

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Years or revoltions around the Sun?

"In astronomy, the Julian year is a unit of time, defined as 365.25 days of 86400 SI seconds each (no leap seconds). [...] The Julian year, as used in astronomy and other sciences, is a time unit defined as exactly 365.25 days. This is the normal meaning of the unit "year" (symbol "a" from the Latin annus) used in various scientific contexts."

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Years or revoltions around the Sun?

Are you perhaps thinking about the moon.

0
1
Joke

But the earth is only 6 thousand years old

So how can this be.....

Clearly the astro-boffins have got it all wrong using their "science" , "facts" and "empirical evidence".

What is needed now is for the above to be taught in schools , what could possibly go wrong ??

<coat>

11
6
Silver badge
Angel

Re: But the earth is only 6 thousand years old

gb2 Jesus Camp!

0
4
Silver badge

Re: But the earth is only 6 thousand years old

A wizard did it.

2
0
Bronze badge
Joke

Re: But the earth is only 6 thousand years old

Ayup ... 6,000 years, give or take a few days ... as more than a few of the US 'Tea Party' pols (including the one that heads up the House of Reps Science Committee) will affirm ... and as for that round object in the image accompanying this article? All them 'round' pix from NASA are falsified photoshop propaganda pieces. The world is, and always has been, flat ... the oceans don't run off the sides cuz the Good Lord said they mustn't. Now, about that stupid 'big bang' thing ...

5
0
Silver badge

Nah, must be wrong...

A quick search on the internets shows me that

"The problem is that the Bible plainly says that the world was created by God in six days. That is clear to anyone who reads it for the first time. Furthermore, from the detailed chronologies given, we know that creation happened about 4,000 years before Christ."

8
3
Silver badge

"Blind, drunken Gods, swaying to the sound of mad piping...."

Further perusal of Jimbo's Excellent HTML Store™ revelas that...

Gnosticism presents a distinction between the highest, unknowable God and the demiurgic “creator” of the material. Several systems of Gnostic thought present the Demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Being: his act of creation occurs in unconscious semblance of the divine model, and thus is fundamentally flawed, or else is formed with the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine in materiality. Thus, in such systems, the Demiurge acts as a solution to (or, at least possibly, the problem or cause that gives rise to) the problem of evil. In the most radical form of Christian Gnosticism, the Demiurge is the "jealous God" of the Old Testament.

So I think there is some leeway in those texts from the sandy lands.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: "Blind, drunken Gods, swaying to the sound of mad piping...."

You are not trying to tell me that we were created by a mad underGod???

3
0
Silver badge

Re: "Blind, drunken Gods, swaying to the sound of mad piping...."

I have a real problem understanding any kind of 'position' held by Gnosticism. I thought it was supposed to be about self knowledge, or rather learning from personal experience, rather than having any kind of doctrine. Am I wrong?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: "Blind, drunken Gods, swaying to the sound of mad piping...."

I often get a demiurge - must be my age.

9
0
Silver badge
Paris Hilton

Re: "Blind, drunken Gods, swaying to the sound of mad piping...."

Am I wrong?

Yes. You seem to be mix this up with more oriental approaches like Zen Buddhism and things like that.

(I still hope to see Frank Herbert's Zensunni religion before I log off; it would be weird, but the human mind is malleable and can pull practically anything out of the hat as long as verification of it can be left as an exercise...)

1
1
Thumb Up

Re: "Blind, drunken Gods, swaying to the sound of mad piping...."

"Further perusal of Jimbo's Excellent HTML Store™ revelas that..."

Excellent! Have an upvote.

2
0

Re: Nah, must be wrong...

Six days? Must have had a slow 3D printer...

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Nah, must be wrong...

If you did a quick search of Genesis 1, you'd see that the earth was already there, but it looked like Waterworld. Presumably there was some rock underneath.

Which isn't really relevant to much here.

1
0
Bronze badge

Re: "Blind, drunken Gods, swaying to the sound of mad piping...."

I had an image just then of a goggle-eyed flautist standing on one leg singing "Aqualung".

3
0
Bronze badge
Stop

"Earth and its smallish satellite."

The Moon is quite biggish for a satellite. It's the largest one in the solar system, relative to the size of the planet being orbited.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: "Earth and its smallish satellite."

Yes, but only if one subscribes to that revisionist claim that there are only 8 planets in the Solar System!

6
3
Gold badge

Re: "Earth and its smallish satellite."

Pluto and Charon really should be considered a double dwarf planet with 3 minor satellites.

1
0
Bronze badge
Coat

obligatory....

"...little blue dot"

P.

0
0
Bronze badge
Headmaster

Re: obligatory....

...and quite pale too!

0
0
Mushroom

By the looks of the graphic...

...that's Marvin the Martian's original "eath-shattering KA-BOOM".

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: By the looks of the graphic...

The illudium Q-36 explosive space modulator?

4
0
Silver badge

For the love of...

Every time an article like this comes up all the comments go right for the same tired old clichés about creationists. I get it. You don't like them. Well done. Now go and have an original thought for once instead of just rehashing the same boring rubbish and crap "jokes". Or better yet, talk about the thing in the article. You know, the science? The actual interesting stuff?

All this blathering gets old, guys. It gets really, really old.

15
16

Yep, it's old but it beats reading articles about storage arrays which el Reg is awash with nowadays....

19
1
Silver badge

It gets really, really old

It might be you...

9
4
FAIL

@Graham Dawson

"Now go and have an original thought for once instead of just rehashing the same boring rubbish and crap "jokes". Or better yet, talk about the thing in the article. You know, the science? The actual interesting stuff?"

And yet, you completely fail to contribute to the conversation topic in any meaningful way yourself.

21
5
Silver badge

It gets really, really old

And no 60myr older than we originally thought !

4
0

"All this blathering gets old, guys. It gets really, really old."

Steady on. You don't want to upset the creationists.....

5
1

No, its not him. Its you.

0
1
Silver badge
Thumb Down

"It gets really, really old.". Yes, but the problem is it's still there, mostly only in the USA though. It's a scam and like home schooling an awful form of child abuse.

4
3
Silver badge

>No, its not him. Its you.

You?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

"All this blathering gets old, guys. It gets really, really old."

Really? How old? Teach the CONTROVERSY! <snort>

1
0
Bronze badge
Headmaster

No, its not him. Its you.

No, it's not him. It's you. - FTFY.

1
0
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Here we have this loverly sandbox, and you don't want us old farts playin' innit?

4
0
Childcatcher

@ Lars

Please explain why homeschooling is an awful form of child abuse and also, please, give us your definition of a good form of child abuse.

2
0
Bronze badge

Re: @ Lars

give us your definition of a good form of child abuse.

Sending the child to bagpipe lessons?

5
0

"Yes, but the problem is it's still there, mostly only in the USA though. It's a scam and like home schooling an awful form of child abuse."

I think you'll find that the problem exists in most of the world. Middle East, Africa etc. The idea that the world is really, really old and wasn't made by some form of magic guy is the minority opinion. It's really only in the developed world where there is better understanding (except in the US of course).

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: @ Lars

"your definition of a good form of child abuse"

I would point you in the direction of the film Kick-Ass, and Mindy's training to become Hit Girl, as an example...

Being shot in the chest (while wearing a bullet proof vest, of course) by your father has to come high on the list of child abuse, but the outcome of turning a young girl into a leathal assassin clearly makes it a good form of child abuse!

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge
WTF?

Re: @ Lars

@Euripides Pants, lots of parents teach their children at home, they bring up, raise their kids, all should.

But that is after school, an addition to what kids learn at school, and I would point out among other children. Homeschooling is about preventing kids from going to school and I doubt those parents have shit to give. Behind this wish to prevent kids from going to school lies some quasi religious nonsense. How this is allowed in the USA is beyond me.

As for a definition of a good form of child abuse define for me a good form of a headache.

2
0
Silver badge
Flame

@ Jugernautilus

Yes, but I doubt creationism is on the curriculum in Middle East, Africa etc, or tried to be forced into the curriculum of any schools or universities nor do I think you will find any creationism amusement parks either. Creationism is a scam and I bet Mr Ham and his ilk know it too. But money is money as always.

1
0

Re: Re: @ Lars

Lars,

The folks who tout public education because kids learn to deal with bullies make a better argument than you. Homeschooling is about keeping kids out of public school because public school does a crap job of *educating*, it mostly manages to condition children to conform and obey. Pink Floyd's "The Wall" illustrated this sentiment quite well. Studies show that homeschooled children generally score better on standardized achievement tests than public schooled kids and are better adjusted socially, see this: http://www.nheri.org/research/research-facts-on-homeschooling.html

Colleges (at least in the US) are waking up to these facts and are actively trying to recruit homeschooled high school graduates.

My wife and I have been homeschooling our daughter for nearly 10 years. We had to start using college level history textbooks a few years ago and had to start using college level physics textbooks this year. Standardized test put her on average 1 grade higher than her age and she is better adjusted socially than teens her age. I'd also wager that she's better adjusted socially than many of the Reg commentards too. An added bonus is that she doesn't get taught creationism, she gets taught real science.

As for the question about what constitutes a good headache, we all know that the only good headache is a dead headache.

0
2
Gold badge

I don't just dislike creationists, sirrah. I believe they are dangerous, and that teaching that shit to youth is child abuse.

Believe what you want, but don't teach lies to children and call it the truth.

2
0

@Trevor_Pott

You seem to be tilting at windmills, Trevor. No one here has actually defended creationism, just homeschooling. And only because it works so much better than the twatpuddle that is public schooling in the US.

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums