The Earth is 6,000 years old
Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: General
Forum Name: Science & Technology
Forum Description: It is devoted for Science & Technology
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35302
Printed Date: 22 November 2024 at 8:09am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: The Earth is 6,000 years old
Posted By: Abu Loren
Subject: The Earth is 6,000 years old
Date Posted: 05 January 2016 at 4:21pm
|
This world in which we all live in is relatively young and not billions of years old as the fiction that is masquerading as science tells us. The first great civilisation that sprung up was the Chaldean civilisation in and around the area that is in the present day Iraq. This is where the earliest form of writing is discovered, and suffice to say this area is where the Noah's Ark landed after the flood (actually the evidence points to near Turkey) but we can picture the survivors moving to adjacent areas as the community grew larger. I know that the Pseudo scientists will come back with the 'evidence' of the Earth being billions of years old as they can 'prove' it with their flawed dating techniques, but what they have is not an exact science. They will always try to push their atheist views on the unassuming public but people will always discern what is right and what is wrong as the need to have God in our lives is much stronger than a need to obey satan. ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Replies:
Posted By: Matt Browne
Date Posted: 17 January 2016 at 8:03am
|
I'm surprised you're repeating this kind of nonsense promoted by Amercian born-again Christians. I don't see any contradiction between a 4,56 billion year old Earth and theism. Saying the Earth is 6000 years old is like saying the moon is made of green cheese. ------------- A religion that's intolerant of other religions can't be the world's best religion --Abdel Samad Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people--Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 18 January 2016 at 4:11am
It is nonsense to a person who is brought up in the pseudo Science world without having spirituality. The contradiction is that the idea of a 4.5 billions years old Earth is promoted by satan worshipping scientists without any actual proof. Carbon dating is just conjucture and a need to push their ajenda as science. There is NO way that anybosy could date the age of the Earth. If a scientist in a white coat told you that the Moon is made of green cheese then you would believe it. That's the difference between me and you. ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Matt Browne wrote:Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 18 January 2016 at 8:14am
So how do you know it's 6000 years old? 
I think what Matt may be getting at is that this 6000 year figure is based the genealogies of Jesus and various other prophets as documented in the Old Testament. Are you willing to give that much credibility to the Bible? Or is there some independent source for this in the Quran? ------------- Addeenul �Aql � Religion is intellect. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 18 January 2016 at 11:07am
I'm disapointed Ron, I thought we were leaving this one with his own coments about evidence. |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 18 January 2016 at 1:00pm
What's so funny? I said the Earth could not be dated by any scientific method.
Unlike the other Muslims I accept certain parts of the Bible, without being arrogant I can discern what is from God what is from man in the Bible. Yes, I accept the geneology as stated in the bible as also I believe that people at the beginning lived a lot longer. For example, Prophet Nuh (Alayhi Salaam) lived upt to 950 years. There are no evidence of any civilisation older than 6,000 years as there are no archeological finds supporting this, therefore what we have is the civilisations starting up after the flood of Prophet Nuh (Alayhi Salaam). ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 20 January 2016 at 11:20am
|
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7937240/Oldest-house-in-Britain-discovered-to-be-11500-years-old.html 11,500 year old building in Britian. Predates domestic animals. Predates farming. No cultivated plants. No planting of corn or anything like that. Different animals about such as giant wild cattle. |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 21 January 2016 at 4:00am
I read the first paragraph and just had to give it up. No wonder people like you are fooled all the time. " The home is so old that when it was built Britain was still part of Continental Europe". ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Emettman
Date Posted: 21 January 2016 at 2:35pm
Unless it's fact, of course. I'm going to have to take it that you are serious, though at the back of my mind is the thought that you are playing a prolonged joke. Probably most troubling is you insisting that the world is not spheroidal and does not rotate. Apart from the fact that would not give the weather patterns that we have, a minor but confirming detail, I suggest you ask an Arabic or other Muslim source how geostationary satellites stay up. "The Arab Satellite Communications Organization (often abbreviated as Arabsat) is a leading communications satellite operator in the Arab World, headquartered in the city of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Arabsat was created to deliver satellite-based, public and private telecommunications services to the Arab States... [T]he organization plays a vital role of enhancing communications in the Arab World. The Arabsat satellites are a series of geostationary communications satellites launched from 1985 through 2011. Some of the later satellites in the series remain operational in orbit, while others have been retired and are derelict." Now that works with a rotating spheroidal earth, and only with a rotating spheroidal earth. Apart from how you'd get the satellites to stay up with a flat earth, why would you need more than one? On a young earth, your claimed origin is so young that many methods go past it. Ice core samples, involving no radiation-measuring at all happily go back 60,000 years. That's before longer dates are brought in (nothing to do with irrelevant carbon dating, of course.) |
Posted By: Ron Webb
Date Posted: 21 January 2016 at 8:26pm
I had a similar reaction to the Quran.  ------------- Addeenul �Aql � Religion is intellect. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 22 January 2016 at 1:29am
I take it you will not want to think about the geological record. All that rock and stuff that shows how and when the English Channel formed. |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 22 January 2016 at 8:33am
Spoken like a true devil's advocate! ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 23 January 2016 at 3:52am
My friend all these satellites do not exist. 'Satellite' communication is based on ground based towers in the form of Radio Wave technology. Carbon dating is a flawed science. ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 23 January 2016 at 3:53am
You are right I don't want to think about the geological record because it is false. There is NO way these can be accurately dated. The english channel did NOT form about 11,000 years or so ago. It was formed when Allah Subhana wa Ta'ala created the Earth. ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Emettman
Date Posted: 23 January 2016 at 6:42am
Laugh Out Loud. Do tell that to your Islamic colleagues at Arabsat who have been (according to them) sending up satellites since 1985. I also note the direction that parabolic satellite receivers are set on the sides and roofs of houses in the UK. There is there is no tower along their *narrow* line of reception. They point to the sky. http://www.stc.com.sa/wps/wcm/connect/english/business/wholesales/wholeSaleNewsItems/stc-and-arabsat-launch-satellite-ground-station At the above site, look at the direction of those Arabsat ground station dishes. What could they be pointing at? Oh, and Carbon dating was of no relevance to any point I made. You have an obsession with it? |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 23 January 2016 at 8:28am
So the rocks in the ground are false. Who chose to do all the work of making them appear like they have been formed through a long history of errosion and deposition? |
Posted By: Matt Browne
Date Posted: 24 January 2016 at 1:04am
Mentioning carbon dating in this context shows a lack of knowledge in this matter. The topic is the age of the Earth, not the age of a preserved iceman eating plants a couple of thousand years ago containing C-14 atoms. Perhaps you've never heard of elements such as argon and lead and where they come from. ------------- A religion that's intolerant of other religions can't be the world's best religion --Abdel Samad Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people--Eleanor Roosevelt |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 24 January 2016 at 5:45am
You see, you are believing what the science men tell you blindly without even thinking about it. The weather patterns are created by the movement of the Sun around the Earth, and the winds that blow over the plane Earth, for example the low and high pressures and the jet stream etc. I suggest you go to youtube and search for 'the sun's trajectory over the flat earth' and this will show you brilliant graphics about the Sun and the Moon, how they traverse the flat plane(t) that we call Earth.
Saudi Arabia do not have a space programme, hence theese 'satellites' are managed by India. By the way all the 'space faring' nations are in on the lie including India, China, Japan, ESA.
Hence the Earth is NOT a spheroid!
There are 0 satellites in space. It's ALL a con.
I've already told, dating rocks do NOT work, it's impossible. Of course, you're going to come back with "he would say that wouldn't he?". ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Emettman
Date Posted: 24 January 2016 at 9:33am
|
" By the way all the 'space faring' nations are in on the lie...."
And not one journalist or whistle-blower to make their name by breaking the story? Everything pictured as being from the Hubble telescope, invented? Yachts in round the world races having to average something like 35 knots? Cape Horn to Western Australia is such a trek on a flat "map". "You see, you are believing what the science men tell you blindly without even thinking about it." Err, actually no. I'm used to checking the working on proposed ideas, and enjoy seeing how these rose and fell with argument and evidence through history. "youtube and search for 'the sun's trajectory over the flat earth" I did. I saw several I have rarely seen anything more hilarious, as long as no-one takes them seriously. Both major and blatant errors abound... talk about "believing blindly without thinking about it!" "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GY0xhUOL3vM" Spot at least three fatal problems with the text, the animation or conflict between them. You'd have to be naively believing not to see them. Do you really believe this flat earth idea? I credit you with more intelligence than that, so lean towards the likelihood of you playing a game. I call deliberate Poe. Chris. |
Posted By: Emettman
Date Posted: 26 January 2016 at 12:20am
|
It gets even worse as you think about it.
(so somebody must be swallowing without examining) No satellites since with no supporting mechanism they would just crash down onto the flat earth, as apples fall from trees. So what's keeping the sun up? Worse, the sun is supposed to be moving in a circle: just on a whim? What force is creating this circular path, since moving objects with mass don't do that, having a natural preference, as Newton observed, for straight lines, unless acted upon by a force. The sun staying up and moving in circles for no reason is hilarious. Or would be except for anyone taking it seriously. |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 26 January 2016 at 11:38am
Carbon dating doesn't work. Full Stop. Period. ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Abu Loren
Date Posted: 26 January 2016 at 11:41am
A spinning globe Earth is a satanic lie! It doesn't make any sense at all. The Earth does NOT spin 1,000+ miles. ------------- La Ilaha IllAllah |
Posted By: Emettman
Date Posted: 26 January 2016 at 1:44pm
Rarely have I seen such a closed, fixed, position so firmly held on no solid ground at all. No Satan required at all You who rail at people believing without thought, scepticism or fair, questioning doubt; have you brought thought, scepticism or fair, questioning doubt against the flat earth or young earth models of earth and the solar system, or the cosmos as a whole? Have you seen how many wild assumptions and extra entities have to be brought into play (or ignored!) to make these young or flat perspectives even seem to work? I've twice been round the world. Looking at a flat map the air-flight leg times don't match by such a large degree that I don't need close detail I've been to Australia twice. THE STARS ARE WRONG. (That's to a northern hemisphere dweller, on a spheroidal earth.) On a flat earth the stars should look pretty much the same, looking up from Australia or the UK, because that's looking in almost the same direction. Think about it for ten seconds. It may be that a *absolutely* literal reading of terms seems to imply a flat earth, but this requires a ruling brought in from outside as far as I can tell. No metaphors, similes or pictorial language anywhere in the Qur'an? I'd be very surprised. But the world is round, and it spins, and gravity works. (On a flat earth how do you get much more variation in day length through the year as you get near the North pole? The effect is clearly recorded in discussion on its effects on Ramadan at such latitudes.) |
Posted By: AaronKM
Date Posted: 05 April 2016 at 10:02am
As Salaam Alaykum brother. Having read most of the Quran, here is my take on it: The Quran contains allegory. It says so in the verse 3:7. Most of this refers to verses that have more than one meaning. However, I am under the impression that some of the stories are allegory as well, meant to teach us something, and not necessarily a literal account of a historical event. Look at the underlying themes from Adam, for example. Made from clay, angels prostrated to him, gave in to sin, expelled from paradise. My take on this is that it was meant to teach us about man, and what man means to Allah. We don't have to stick our fingers in our ears and yell "lalalalalalala" every time science contradicts a literal interpretation. In this sense, science actually teaches us about Islam. |
Posted By: 2Acts
Date Posted: 02 May 2016 at 4:06pm
| interesting |
Posted By: whirlingmerc
Date Posted: 09 May 2016 at 5:54pm
|
If God wanted to make the world and stretch out the stars and universe with his little fingers in 6 days He most certainly could if he wanted.
But there is a more stunning claim than that. The New Testament claims the world was made from , through, to by and for Jesus Christ. |
Posted By: Ringer
Date Posted: 10 May 2016 at 3:44pm
|
To promote that the Earth is required by the Bible or Qur'an to be 6,000 years old (or anything less than a few billion) is dangerous since were people to believe that they would have to accept that the holy book is a lie once they understood the evidence for the extremely ancient Earth. Causing or Encouraging people to give up on the Holy Scripts (either Bible or Qur'an) through listening to your lies or ignorance is a form of Shirk and according to the Qur'an the liar would be destined for Hell. The same applies to telling a lie that the Earth is not spheroidal etc. -- you would be encouraging people to become disbelievers and according to the Qur'an, sending them to Hell along with yourself. Do you really want to go there? ------------- -- Ringer |
Posted By: simple
Date Posted: 21 August 2016 at 1:15am
Not true. What evidence exactly are you talking about?
Not if you were wrong and they were right. By the way both bible and Qur'an could not be holy books. Only one could be. The other has to be very very unholy. |
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 25 August 2016 at 2:11pm
This still leaves room for the third option, that: Both are very, very unholy. C'est la vie: Airmano ------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
Posted By: simple
Date Posted: 30 August 2016 at 5:54pm
|
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 31 August 2016 at 12:55pm
Or since we all agree that one of the books is wrong, they could both be wrong. Just was we agree that all the other holy books are wrong. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 31 August 2016 at 1:06pm
Do you consider the Earth to be less than billions of years old? If so how do you explain the fossil record? How do you explain the stone my house is built from? Every time I walk over my door step I see the layers of sandstone which were once sediment at the bottom of a sea or lake. It has taken a long time for those sands to be compressed, then had errosion cut away all the other layers of stone above them which were deposited later and then for that stone to be exposed far above the level of the sea. |
Posted By: simple
Date Posted: 14 September 2016 at 10:46am
| No. The bible is right. The Gabriel of the bible is not the Gabriel that appeared to Mohammed. |
Posted By: simple
Date Posted: 14 September 2016 at 10:49am
| Yes, of course. The main way dates that are old are determined is by a belief that our laws existed also in the past, so therefore the ratios of isotopes must have been all a result of those laws. Prove the forces and laws were the same in the far past? Otherwise you have religion, not knowledge or real science. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 16 September 2016 at 12:41am
Any evidence to support that or is it just because you say so? You will need something external to the Bible to support the Bible. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 16 September 2016 at 12:48am
When we look into space we see light that has traveled from the object we are looking at to us. This has taken some time to happen. The same is true here on earth but the time for light to get from the horizon to the eye is so small it's practically zero. Over the vast distances of space the time is as vast as the life time of this universe. When we look at the way stuff behaves in the lab or classroom we can see how light is given off by hot things. The light given off by my electric welder has certain characteristics which when split up by passing it through a prism and the various wavelengths are compared will tell you what elements are being heated to a plasma. This is the same for stars. The same elements doing the same things as a plasma in a star. All stars. The Sun is a star. We thus know that the same process driven under the same laws of physics hold true over the whole life time of this universe. To deny this, once you understand it, is simply lying. |
Posted By: simple
Date Posted: 18 September 2016 at 8:46pm
| Your mistake is to assume that the realities on earth have to equal realities in the far universe. Since you have not been away from earth, that is absurd, and religion, not science. For all we know, time is different in far space than here, or maybe does not exist at all. Can you prove time exists the same in deep space? This should be fun. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 20 September 2016 at 1:20am
I have not been to Austrailia. I do believe that it exists, that is to say I have very strong evidence that it does. I have much stronger evidence that the way the universe works here are the same in galaxies 12 billion light years away/billion years ago because of the detail we can see in the observations of them. The exact same evidence tells us how the sun works. The exact same understanding of the way the universe works allows the path of the planets to be predicted. The exact same understanding of the way the universe works allows us to predict the way to make a jet plane fly. The exact same understanding of the universe allows us to make GPS work. I have never been into orbit to see that the satellites are really there but I know they are. Just like I know Austrailia is there. |
Posted By: simple
Date Posted: 25 September 2016 at 2:27pm
Totally false. What if time did not even exist, or exist as we know it here out in the far universe? That would mean times and distances formulated by science are wrong! Bottom line..you do NOT KNOW!! ALL your models are religion..belief based. Stop preaching and trying to convert here.
False. You have theories about how stars work and the sun...you have not been there, even if you were down under. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 27 September 2016 at 2:01am
I only have theories about the existance of Austrailia. The theories that support the idea of the earth being old, many millions of years, are strongly supported by the rocks which were used to build my house. Every time I walk over my door step I see the evidence of how it was deposited in a shallow lake or stream bed. A small delta of some sort of to be more exact. I know where the rock came from, just down the road, 600m away. I know what layers of rock are above the layer that is exposed around here and they include limestone which was deposited in a shallow sea. This all takes a lot of time. So I know with a much higher degree of confidence that the earth is many millions of years old at least than I know anything about a far off place I have never been to. It would be far easier for the rest of the world to be lying about that. |
Posted By: airmano
Date Posted: 01 October 2016 at 1:28pm
Simple(!)
Have you ever met Jesus ? No ? And yet, you believe [in] him ? And at the same time you seriously try to tell me that I have to go to the centre of a star to understand how it works ? Goodness me!: Airmano ------------- The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses (Albert Einstein 1954, in his "Gods Letter") |
Posted By: asep48garut60
Date Posted: 03 October 2016 at 12:25am
|
Dear All,
My opinion is that no one knows the exact age of the universe, human beings can only determine and predict through research. Nevertheless, I appreciate all the efforts that have been made by experts, even that is now being carried out by them, because there are some of their efforts which proved acceptable to mankind and even by religion. Lots of benefits from the research results and findings of experts, in addition to supporting the development of science also it can support in providing evidence of the truth of the Books revealed by God. Thus, all the holy books need other sources as supporters, one of those is science. Best Regards. |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 03 October 2016 at 12:05pm
The universe is 13.8 billion years old. How exact would you like that figure to be refined to? How many decimal places? Most holy books have lots of wrong bits in them. The world has never flooded for example. |
Posted By: asep48garut60
Date Posted: 31 October 2016 at 3:03pm
|
Dear Tim the plumber,
I said that no one knows exactly about the age of the universe, who knew only God because He created the universe. Even the coming of the Hour is no human being knows as mentioned in His word. If there are claims about the age of the universe, it's only according to human's estimates, not necessarily in accordance with God calculation. Regards, Asep |
Posted By: Tim the plumber
Date Posted: 04 November 2016 at 9:51am
Those pescky scientists have a very precise date for the start of the universe. They have this from looking at the universe and understanding it. It is indeed not in accordance with the age of the world as given in the Bible (I don't know about the Koran) and it's 13.772 billion years. I have no idea what the coming of the Hour is all about. |
Posted By: asep48garut60
Date Posted: 14 November 2016 at 2:19pm
|
Dear Tim the plumber,
Yes, I also don't know when the end will occur because of the knowledge of it is only Allah who knows it as mentioned in the Quran 7:187. �They ask you about the Hour (Day of Resurrection):�When will be its appointed time?� Say:� The knowledge thereof is with my Lord (Alone). None can reveal its time but He. Heavy is its burden through the heavens and the earth. It shall not come upon you except all of a sudden.� They ask you as if you have a good knowledge of it. Say:� The knowledge thereof is with Allah (Alone), but most of mankind know not.� Regards, Asep |
Posted By: DavidC
Date Posted: 15 November 2016 at 7:51am
�But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only." Matthew 24:36 ------------- Christian; Wesleyan M.Div. |
Posted By: asep48garut60
Date Posted: 15 November 2016 at 1:57pm
Yes, you're right David, no one knows, only God knows it. The fundamental difference is: Quran 7:187 use the word "Lord" while Matthew 24:36 uses the word "Father". Regards, Asep |
Posted By: DavidC
Date Posted: 16 November 2016 at 7:12am
No difference, really. Functionally the same reference, the difference is semantic. The word 'Lord' (adonai) is a relational word in the Bible. Any patron or person of honor would be addressed as lord by someone of lower status. Jesus' use of 'Father' is an explicit reference to God. I think you can safely say this is one Bible verse which is confirmed by the Qu'ran, especially since the 'Son' is explicitly excluded from this foreknowledge. ------------- Christian; Wesleyan M.Div. |
Posted By: asep48garut60
Date Posted: 16 November 2016 at 11:05am
|
Dear David,
It is OK if it means like that, at first I thought that the word "Father" it can be assumed with something like: God has a wife, children, grandchildren, and even father or mother-in-laws and etc. Thanks for your explanation David. Regards, Asep |
Posted By: rizastranger
Date Posted: 26 June 2022 at 1:25am
|
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته I need to contact you
|