deleted

Whiskey,

I thought about it, but I'm not going to get into a long religious/scientific argument with you on the Big Bang and age of the Earth or universe.  I'm Christian too, but I probably lean towards scientific explanations, so I think we'd be blowing a lot of air at each other for no purpose.

Conversly, you've got the wrong idea about carbon dating (Aviyur, this may be of interest to you, too).  It's half-life is roughly 5730, much longer than what you said was the accuracy of it.  Additionally, a radioactive isotope's age can be measured much further than the back than its half-life.  The accuracy of it is actually limited to something close to 60,000 years.  Now understand that at that point it can be off by a few hundred years, but it would still give the right approximate age. [Wikipedia on Radiocarbon Dating]

Additionally, they don't use carbon dating for very old things.  Just as you said, it wouldn't make any sense.  However, there are plenty of other isotopes with ages ranging from the small (like Carbon14) to the rediculously long (Uranium is actually pretty short, but it's the longest useful one).  [Radiometric dating]

Whiskey is a Christian creationist.  I am a Christian Evolutionist.

Sound strange?  Not really.  One way of describing it could be to say that God created the tools by which life came into being.  If the world is only 10,000 years old, then why would God deceive us into thinking it was older?  Surely a better way would be to create the tools, and then allow it to evolve by itself.  I believe it was the Archbishop of Canterbury who, upon hearing of Darwin's theory, said something along the lines of "What wonderful tools God uses", meaning how Evolution creates life.  I'm British, and most British Christians have a good laugh about how the Creationists in America argue with the Evolutionists.

Anyway, IMO Noah's flood comes from the stories of the flooding of the Black Sea basin (about 10,000 years ago), which would certainly have been the whole world for the people living there.

Anyway this thread was originally about how 2012 is not the end of the world.  How did we get here?

Or zombie apocalypse' as a result of a chemical companies medling in prolonging human life.

deleted

So christian science is belief now? I thought we were debating scientific discoveries here as you were telling everyone else they were wrong about the age of the earth/universe. I'm not here to critize you for your beliefs as a christian, you can believe whatever you want, but understand that they are infact, just that. Beliefs.

I encourage you to become educated about that which you do not agree with, if you truly have your faith it shouldn't compromise it. But one thing I would not do, is just blindly believe anything somone says (christian scientists?) because it supports what you already believe even if their claims are ill founded.

I'll leave it at that.

It didn't originally begin w/ evolution: the process is called abiogenisis. We don't actually know how life first began, although we are getting closer to an answer all the time.

Special FX looks great, Emmerich has enough productivity reputation to convince any big Hollywood corporate executives to invest in his projects rather than some of others (better or worst, btw), this film isn't about acting it's about racking up audience tickets (just as much as any other blockbusters presented to the public every summer since Spielberg's Jaws stormed into the trend of tent-pole cash grabbers from crowds), 2012 is a myth, zombie apocalypse fits the horror genre perfectly if you like that kind of stuffy shitty scary stunny filty bloody violent "entertainment".

There, feeling any better?

I went to Abrams' Star Trek. DVD cash for it already reserved.

I might find some spare money to spend on District-9... but i doubt it, since my food bills have been steadily increasing for about 6 to 12 months in a row. Rent went higher, phone, ISP, cable, clothing -- everything. Revenu isn't though, strangely it has LOWERED over the last 4 years -- blame the capitalists trying to recuperate their losses on the market crashes of late.

So, ya know... 2012 or zombies. Or insults & threats by ANY forum users.

I've got much more important "problems" to cope with than being bothered, too.

There, understood?

According to the point of origin "theory", the snap buildup of the big-bang (conditional to the calcutated mass ***OBSERVABLE***) is additional to the 13.7 billions figure.

Knowing the amount of energy produced, some phycisists speculate a 'period' of non-time (howerer strange this notion may seem to many people) had to occur before matter shuffled the +/- 50kms (really, THAT small) universe_bubble into the expansion momentum necessary to turn dimensions on, so to speak.

Thus, the 5 to 8 gap. Unmeasurable rationally, but still theorizable until all mass is accounted for.