4.4 billion-year-old crystal

Discussion about scientific issues as they relate to God and Christianity including archaeology, origins of life, the universe, intelligent design, evolution, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
neo-x
Ultimate Member
Posts: 3551
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 2:13 am
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Contact:

4.4 billion-year-old crystal

Post by neo-x »

Full article here4.4 billion-year-old crystal is oldest piece of Earth
(CNN) -- From a sheep ranch in Western Australia comes the oldest slice of Earth we know.
Scientists say they have dated an ancient crystal called a zircon to about 4.4 billion years, making it the earliest confirmed piece of the planet's crust. The findings -- the first to describe the zircon -- were published in the journal Nature Geoscience on Sunday.
"This is the oldest and the best dated of all the crystals that have been reported," said John Valley, lead study author and professor in the Department of Geoscience at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
This crystal is a translucent red, Valley said, but glows blue when bombarded with electrons. At 400 micrometers long, its biggest dimension is just a tad larger than a house dust mite, or about four human hairs.
The crystal was found in an arid region north of Perth, Australia, in a low range of hills called the Jack Hills, in 2001.
Scientists say the crystal's chemistry -- specifically, the ratio of oxygen isotopes within it -- suggests that the temperatures on Earth 4.4 billion years ago would have supported liquid water, and therefore perhaps life. Two isotopes of an element are considered different if they contain different numbers of neutrons.
I wonder how yec scientists explain this...if they do, what kind of method would they employ to date it?
It would be a blessing if they missed the cairns and got lost on the way back. Or if
the Thing on the ice got them tonight.

I could only turn and stare in horror at the chief surgeon.
Death by starvation is a terrible thing, Goodsir, continued Stanley.
And with that we went below to the flame-flickering Darkness of the lower deck
and to a cold almost the equal of the Dante-esque Ninth Circle Arctic Night
without.


//johnadavid.wordpress.com
Seraph
Senior Member
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: 4.4 billion-year-old crystal

Post by Seraph »

Observational evidence vs historical evidence. We observe the crystal, but our pre-existing beliefs are what make us believe its 4 billion years old. The evidence doesn't say anything, its the lens scientists see the evidence through that makes them believe it's 4 billion years old. Who is the higher authority, the wisdom of man, or the wisdom of God? You can put your faith in man (science) or God (the Bible).


...is what a YEC person would probably say. Personally, I think the 4 billion year old crystal is pretty neat. :P
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6024
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY

Re: 4.4 billion-year-old crystal

Post by Byblos »

Seraph wrote:Observational evidence vs historical evidence. We observe the crystal, but our pre-existing beliefs are what make us believe its 4 billion years old. The evidence doesn't say anything, its the lens scientists see the evidence through that makes them believe it's 4 billion years old. Who is the higher authority, the wisdom of man, or the wisdom of God? You can put your faith in man (science) or God (the Bible).
Seriously? You think YECers are that shallow? I understand their main focus is the literal reading of the creation story in Genesis but that is most certainly not how they would argue against a 4 billion year old rock. I presume they would challenge the aging methods employed (and I'm not making any kind of statements for or against either the methods employed or their challenges). I'm well aware that various methods of dating are employed and they all seem to converge on a preponderance of old age but they are far from accurate (some differ by millions of years). So let's not just dismiss YEC arguments out of hand as though they were irrational.
Last edited by Byblos on Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Let us proclaim the mystery of our faith: Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.

Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
Seraph
Senior Member
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:47 pm
Christian: No
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: 4.4 billion-year-old crystal

Post by Seraph »

I'm not saying that is the full extent of how rational YEC arguements can be, but more often than not they seem to boil down to that. It was more a tongue in cheek version of Ken Ham-esque YEC apologetics than anything.
Last edited by Seraph on Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
I am committed to belief in God, as the most morally demanding, psychologically enriching, intellectually satisfying and imaginatively fruitful hypothesis about the ultimate nature of reality known to me - Keith Ward
User avatar
Byblos
Old School
Posts: 6024
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 12:21 pm
Christian: Yes
Location: NY

Re: 4.4 billion-year-old crystal

Post by Byblos »

Seraph wrote:I'm not saying that is the full extent of how rational YEC arguements can be, but more often than not they seem to boil down to that. It was more a tongue in check version of Ken Ham-esque YEC apologetic than anything.
For what it's worth, Ken Ham would challenge the science first.
Let us proclaim the mystery of our faith: Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.

Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed.
Post Reply