PDA

View Full Version : Rubio: Actual Age Of Earth Is a mystery.



Qtec
11-20-2012, 05:33 AM
This is not a joke. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Marco Rubio: Actual Age Of Earth Is 'One Of The Great Mysteries'

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) isn't qualified to answer a question about how old the earth is, he told GQ in a recent interview.

"I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think<span style='font-size: 14pt'> that's a dispute amongst theologians</span> and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States," Rubio told GQ's Michael Hainey. "I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all."

Rubio continued, refusing to take a stance on the planet's age, which scientists have long estimated at 4.54 billion years.

"Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that," he said. "It's one of the great mysteries." </div></div>

Translation.

"I'm running for POTUS 2016 for Pete's sake. If I answer that question truthfully, I would lose half my base! And NO, mankind did not evolve."

Then he tries to cover himself.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rubio continued, refusing to take a stance on the planet's age, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>which scientists have long estimated at 4.54 billion years.</span>

"Whether the Earth was created in <span style='font-size: 14pt'>7 days, or 7 actual eras</span>, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that," he said. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>"It's one of the great mysteries."</span> </div></div>

Its only a mystery if you think geologists, physicists, astro physicists etc........and mathematicians have it all wrong.

Its obvious, the GOP have learned NOTHING from the last election.


Q

Soflasnapper
11-20-2012, 09:46 AM
There is a reason Obama won the majority of those with post-graduate degrees, and scientists in particular.

The GOP tends to wear protective amulets against science around their necks. They have the antidote to science.

LWW
12-07-2012, 04:23 AM
Perhaps one of you will tell us the exact age of the Oit?

Gayle in MD
12-07-2012, 01:35 PM
LOL, he's a Tea Party Candidate, everything is a mystery to that bunch!

The only thing they know for sure is that they THINK, (using the word loosely) they have right to dictate everything, to everybody, even after the country has told them to go take a flying ****.

cushioncrawler
12-07-2012, 03:54 PM
Perhaps one of you will tell us the exact age of the Oit?Canyon Diablo meteorite
Further information: Canyon Diablo (meteorite)
Fragment of the Canyon Diablo iron meteorite.
The Canyon Diablo meteorite was used because it is a very large representative of a particularly rare type of meteorite that contains sulfide minerals (particularly troilite, FeS), metallic nickel-iron alloys, plus silicate minerals.

Barringer Crater, Arizona where the Canyon Diablo meteorite was found.
This is important because the presence of the three mineral phases allows investigation of isotopic dates using samples that provide a great separation in concentrations between parent and daughter nuclides. This is particularly true of uranium and lead. Lead is strongly chalcophilic and is found in the sulfide at a much greater concentration than in the silicate, versus uranium. Because of this segregation in the parent and daughter nuclides during the formation of the meteorite, this allowed a much more precise date of the formation of the solar disk and hence the planets than ever before.

The Canyon Diablo date has been backed up by hundreds of other dates, from both terrestrial samples and other meteorites.[30] The meteorite samples, however, show a spread from 4.53 to 4.58 billion years ago. This is interpreted as the duration of formation of the solar nebula and its collapse into the solar disk to form the Sun and the planets. This 50 million year time span allows for accretion of the planets from the original solar dust and meteorites.

The moon, as another extraterrestrial body that has not undergone plate tectonics and that has no atmosphere, provides quite precise age dates from the samples returned from the Apollo missions. Rocks returned from the moon have been dated at a maximum of around 4.4 and 4.5 billion years old. Martian meteorites that have landed upon Earth have also been dated to around 4.5 billion years old by lead-lead dating. Lunar samples, since they have not been disturbed by weathering, plate tectonics or material moved by organisms, can also provide dating by direct electron microscope examination of cosmic ray tracks. The accumulation of dislocations generated by high energy cosmic ray particle impacts provides another confirmation of the isotopic dates. Cosmic ray dating is only useful on material that has not been melted, since melting erases the crystalline structure of the material, and wipes away the tracks left by the particles.

Altogether, the concordance of age dates of both the earliest terrestrial lead reservoirs and all other reservoirs within the solar system found to date are used to support the hypothesis that Earth and the rest of the solar system formed at around 4.53 to 4.58 billion years ago.

cushioncrawler
12-07-2012, 04:09 PM
Rubio continued, refusing to take a stance on the planet's age, which scientists have long estimated at 4.54 billion years.
"Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that," he said. "It's one of the great mysteries."

I think i see the problem. The The Holey Bible meens to say that the earth woz accreted, not created.
And i think scientists estimate less than 100 million years for the accretion.

So, God might possibly hav accreted the heavens and the earth -- but certainly didnt create.
mac.

LWW
12-07-2012, 11:55 PM
So you don't know the age either?

cushioncrawler
12-08-2012, 12:50 AM
No the accretion period happened in the first 100 million yrs -- followed by 4.44 billion yrs, unless i messed up the decimal.
mac.

LWW
12-08-2012, 06:16 AM
What you know is an estimate.

I'm not even disagreeing with the estimate ... but none of us knows exactly.

cushioncrawler
12-08-2012, 03:24 PM
Yes and no. I dont trust science. Hell even gravity G haz been shown to be over 1% off newtonian einsteinian theory lately. But all the same one shoodnt say that the age of the earth iz a mystery. Even aetherists and einsteinians etc are in agreement i think.
mac.

LWW
12-08-2012, 09:51 PM
If they are in agreement then why is there a range of age presented?

cushioncrawler
12-08-2012, 09:57 PM
Age of the Earth
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The age of the Earth is 4.54 0.05 billion years (4.54 109 years 1%).[1][2][3] This age is based on evidence from radiometric age dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples. Following the scientific revolution and the development of radiometric age dating, measurements of lead in uranium-rich minerals showed that some were in excess of a billion years old.[4]

The oldest such minerals analyzed to date – small crystals of zircon from the Jack Hills of Western Australia – are at least 4.404 billion years old.[5][6][7] Comparing the mass and luminosity of the Sun to the magnitudes of other stars, it appears that the solar system cannot be much older than those rocks. Ca-Al-rich inclusions (inclusions rich in calcium and aluminium) – the oldest known solid constituents within meteorites that are formed within the solar system – are 4.567 billion years old,[8][9] giving an age for the solar system and an upper limit for the age of Earth.

It is hypothesised that the accretion of Earth began soon after the formation of the Ca-Al-rich inclusions and the meteorites. Because the exact accretion time of Earth is not yet known, and the predictions from different accretion models range from a few millions up to about 100 million years, the exact age of Earth is difficult to determine. It is also difficult to determine the exact age of the oldest rocks on Earth, exposed at the surface, as they are aggregates of minerals of possibly different ages.

cushioncrawler
12-08-2012, 10:01 PM
There appears to be very little arguement about the age of the earth, or how formed etc. But even if there woz a lot of arguement about the age, this would be sort of 1000th on the list of arguements, and sort of 1000th on the list of importance.
The age iz surely wrong by miles, but it will be the reasons for the error that will for sure be important -- the age itself of the earth itself, no big deal.
mac.

cushioncrawler
12-08-2012, 10:05 PM
In a way all such science will be tied up with all such science -- and aetherists like myself know that allmost all standard science, especially einsteinian relativity etc, and quantum mekanix etc, and einsteinian gravity etc, are all kompletely wrong.
This will be a major scientifyk skandal for sure.
And i am surprized that creationists are not circling.
mac.

LWW
12-09-2012, 04:31 AM
I'm going with 4,538,267,901 years 7 months 23 days 14 hours 56 minutes and 8.09 seconds from right now ... and I challenge anyone to rove me wrong.

cushioncrawler
12-09-2012, 04:57 AM
The The Holey Bible proovs u wrong.
mac.