Jack Hills zircon crystal is oldest-known fragment of Earth | Mail Online
By analysing the rock, geoscientists have confirmed that the Earthâs crust formed at least 4.4 billion years ago, just 160 million years after the formation of our solar system.
Add Comment
All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read
- 7Posted by barwick11 10 years, 10 months agoaaaahahaha... this is hilarious... "have confirmed the Earth's crust formed at least 4.4 billion years ago..." <br /><br />These people are the most presumptuous idiots on the planet. They base their theories on a full set of preconceptions that they PRESUME to be true, and then claim they proved something... <br /><br />Here, look, I can do it too... Since "everybody knows" that the age of these layers of sand on the beach are 7.3 years, and I found this crab egg buried in that layer, then this freshly hatched crab has been in that egg for at least 7 years! <br /><br />Sorry, but crap like this pisses me off. They're not scientists, they're government-funded (usually) zealots out to prove their preconceived notions that the earth is somehow billions upon billions of years old. Any evidence to the contrary is thrown out as invalid, and those bringing forth such evidence are not only ignored, but ridiculed, shamed, name-called, and often banned from any future publications or funding. <br /><br />That's "science"...| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 5Posted by mspalding 10 years, 10 months agoI hope this guy is trolling...| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 7Posted by barwick11 10 years, 10 months agoYea there mspalding, awesome response. Typical of your point of view. Because, you know, since the mainstream claims it's true, it must be true. <br /><br />So glad you're smart enough to see through the mainstream's crap when it comes to economics and politics, but too blind to see the fact that the mainstream may in fact be wrong in their zeal for demonstrating a billions of years old earth. <br /><br />And to Rockymountain's post, you just contradicted your desires in your post. You "don't want this to turn into a religious rant", yet you then invite me to bring forth my evidence? <br /><br />I'll tell you what. I got 1.5 hours of sleep last night (I think... maybe not that much) up with a kid with an ear infection and a sore throat, and the other kids coughing and not feeling good. I'm not up for an argument right now. How about I do us both a favor and agree to not post here, given you agree to also not debate the same topic. But I will provide reading material for you to look into one small part of the scientific study based on creation (portions of which may be right, and they may be wrong, just like other real science), so you'll have both your desires in your post: <br /><a href="http://www.creationscience.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.creationscience.com/</a>| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 5Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 10 years, 10 months agoI invite rational, reasoned debate. Not abuse.| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
-
-- 3Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 10 years, 10 months agoMe too. All we need is another post to devolve into a religious rant. <br /><br />barwick11. Please cite your evidence.| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months agoHe's got a point.... <br /><br />Actually, the oldest things on the planet are far older than 4.4 billion years.. things like iron, oxygen, carbon... all had to form in stars long before the Earth congealed... <br />| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
-
- -
-
- 3Posted by richrobinson 10 years, 10 months agoIts hard to wrap your mind around that. We have so much to learn.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2Posted by LarryHeart 10 years, 10 months agoWhat is the point of this post?| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 4Posted by richrobinson 10 years, 10 months agoWhat is the point of yours?| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 4Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 10 years, 10 months agoThe point of the post was that I found it interesting and thought perhaps someone else might also.| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months agoit's brutal in here today| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 2Posted by $ rockymountainpirate 10 years, 10 months agoI'm glad I was out most of the day.| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
-
- -
- -
-
- 2Posted by mckenziecalhoun 10 years, 10 months ago...at least 4.4 billion years ago,...; <br />Remember that millions of those crystals may have formed and been subsumed in the mantle before that. Glad they found it.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 2Posted by salta 10 years, 10 months agoGeology is an interesting subject, but I'm amazed this makes it into the general news media. The approximate age of the Earth is now very well established, but the "apparent" accuracy of another test is not really news. If we were out by 10% error, and the true age was 4.0 billion or 5.0 billion, would it really matter to anybody? Its the broad strokes that count.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1Posted by $ Radio_Randy 10 years, 10 months agoGot you all to forget Obamacare, for a minute, didn't it? <br />Mission accomplished.| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
- 1Posted by khalling 10 years, 10 months agohuh? it's interesting. killjoys| Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink
-
- -
-
- 1Posted by robinhood777 10 years, 10 months agosimply trying to interject another thought here. The Scientists that get most papers published have an agenda and deeply believe in evolution (hence promote it) while the one third of the scientists in the world that absolutely do not believe in it, get blacklisted. In addition, there is no way anyone can prove it cause not a soul was alive billions of years ago (hence why it is called a THEORY of evolution). The methods of dating are very subjective and seriously take a lot for granted. Would be an interesting thing to look at the other side of the argument in depth and see if there is any validity to it.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1Posted by Zenphamy 10 years, 10 months agoThat soon for a crust is amazing. Then signs of life just 7 or 8 millions later, just after the late bombardment. We are such a minuscule blip on the time frame of the Earth.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
- 1Posted by mminnick 10 years, 10 months agoThink of the 4.4 Billion years this way. It is 1/3 the current estimated age of the observable universe.| Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink
