ScienceWhopper:Natural History According to Jeffrey Holland

[_Hoops]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=age+of+the+earth

I'll assume, then, that you're not willing to tell us what you so confidently claim to be true. Interesting.

[_SteelHead]

Many times in history the entire weight of science has been overturned.

I have to say false. Mathematics is a science. In our universe if you take 2 integers and increase them by 2 more you will have four integers meaning 2+2 = 4. This is a scientific fact that can not be overturned.

There are fundamental verifiable truths in science that can not be changed without re-writing the rules of the universe. These are not overturned every now and then.

[_Buffalo]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=age+of+the+earth

I'll assume, then, that you're not willing to tell us what you so confidently claim to be true. Interesting.

Oh, for the sake of Jesus' foreskin!

4.54 billion years.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=let+me+google+that+for+you

[_Some Schmo]

I'll assume, then, that you're not willing to tell us what you so confidently claim to be true. Interesting.

Oh, for the sake of Jesus' foreskin!

4.54 billion years.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=let+me+google+that+for+you

*waits for Hoops to object on the basis of precision...*

[_Chap]

Dammit, Buffalo, when you joined our gang you promised never to tell that secret to a girl!

[_keithb]

This view of science as being liable to a total 'overturn' at any moment is odd, and does not really represent that way things have gone on over the last '100 or 200 years'.

Large parts of the science we still use are really very old - such as the system of dynamics established in its essentials by Isaac Newton in 1687. Although we have learned that Newton's system does not represent accurately what happens at high speeds or when very large masses are involved, it is still reliable for all everyday purposes. Maxwell's electromagnetic equations were published in 1861-2, and still do for electric and magnetic fields what Newton did for the motion of masses. In five years' time, general relativity will be 100 years old, and it is still one of the most powerful physical theories we have. Like Newton's dynamics, it may eventually be shown to have its limitations, but that time is not yet, and any competing theory will be in part judged by whether it tells us why general relativity seems to be true in all the tests it has survived so far. We have known about atomic nuclei since Rutherford's paper in 1911. And so on. The science that Franktalk speaks of as entirely provisional and likely to be 'washed away by future generations' isn't the science known to people who actually understand and practice it.

+1

I was actually going to post a reply to Franktalk, but Chap beat me to it. Franktalk, can you cite even one example from the last 100 years of the phenomenon that you're describing?

[_Hoops]

*waits for Hoops to object on the basis of precision...*

Wait for Schmo to stand on a chair so he can be seen and heard.

[_Hoops]

4.54 billion years.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=let+me+google+that+for+you

It wasn't that long ago that science told us the earth was 2.5 billion years old. So is 4.5 it now? You're sure?
eta: fix a misspelling

[_Buffalo]

Dammit, Buffalo, when you joined our gang you promised never to tell that secret to a girl!

Sorry fellas. I got all riled up!

[_Buffalo]

4.54 billion years.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=let+me+google+that+for+you

It wasn't that long ago that science told us the earth was 2.5 billion years old. So is 4.5 it now? You're sure?
eta: fix a misspelling

It's possible it could be slightly older, but not possible that it could be younger than 4.54 billion years old. Either way, it looks bad for the Jesus Squad.