[RadioAstronomer]

Whereas if a cosmologist waves his hands and murmurs soothingly about "billions and billions of years"--who can say him nay?. That's the thing about stats and their obfuscatory nature--they often reveal an accompanying condition rather than the fact they seem to reveal.

You have it backwards. We (the human race) started out thinking the universe was young until the evidence became so overwhelming that we finally had to admit it was billions of years old.

[Just mythoughts]

"We (the human race) started out thinking the universe was young until the evidence became so overwhelming that we finally had to admit it was billions of years old."


I do not believe this is historically correct, I think the theory of a young earth got rooted about the same time as darwin's plantings.

Biblically speaking Moses, David, Solomon, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Peter and Paul and others, knew and wrote about a very very OLD earth. Peter called it the earth that WAS.

[Mamzelle]

I made no claim as to the age of the earth--I observed that cosmologists just add ages to our age whenever they are short of real knowledge--I think it's a copout, a pretense of knowing what has to be speculative. And that is the difference between a scientist who develops medicines and the scientist who tries to figure out the history of the universe--you know when the drug is bad. You don't know when the cosmologist is wrong--nor do we really care--his speculations just fade from view as time and space recede.

But, as you bring up the subject--has time always and behaved the same? That is, a billion years ago--was a day still 24 hours? Our notions of time are like our notions of speed--dependent on a paradigm.