Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ctdonath2
.... but not to the accuracy claimed about the age & origin of the universe.

If you have a beef with the claimed accuracy of the measurements regarding the age of the Universe, by all means post the evidence. This thread is over 150 post long, and not a single naysayer has provided a scintilla of evidence that the methods used by the scientists were defective.

183 posted on 04/25/2002 2:02:54 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]


To: longshadow
Do you think the same skepticism would be visible on this page from the same players if the results of this study were that the universe is 6,000 to 10,000 years old?
186 posted on 04/25/2002 3:19:01 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies ]

To: longshadow
This thread is over 150 post long, and not a single naysayer has provided a scintilla of evidence that the methods used by the scientists were defective.

That's probably because they aren't. I personally don't doubt the intelligence of these people and what they're doing. My only argument that hasn't been refuted either is that they're only measuring what they can see. If there are galaxies or other objects in space farther out than what we can now detect, objects whose light is too faint, or hasn't reached us yet, that would throw their whole discoveries out of whack, because that would mean the universe is older than what they're saying. That's why I'm skeptical of stories like this.

I say wait 20 or 30 more years when technology advances with even better telescopes. You'll be hearing the universe is at least a 100 billion years older or more.

195 posted on 04/25/2002 5:34:53 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson