You would thank that, given the utter and sheer brilliance of these "experts," that they would be able to get the age of the earth closer than to within 1,000,000,000 years.
Actually, the result being reported here measured it to within half a billion years, which is an error of about 4%. Considering that they are measuring something that happened about 13 billion years ago (give or take), 4% error is pretty darned good.
Seriously, are you going to disparage science until they can tell you the month, day, and hour of the Big Bang? How much accuracy do you demand, and why?
I'm getting some strong hints that some of the posters here have the opinion that the universe is only 6,000 years old, which would explain their open hostility to the current findings of science.
I was referring to "astronomers using another method estimated the age at 13 to 14 billion years." 14,000,000,000 minus 13,000,000,000 equals 1,000,000,000 years. If the actual age of earth was 13,000,000,000 years and they guessed 14,000,000,000 years, they were within 1,000,000,000 years worst case.
My cynicism for the wide range of years for the age of the earth is borne from the periodically-appearing news reports that yet another "scientist" or "group of scientists" has determined that the earth is really _______ (fill in the blank) years old.
posted on 04/24/2002 8:11:08 PM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson