You can't prove the earth is more than 6,000 years old.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Let’s hear your reasoning for why it isn’t then 🍿

I'm curious too

Prediction: a book ~1/3 as old as Earth itself implied it

Before the 1890s(I think or the 1950s) It was common knowledge that the earth was thousands of years old. Since then "reliable science" has said millions, tens of millions, billions, then tens of billions. Like oh okay so you don't know, but you're just moving it.

Secondly, what dating methods is science using? Soil samples? Radioactive decay?

A lot of retarded ass shit was “common knowledge” a long time ago, no offense

I feel that. But maybe

Maybe we're the retards

If I share a YouTube linky link will you watch it? It may be a few hours.

Nah sorry 😅

Def not in a book, You know I can't read 😡

The scientific consensus, based on various dating methods, strongly supports the Earth being approximately 4.5 billion years old. 😉

What dating methods?

Radiometric dating methods, such as uranium-lead, potassium-argon, and rubidium-strontium dating, measure the decay of radioactive isotopes in rocks and minerals to determine their age.

More:

Studying sediment layers, ice cores, and tree rings to estimate time spans.

Bruh lol

🧡💜

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LaHcHwPj4sw&pp=ygUVS2VudCBob3ZpbmQgaWNlIGNvcmUg

He sites a time where some air craft in ww2, dug out of ice a few decades later were actually hundreds of years old 😂

Tree rings vary depending on moisture

Ice cores depend on temperature changes

Sediment organizes based on size, shape, and density