How old is the Earth?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
The archaeological record for intelligent humans goes back at least 12,000 years.
[/QUOTE]

And at that time the climate became favorable for (human) life.

What do you do with the stuff we've dug up that's older than 7,000? Things like Gobekli Tepe show that the builders possessed human intelligence well before the 7,000 year mark.

The C14 dating method, or radiocarbon dating, determines the age of organic materials by measuring the remaining amount of the unstable carbon-14 isotope relative to stable carbon-12. Cosmic rays produce 14C in the atmosphere, which living organisms absorb. After an organism's death, it stops absorbing 14C, and the remaining 14C decays at a known rate (a half-life of about 5,730 years). By comparing the 14C:12C ratio in the sample to the atmospheric standard, scientists can calculate the time elapsed since the organism died, providing reliable dates for organic materials up to approximately 60,000 years old.

Note that the method is safe for only 5730 years, after that the method is no longer reliable, as far as I know the 60,000 years are rubbish but maybe my knowledge is outdated.
 

HealthyShape

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2025
1,827
673
113
Northeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Note that the method is safe for only 5730 years, after that the method is no longer reliable, as far as I know the 60,000 years are rubbish but maybe my knowledge is outdated.

The statement “the method is safe for only 5730 years” is incorrect. The half-life is 5,730 years, meaning after one half-life half the original 14C remains; it does not mean the method stops working after that time.

Radiocarbon dating is useful well beyond a single half-life. Modern instrumentation (accelerator mass spectrometry, AMS) and careful sample preparation allow reliable measurements and age estimates out to roughly 40,000–60,000 years, depending on sample quality, contamination, and the lab’s detection limits.

Beyond ~50–60 thousand years the residual 14C becomes extremely small relative to background and contamination, so uncertainties grow and ages become less reliable or are reported as minimum ages.
 

Hiddenthings

Well-Known Member
May 19, 2025
3,777
415
83
Leeton NSW
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
@ProDeo

I'm no scientist but they say the “safe” range is not just one half-life (5,730 years), but about 8–10 half-lives. That’s why the upper limit of ~60,000 years is accepted in modern science.
 

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
no one was there. so they are not facts.. even if they proclaim them as fact.

All the way up to the multiverse, which never can be proven, but because it makes evolution more acceptable. And your kids have to learn it as truth, else they get a bad figure on the school report.
 

HealthyShape

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2025
1,827
673
113
Northeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
All the way up to the multiverse, which never can be proven, but because it makes evolution more acceptable. And your kids have to learn it as truth, else they get a bad figure on the school report.
The multiverse is not promoted as a fact. It is a (popular?) possible explanation of the quantum mechanics. Your kids do not need to say it is truth to get a good figure on the school report.
 

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
The statement “the method is safe for only 5730 years” is incorrect. The half-life is 5,730 years, meaning after one half-life half the original 14C remains; it does not mean the method stops working after that time.

Correct, problem is the method stops working and nobody knows when. 5730 years is testable, 6000-7000 maybe, but with assumed error margins.

It's a long time ago (about 25 years) I gave the Creation vs Evolution issue attention (we all have to deal with it) and I remember that 60.000 years number did not exist in the mind of scientists, much much lower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kayla McCanny

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
@ProDeo

I'm no scientist but they say the “safe” range is not just one half-life (5,730 years), but about 8–10 half-lives. That’s why the upper limit of ~60,000 years is accepted in modern science.

Accepted by assumption, not proof.
 

HealthyShape

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2025
1,827
673
113
Northeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
problem is the method stops working and nobody knows when.
Well, this it not a precise statement. It does not just stop working suddenly with everybody being in dark. It is still highly reliable after its half-time and how reliable it is depends on the lab, tools used and the quality of the sample. Even if we cannot determine the precise age anymore, we can still determine a minimum age, for example. So it is not that simple.
 

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
The multiverse is not promoted as a fact. It is a (popular?) possible explanation of the quantum mechanics. Your kids do not need to say it is truth to get a good figure on the school report.

Speculations become truth for those who trust science blindly.
 

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
Well, this it not a precise statement. It does not just stop working suddenly with everybody being in dark. It is still highly reliable after its half-time and how reliable it is depends on the lab, tools used and the quality of the sample. Even if we cannot determine the precise age anymore, we can still determine a minimum age, for example. So it is not that simple.

But 60.000 years is an assumption, no proof.

Don't get me wrong, I have reconciled Creation and Evolution a long time ago, a viable explanation is just there in Genesis 3, but not after reading the story 50 times (or so) and I finally could give the issue a rest.
 

HealthyShape

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2025
1,827
673
113
Northeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Speculations become truth for those who trust science blindly.
To trust science blindly is an oxymoron. Science is based upon repeated experiments, peer-review, critique, discussions, falsification etc. Not on trust.
 
Last edited:

HealthyShape

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2025
1,827
673
113
Northeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But 60.000 years is an assumption, no proof.

Don't get me wrong, I have reconciled Creation and Evolution a long time ago, a viable explanation is just there in Genesis 3, but not after reading the story 50 times (or so) and I finally could give the issue a rest.
I would not look for scientific worldview in Genesis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wick Stick

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
To trust science blindly is an oxymoron. Science is based upon repeated experiments, peer-review, critique, discussions, falsification etc. Not on trust.

Yes, for you, me and likely for the rest of the forum members because we have an interest, not so for average people, they just accept.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HealthyShape

HealthyShape

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2025
1,827
673
113
Northeast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yes, for you, me and likely for the rest of the forum members because we have an interest, not so for average people, they just accept.
Yeah, people can be easily mistaken... but what can we do... the best we can do is to correct some mistakes and misconceptions, but in the end, its everybody's own responsibility to learn and to get educated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ProDeo

Wick Stick

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2023
2,424
1,486
113
46
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The C14 dating method, or radiocarbon dating, determines the age of organic materials by measuring the remaining amount of the unstable carbon-14 isotope relative to stable carbon-12. Cosmic rays produce 14C in the atmosphere, which living organisms absorb. After an organism's death, it stops absorbing 14C, and the remaining 14C decays at a known rate (a half-life of about 5,730 years). By comparing the 14C:12C ratio in the sample to the atmospheric standard, scientists can calculate the time elapsed since the organism died, providing reliable dates for organic materials up to approximately 60,000 years old.

Note that the method is safe for only 5730 years, after that the method is no longer reliable, as far as I know the 60,000 years are rubbish but maybe my knowledge is outdated.
I've been scrupulously avoiding any reference to carbon-dating throughout this topic. My arguments and examples here have been drawn from archaeology, and the Biblical text.
 

ProDeo

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2024
1,813
1,503
113
51
Deventer
Faith
Christian
Country
Netherlands
They have known controls to base their assumptions off but in the end what does it really matter how old the earth is?

Exactly assumptions. I love science. But only the facts.

The age of the Earth once was an important issue for my critical brain, but no longer.
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
38,988
25,096
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The statement “the method is safe for only 5730 years” is incorrect. The half-life is 5,730 years, meaning after one half-life half the original 14C remains; it does not mean the method stops working after that time.

Radiocarbon dating is useful well beyond a single half-life. Modern instrumentation (accelerator mass spectrometry, AMS) and careful sample preparation allow reliable measurements and age estimates out to roughly 40,000–60,000 years, depending on sample quality, contamination, and the lab’s detection limits.

Beyond ~50–60 thousand years the residual 14C becomes extremely small relative to background and contamination, so uncertainties grow and ages become less reliable or are reported as minimum ages.
There are some built in assumptions that determine the outcomes of the readings, and if those assumptions are false, then the readings don't show what people think they show.

One assumption concerns the level of radiation received by the target material, be it a tree, or animal, or whatever, that we "know" what that radiation level was. In fact we do not, as no one was there taking test samples for us. And we have good reason to think it may have been very different.

The Bible addresses this head on:

2 Peter 3:3-7 KJV
3) Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4) And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
5) For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6) Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7) But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

God judged the world once with water, and will again by fire. But people don't want to think about that! So they look at a world ravaged by that flood, that killed all but 8 people, and tell themselves, there wasn't anything cataclysmic, this all happened just like it happens today, over a long long time. In a word, Uniformatarianism.

". . . All things continue as they were from the beginning . . ."

Just like in Romans 1, people did not want to be thankful, and so admit accountability to God, so they chose to forget about Him. Here, they don't want to know God will judge them, again, accountability, so they lie to themselves that it's all been going on for millions and millions of years, no, this wasn't from God's judgment! Because that would be admitting God will judge me!

Uniformatarianism as a philosophy exists to aid man in ridding God from his thoughts. In fact things have not continued always just as they were. There seem to be no end of "exceptions", such as fossil layers that don't match the theoretical "fossil record", trees standing upright through "millions of years" of rock layers, dinosaur fossils with soft tissue, rocks tested to be millions of years old that were actually formed in the modern day, it goes on and on.

1 Timothy 6:20-21 KJV
20) O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
21) Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

Much love!
 

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
38,988
25,096
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
They have known controls to base their assumptions off but in the end what does it really matter how old the earth is?
The Bible presents a young earth, and it's important to be able to read the Bible the way it's written, and not with reservations. Looking at this strictly from "creation days", there is much debate over how long those days were. People resort to "the Day/Age Theory", "the Gap Theory", "Theistic Evolution", "Pre-Adamic Civilizations", but the Bible says plainly that in 6 days God created heaven and earth and all that is in them, and on the 7th day He rested. So you also work 6 days and rest on the 7th. It's the same days, and we rest just like God rested, we know exactly how long that day is.

So when we come to that passage, and others like it, can we read it and accept it fully, or do we have ways of negating what it says in favor of some other theory?

Much love!