ReBurn
Gold Member
Well if the Zetas are involved then I'm all in. Props to the homies on Niburu!
EDIT: Before it's too late! http://zetatalk.com/
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
So my girlfriend thinks the Earth is 6000 years old...
- Thread starter Mengy
- Start date
- Status
Well if the Zetas are involved then I'm all in. Props to the homies on Niburu!
EDIT: Before it's too late! http://zetatalk.com/
matt360
Member
This is like that Friends episode where Phoebe told Ross that she doesn't believe in evolution.
Anyways, the OP went a little heavy on the melodrama toward the end of that initial post, and while I can understand the sentiment, I think religious views like this are fairly trivial in the grand scheme of things. If her entire being is completely defined by her religious beliefs that could be a problem, but a couple quips during Stargate is petty in my book.
You just need to ask yourself if this is something you can look past. Believing that the earth is only 6000 years old isn't hurting anyone and does not make her a bad person, but if you cannot accept that kind of thinking then you should end it. I've had trouble in the past dating a Japanese girl who denied that the Rape of Nanjing ever occurred, even after showing her pictures of the event. She also said 9/11 was an inside job. As offensive as those beliefs were to me, she was still a great and caring person.
Anyways, the OP went a little heavy on the melodrama toward the end of that initial post, and while I can understand the sentiment, I think religious views like this are fairly trivial in the grand scheme of things. If her entire being is completely defined by her religious beliefs that could be a problem, but a couple quips during Stargate is petty in my book.
You just need to ask yourself if this is something you can look past. Believing that the earth is only 6000 years old isn't hurting anyone and does not make her a bad person, but if you cannot accept that kind of thinking then you should end it. I've had trouble in the past dating a Japanese girl who denied that the Rape of Nanjing ever occurred, even after showing her pictures of the event. She also said 9/11 was an inside job. As offensive as those beliefs were to me, she was still a great and caring person.
AnathemicOne
Banned
I hated that episode...
Sanky Panky
Banned
People here always say that science can be safely relied upon, is trustworthy and true. They don't bother questioning the inferences and assumptions made by scientists.
And that is where you are wrong, and this is the misconception most people have about these type of scientific hypothesis.
We already know that Carbon dating can't be used for rocks or bones past 5,000 years (even at 50,000 years you have to make assumptions on the the carbon rations and contamination in the atmosphere).
While the topics are immensely complex, they boil down to baseless assumptions of initial ratios of isotopes present in the rocks/lava. For the method of Potassium-Argon to be accurate, no Argon can be present at the beginning. Recent lava flows have been dated to be millions of years, because Argon was indeed present initially. These are not "thoroughly tested" assumptions.
Moreover, differect isotopes have to be used depending on how old the rocks are initially believed to be (because of different half-lives), and what the initial mother/daughter ratio of elements was at the time the rock was formed. This is introducing bias to something that is supposed to be scientific.
I'm not arguing for a particular age, but I don't give too much credit to theories based on untestable assumptions.
matt360
Member
Yeah, that's all I remember about that one. But it might be a good litmus test to see how you feel on the subject. If you thought Phoebe was a "fucking idiot" for believing that (I remember thinking she was, but I was never a big Phoebe fan anyways), then maybe you can't handle being with someone with those kinds of beliefs. If you thought it was funny or cute, then maybe you're the type where that kind of belief isn't important to you in a serious relationship.
mclaren777
Member
This thread is an amazing train wreck.
Vermillion
Banned
travisbickle
Member
Meh, whatever. My wife believes in fan death!
Oh c'mon mclaren, let's not dance around this.
You know what we all want from you, give it to us! None of these cock-teasing posts.
Vermillion
Banned
Ultimadrago
Member
Can't you see all the meaningful debate going on?
We're about to break new ground here!
How could you marry a child. Someone call Chris Hansson on this guy!
Vermillion
Banned
Re-posting for posterity.
Link me or source it. Peer-reviewed please.
I only found two sources that seemed to be digestible
1. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n4/assumptions
2. http://timcooley.net/2010/01/22/creationist-nonsense-lava-and-radiometric-dating/
Answers in Genesis or something that attempts to refute the YEC arguments against.
Now, on Sanky Panky - radiometric dating has tons and tons of verifiable instances in which it is completely accurate, there are a few instances where there are issues (the manatee thing pops to mind) - but do you think that invalidates the fact that it is more often than not accurate? Like... in pretty much every tested instance, out of thousands and thousands of instance, there are a handful of inconsistencies.
Does that really cast SO much doubt in radiometric dating to you?
Sutton Dagger
Member
You said you would provide credible sources?
I would also like you to explain the relationship between dendrochronolgy and Carbon dating.
You preempted me! Cooley's blog is excellent.
By all means, question away! Which ones do you think are suspect? I get the feeling I'm about to find out.
Carbon-14 calibration curves aren't made in a vacuum. If there's something we can date in more than one way, we do that and cross-check them to confirm the ages. Our current setup does extend back 50,000 years because it's cross-referenced against dendrochronology, mineral deposits in caves, and ocean sediment cores.
Stop right there, bro. That's a well-publicized case you're talking about, and there is an explanation. I recommend reading or listening to this.
Science has to be able to make reasonable assumptions. There is literally no way to get anything done otherwise.
Darkmakaimura
Can You Imagine What SureAI Is Going To Do With Garfield?
Confused. Wouldn't that make the Earth 7,000 years old or is he still resting? Not trying to e funny but actually trying to make sense of this comment.
shadowsdarknes
Member
Your off the mark a tad bit, but your in the right area I suppose, with only a slightly exaggerated misconception. What I originally said was I met a stunningly beautiful blonde from Charleston, a real southern belle with the accent saying y'all who happened to be very religious to the book; her faith is as strong as Tebow's.
With that said, she wasn't walking around having a conversation trying to convert everyone to her views, she respected everyone else's views as far they respected hers.
She would say how blessed she was after a good day though, and do little prayers and stuff which didn't annoy me at all. In fact, I found it to be very enchanting.
It just wasn't a talking point for either of us to say to one another, "hey I know your Christian why don't you believe in evolution," or, "hey I know you chose not to be religious, don't you know that's sinning." Of course I'm making an exaggeration to exemplify our attitudes towards the whole thing. Instead, we were all about having fun acting all nonchalant.
And no, obviously I would not openly disrespect anyone's religion. I thought my stance in this thread would have made it blatantly transparent regardless of how I feel about it.
Call it sexist, or whatever you want. As I stated before all the women I grew up around hate both of those topics, and the same story with girls I am attracted to.
What it boils down to is religion is not a topic I am interested in discussing outside of a philosophy classroom. Politics on the other hand is a topic I do like to talk about but with certain people, chiefly neutral thinkers who are not going to blow their lids over a dispute.
Your absolutely right, it wasn't my intent at all to come off that way.
And lastly, in regards to the questions you asked in the bottom segment, specifically the one wondering if I keep my opinions to myself, here is your answer. Well, I honestly don't hide anything, nor do I hold anything against that person, what they believe does not count against them as a detraction, I simply push it aside and accept that is who they are. It is of insignificance to me. It is a very small thing to magnify. There are much more to people than their religious values taken at face value, and that statement right there is the point I have been trying to convey until now.
Of course it's impossible to appease every question and satisfy everyone's opinion. You can probably form a million other criticisms and draw a million other conclusions that are negative. Even with all the effort I put into this memoir to try and help everyone understand where I'm coming from, but I guess it is what it is.
Wouldn't even be 8-9 thousand?
Vermillion
Banned
Nah, God's resting for the full seventh. Many people say that God made the Earth in six days. The seventh was just a chill day.
Incitemaybe
Member
That's actually a really sad story OP :-(
I would honestly say you will have to move on from her at some point.
I would honestly say you will have to move on from her at some point.
But we have ordinary stuff that we eat now... This must mean mythical creatures were the tastiest animals and that's why we ate them all, it all makes sense now.
I'd be more accepting of a woman who believed the Earth was 6,000 years old than I would a woman who got all fired up about something she saw in a dumb film like Stargate.
That's not right.
The 6,000 year thing comes from the computation of a biblical scholar, Bishop Ussher. He supposedly computed the ages of the people in the Bible and came up with the year 4004 BC as the date of creation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher
Unless you were being facetious, in which case: Oops.
Time to pack it in, atheists, internet poster "imtehman" has just ended you all.
what point does calling somebody an agnostic serve? Are you one of those people who insists that you're loading a magazine into an assault rifle (as opposed to a clip)?
Agnostic Atheists broseph. Yes, such a thing is possible.
You can't disprove using any rational, scientific means that an invisible, incorporeal space dwelling all powerful unicorn that lives behind the sun exists?
I'll start labeling myself by your definition, when all you and everyone of your thiests out there become believers of this all powerful unicorn, peace be upon it's name!
<_<
Of course, I'm sensible enough to realize not every religious individual holds your opinion and I wouldn't paint every religious individual in the same stroke.
<_<
state-of-the-art
Member
I don't think I could date somebody like that. Makes me feel lucky that my girlfriend is smarter than me.
Can't believe there are people even trying to question the age of Earth in GAF.
It's absolutely not possible for it to be 6000 years old, it's not even remotely possible for it to be 600,000 years old. It shouldn't even be a matter up for debate, and it's not just carbon dating we are relying on. From the ruins, ancient relics and fossils that we've discovered, to evolutionary biology, to everything we know about the universe including our own solar system. There are so many branches of science that would totally collapse if the Earth was just a few thousand years old.
Hack, it takes millions of years just to form cruel oil. How the fuck does a reasonable person explain that? That god created everything including the entire universe?
It's absolutely not possible for it to be 6000 years old, it's not even remotely possible for it to be 600,000 years old. It shouldn't even be a matter up for debate, and it's not just carbon dating we are relying on. From the ruins, ancient relics and fossils that we've discovered, to evolutionary biology, to everything we know about the universe including our own solar system. There are so many branches of science that would totally collapse if the Earth was just a few thousand years old.
Hack, it takes millions of years just to form cruel oil. How the fuck does a reasonable person explain that? That god created everything including the entire universe?
Yes.
Realize that ACTUALLY UNDERSTANDING the universe and how it works, the physics and chemicals and forces, is not necessary to be rich, successful or happy in the world.
So why would people bother with all that when God simply works as an answer? Humans are hedonistic and if the easier answer gives more comfort (especially socially) then forget the facts.
ThisWreckage
Banned
Delve deep enough and you'll find out that everyone on Earth has a stupid belief or two. That's at the very least. Quite frankly, someone's belief of how old Earth is would have zero bearing on my relationship. It seems completely trivial and even petty to me.
travisbickle
Member
I retract my statement because I was a bit harsh on my wife, there is some logic to fan death, and the only thing I have to do to appease her beliefs is have the window/door open while the fan is on.
To the OP, try and get her to watch "How to Grow a Planet". It was on the BBC recently and over 4 episodes it talks about the influence of plants on the development of the planet.
It talks about the evolution of plants, but I don't think it really pushes that word, instead it talks about how plants had to change over generations to survive and because generations in plant terms are short, for some species anyway, there are dramatic changes over quite short periods.
By the last episode it talks about grass, calling grass the "underdog" that changed the ecosystem of the planet. Then right at the end of the episode they discuss very sound, logical theories that grass helped the evolution of man...like that BAM your girlfriend will be a believer.
The issue is less to do with a specific dispute over the age of the Earth and more to do with the fact that a partner being able to hold a completely irrational view despite everything pointing to the contrary doesn't bode well for other situations that may arise.
I don't know how you can even be with someone who believes that. I think religion or lack of it influences every conversation you have. My current girlfriend was a very religious Shia Muslim, it put me off so I was almost ready to break it off, she asked me why, I told her, we argued and over a 6 hour conversation I presented to her, poorly I must say, it was late at night, all the arguments in the God Delusion. By the time we finished, she said she needed to think and read more. She is an atheist now. I never saw someone take all the arguments like her, shes a great women.
Sutton Dagger
Member
I'm not trying to be an ass, but at this point I'm fucking sick to death of explaining (as I'm sure other regular posters are) the definitions of atheism and agnosticism... Please check these things before making these claims about fellow posters.
nononono, the unicorn is invisible, and pink. It's the teapot that's behind the sun.
I get that, but if I were to hold such a belief, I wouldn't debate with people on an internet forum. I'd just move on and be happy with life like you said, since the mounting evidence and facts means it would always be a losing debate.
People don't debate on the internet to learn new things.
People debate on the internet to find an echo chamber.
We all know that there's always going to be someone, somewhere, who agrees with your stance, especially if you're part of the big religions. Probably within 5 minutes you'll have someone who agrees.
shanshan310
Member
It seems like she "learnt" all of this as well, at school. Even though it is proven wrong, she was taught it all in school as fact. Its hard to accept that you wasted school learning about stuff that has been widely disproven, I suppose.
Imp the Dimp
Member
I've never ever met anyone in Wester Europe claim the earth is 6000 years old.
They probably exist, but they're not as socially accepted as they are here in America, where education takes a backseat when politics and religion get involved.
No, I think he is referring to the 'days of creation'. In this case he is referring to a 'day' as a thousand years. I am also aware of it being interpreted as like a cycle. The beginning and end of a cycle; a day.
Similar to a day of Brahma.
http://www.forbiddenarcheology.com/bramma.htm
- Status