Napoleon the Clown
The universe is, if I remember correctly, believed to be trillions of years old.
And the Bible is wrong on many things.
5/10/2006 3:42:44 AM
OK, the number you're thinking of is 13.7 billion and yes it's a carefully calculated figure obtained from genuine data!
I hate to break the news to you, but your band of primitive goat fuckers got a lot of wild ass guesses utterly incorrect!
5/10/2006 3:57:16 AM
Napoleon the Clown
Thanks Julian. Knew that sounded kinda high but it's been awhile... I'm too lazy these days.
5/10/2006 4:16:36 AM
Wasn't exactly correcting you, more the keyboard epileptic who got submitted!
5/10/2006 5:49:55 AM
Napoleon the Clown
Eh, I ws still corrected. Besides, I'm happy to be corrected.
5/10/2006 6:15:21 AM
\"So radioactive decay automatically makes the universe 4.3 billion years old (or whatever the current running number is)? However when a more relevant and fully substantiated source, such as the Bible, says otherwise... one is compelled to wonder.\"
He honestly believes that a bunch of mismatched fanciful ruminations from bronze-age goatherders is more relevant to determining the age of the universe than scientific evidence, and is fully substantiated in doing so? The poster is clearly not rooted in reality. One is compelled to wonder, all right---wonder what meds might help his mental condition.
5/10/2006 2:43:15 PM
The Bible is neither relevant nor fully substantiated when concerning anything scientific.
And the Earth is 4.6 billion years old; the universe itself is about two to three times that much (I don't remember the exact figure myself).
5/10/2006 4:09:07 PM
David said:\"One is compelled to wonder, all right---wonder what meds might help his mental condition.\"
Only a hefty dose logic, understanding, reading, and a shot of vitamin R, \"reality\".
6/29/2006 9:43:30 AM
You're right. One is compelled to think how much of an idiot you are.
6/4/2007 1:24:00 PM
One one hand, a scientific observatin and conclusion.
On the other, a story written by people (supposedly divinely inspired) which is wrong on countless occasions.
And you choose... what?
6/4/2007 1:30:35 PM
I think that this post was from Bizarro World. He MEANT to say
"So the Bible automatically makes the universe 6000 years old (or whatever the current running number is)? However when a more relevant and fully substantiated source, such as the radiometric dating, says otherwise... one is compelled to wonder."
8/31/2009 9:06:59 PM
Yes. You do have to wonder. About the limits of human reason when people consider a book written centuries ago a more valid source when it comes to things like the age of the universe than modern science.
8/31/2009 9:12:24 PM
One is compelled to wonder why this quote is on FSTDT! :p
11/6/2009 3:21:49 AM
"Fully substantiated"? Uh huh. Been neglecting our meds lately?
8/7/2010 9:36:10 AM
That reminds me...
relevant to what? The Stone Age?
8/7/2010 9:36:45 AM
We judge the age of the universe by trying to analyze our immediate surroundings. In the grand scheme we are a single grain of sand trying to measure the beach from a point where we don't even see the water. The Bible on the other hand claims the single grain is the center of everything and the beach was made around it in the snap of a finger while the almighty guy who did it spoke directly to his creations... that somehow forgot who he was for 4000 years only to be reminded by a man whose personal history has been written differently by 12 of the people who supposedly knew him best and CONTRADICT EACH OTHER in the telling.
2/8/2011 7:40:07 PM
Wonder all you want. It's not like you're going to understands it anyway.
2/8/2011 7:44:27 PM
So modern science automatically makes the universe 13.7 billion years old, but a fantastical string of fairy tales which contradict themselves, facts and common sense written by bronze age farmers 2000 years ago says otherwise...one is compelled to wonder.
9/19/2011 8:31:15 AM