正文
注：“三棵樹”網友建議我去讀讀這篇文章：“How Old is the Earth？”。並要求我“不要假裝笑就算了，舉出一些反駁的論點和論據來”。於是我告訴他我不需要假裝笑，並且給他如下回複。大家看看對那篇文章是不是該真笑？
------------------------------------------------------------------------
本來那篇文章不值得一提。不過你既然這麽執著，我就給你大致說說它的問題吧：
首先，看看這位作者提出的幾點：
第一，放射性同位素碳定年法：他討論了這個方法的幾個前提假設。應該說對這些假設的探討都是嚴肅的。但他的結論比較有個人的傾向性：
假設1：活的生物體與環境處於（C14/C12比例的）平衡狀態下。
他的質疑是：生物會吃了老一點的食物（別的生物），因此會攝入舊的（C14/C12）比例從而改變其體內的（C12/C14）比值。
他的無知在這裏大大的現了一回：這些可以吃的“老一點的食物”能有多老？了不起幾年、幾十年吧（尤其是在沒有冰箱的自然條件下）？可是這點時間根本就在放射性碳定年法的誤差範圍內。而且“生物吃了幾十年老的食物”的幾率和占它們食物的比例有多大呢？你自己來回答這個簡單問題吧。
假設2：大氣中的（C12/C14）比值（在漫長的歲月中）保持不變。
這個假設是值得仔細推敲的。但他的質疑所用的證據——Velikovski的假說--就根本不值一提。金星的形成早有定論，並有無數的天文學觀察證據所支持。Velikovski的假說根本就是一個科幻小說。拿一個科幻小說式的假說來置疑有無數證據支持的科學理論和實踐，充分顯示了他的無知。
當然，拋開他的質疑，我們都可以也應該（用科學的方法，而不是科幻小說）置疑這個假設2。
在實踐上，科學家們往往不會輕易相信一個/次的定年結果。他們總要用從不同的地方收集到的不同的樣品來反複驗證。同時，他們有時也會有機會收集到古代的大氣樣品（比如封在冰層裏的，古代容器裏的，等等），這就可以直接做比較了。這樣大量的比較的結果指出：這個假設在一定的實驗誤差範圍內相當準確。因此可以用（同時要扣除一些已知的變化）。
假設3：樣品處在封閉係統內。
科學家們也知道有些樣品不在封閉係統內。但他們可以用上麵所說的辦法（用許多不同的樣品）來反複驗證。
假設4：樣品內沒有C14的放射產物。
我不知道有這個假設。因為測量的是（C14/C12）的比例，而不是放射產物的比例。
第二，其它定年方法：
1。樹環定年法
這老兄自以為是的攻擊了一番，卻沒想到樹木再老，也不會老過幾萬年。因此根本不能拿來定幾萬到幾十億年的年代。因此他的攻擊基本上沒什麽用。光這樣一個低級的錯誤就可以讓他這篇文章拿個不及格（如果當term paper來交的話）。
2。月球塵土
這位老兄不知道是從哪裏得到的月球落塵數據（有可能是Slusher）？這個數據的牛皮吹的太大了（還有別的計算到284英尺厚的塵土）。而且那些計算結果都被發現是錯誤的。現在的計算結果發現那月球上的塵土厚度隻有很薄的一層（例如有一個結果是大概隻有1/3英寸厚）而已。
3。地球磁場的衰變
這個好象是創造論者整天拿來說的事。但並沒有科學根據。科學上對地球磁場的發現是：在大部分時間內，地球的磁場並沒有多少變化。但有周期性的倒轉。而且這個周期可以用來與別的定年法互相驗證，效果很好。
4。地球的自轉和月球的遠離
這位老兄的小學數學真的是不行。按照他的4cm/year的數據，要想讓地球和月球相接觸，也得要94億年（地球的年齡是大約46億年）。即使是他所說的20億年，也遠遠超過了他宣稱的一萬年。
5。缺失的氦
他真的沒玩過/見過氦氣球？他不知道氦氣會一直往上升？這些氦氣最後就在大氣層的頂端慢慢的逸散掉了。這麽簡單的常識都沒有，學什麽人攻擊科學的結論？
6。彗星問題
一個人不需要多少天文知識就可以看出他的論點有問題。他說：“Short period comets can't exit for mor than 10,000 years.”人們不禁要問，那“long period comets”呢？它們能存在多久？
他的論點就好象是在計算一個家族活著的人的年齡時，說：“既然這個家族的最小的人的年齡隻有3個月，這個家族活著的人的年齡不可能超過3個月。”
實際上早年跟太陽係一起形成的彗星大多數已經被各大行星和太陽“吃”掉了。現在的彗星絕大部分是從奧托雲（太陽係外圍的一大團塵埃）來的。
你看，這樣一篇垃圾文章不拿個大0蛋還有什麽公正評分可言？
------------------------------------------------------------------------
原文如下：
HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?
Compiled by Rev. Jack Barr
Both creationists and evolutionists spend a great deal of time trying to find the exact age of the earth, and for a good reason. As extensive evidence continues to unfold that indicates the earth is less than 10,000 years old, the evolutionary theory falls apart. If the earth is truly less than 10,000 years old, it would be impossible for man to have evolved from a lower order in that amount of time.
Let's look for a moment, at how evolutionists date the age of the earth.
HOW THE RADIOCARBON DATING METHOD WORKS
The radiocarbon dating method was developed by Professor Willard Libby from California, for which he was awarded a Nobel prize. It is quite accurate in many applications for which the specimens are only a few thousand years old.
Here is how it works. The stratosphere above our earth is bombarded with cosmic rays from the sun, which converts the N14 in the stratosphere to radioactive carbon, or C14. This weak isotope is a part of our environment, and is absorbed by all living organisms (plants and animals) along with another version of carbon, C12, which is not radioactive. As long as the organism is alive, the ratio of C12 to C14 in the organism is theoretically the same as that of the environment; that is, the organism is in balance with the environment.
Once the organism dies, there is no longer a carbon intake. The amount of C12 in the organism remains constant, but the radioactive C14 decomposes with a half life of 5730 years into nitrogen. Nitrogen is a gas, which leaves the organism. This means after 5730 years, there will only be half as much C14 as when the organism died. Thus, by measuring the ratio of C12 to C14, one can (at least theoretically) determine when the organism died.
For practical reality, however, this doesn't always work. Researchers testing the shell of a live clam showed this live clam had been dead for 300 years. Dried up seal- carcasses only thirty years old have tested as old as 4600 years. Fresh carcasses often date as old as 1300 years.
Why is this so?
Radiocarbon dating makes several assumptions. If any of these is wrong, the results can be in error.
Assumption 1:
The Living Organism is in Balance with the Environment
This method assumes the C14 is absorbed by the organism at the same rate as the C12 from the environment. This is not always true. Some organisms have some type of internal metabolism that can reject the C14 more effectively than the C12. At death, then, these organisms have abnormally low C14 levels and appear much older than they really are.
In addition, while living the organism may eat and metabolize organic material that is old, thus loading their own system with the outdated organic material that returns the false reading.
Assumption 2:
The C12/C14 Level of the Atmosphere has remained constant.
Another assumption made in radiocarbon dating is that the ratio of C12 to the radioactive C14 has remained constant for thousands of years. Scientists today have a growing conviction that this ratio has not been constant. Immanuel Velikovsky and other scientists believe that cataclysmic events in the history of the earth could have radically altered the stratosphere, affecting the amount of C14 created.
Velikovsky, writing in WORLDS IN COLLISION, believed that the history of the earth was dramatically altered by the close approaches of Mars and Venus. The book described Venus as originally a planet which passed the earth as a comet only 3500 years ago and was captured by our solar system. Velikovsky believed the flood, the parting of the Red Sea as the Israelites escaped Egypt, the manna from heaven, and the day the sun stood still as the Israelites battled their enemies were all related to natural events.
For years several noted astronomers vigorously blocked the publishing of this book by Macmillan, as these concepts were contradictory to their own theories and the publishing would have affected their own income and status. With the landing of the astronauts on the moon, however, the dust levels that should have been several feet high for the Big Bang theory were found as only a few inches high, giving credence to Velikovsky's theories and giving him fresh recognition during the last years of his life.
Today more and more scientific evidence gives proof to Velikovsky's theories. The Bible describes the long life- times of early man, perhaps due to the increased cloud cover at that time. The lower levels of C14 at that time would make the current samples appear older than they actually are. Evidence exists that the earth's magnetic poles switch occasionally, as old samples often show magnetic patterns that do not match with he current magnetic alignment. Tropical plants have been found buried in Sweden that could not have there unless Sweden was, at one time, a lush tropical paradise.
Assumption 3:
The dating method assumes the sample is in a closed system.
Once the organism has died, the theory assumes the only continuing process is the decay of the C14. This, in fact, is seldom true. Ground water can leach C14 from a rock. Heat, changes in the magnetic field, and other factors can affect the ratio of C12 to C14.
Assumption 4:
There are no daughter elements in the sample originally.
There is no way to know how much radioactive daughter elements are actually in the sample at death. Other elements can affect the ratio.
OTHER DATING METHODS
Other dating methods are often used that have similarities to the radiocarbon method. One popular method is potassium-argon dating. Radioactive potassium is found in small quantities in some rocks. This decomposes into calcium and argon. Another alternative is uranium-lead dating. With uranium-lead dating, radioactive uranium decomposes into lead and other elements. The half-life is a long 4 1/2 billion years. All of these suffer from the same basic assumptions.
Tree-Ring Dating
Another method of dating that is popular with some scientists is tree-ring dating. When a tree is cut, you can study a cross-section of the trunk and determine its age. Each year of growth produces a single ring. Moreover, the width of the ring is related to environmental conditions at the time the ring was formed.
The Bristle cone Pine, found particularly in California, is a very old tree, with specimens supposably dating as old as 7000 years. Scientists have studied the rings on these trees in an attempt to date the tree and the origins of the earth.
Unfortunately, this dating method leaves much to be desired. Ring patterns vary considerably between trees of similar ages. To resolve the discrepancies, patterns are compared between several trees, with the attempt made to identify common years in several ring patterns. The key rings that are used to align different trees are the rings for drought years, or the narrowest rings. In some cases, however, a drought year ring may be missing altogether, falling on the ring for an adjacent year.
This leads to what is known as the ''missing ring'' problem. To solve this, the scientists fall back to radiocarbon dating to identify the rings more completely. This, in turn, leads to circular logic; if the radiocarbon dating is incorrect, the resulting ring dating will also be incorrect. In the final analysis, the BRISTLE CONE Pines still hide their secret.
HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?
There are many methods that can be used to find the actual age of the earth, as various effects can be measured over a period of time and used to establish the historical time line.
The Shrinking Sun
Since 1836, observations of the sun indicate it is shrinking about five feet an hour. Studies show this has been true for at least 400 years. At this rate, 100,000 years ago the sun would be twice as large as it is today. Twenty million years ago the sun would have touched the earth.
The Moon's Dust
Interplanetary dust and meteors is depositing dust on the moon at the rate of at least 14,300,000 tons per year. At this rate, if the moon were 4.5 billion years old there would be at least 440 feet of dust on the moon. The astronauts, however, found a layer only 1/8 to three inches thick. Three inches would take only 8000 years. Even evolutionists believe the moon is the same age as the earth, giving the earth's age as only 8000 years.
The Magnetic Field
The earth has a magnetic field that is constantly decreasing due to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The half-life of the magnetic field is 1400 years. Only 2800 years ago the magnetic field would be four times as strong as it is now. Only 10,000 years ago the magnetic field would be as strong as a magnetic star and be a nuclear power source as the sun. For this reason the earth could not be more than 10,000 years old.
The Earth's Rotation
The rotation of the earth is gradually slowing down at about .00002 seconds a year. The lost energy is transferred to the moon. The moon, therefore, is slowly moving away from the earth at about 4 centimeters a year. This would put the moon in contact with the earth less than 2 billion years ago. Yet, if the moon were closer than about 11,500 miles, the moon would be broken into tiny pieces, much as the rings of Saturn.
The Missing Helium
Helium is generated as radioactive uranium decays. This is known as radiogenic helium, and is the primary source of helium in the earth's atmosphere. If the earth were really 4.5 billion years old as claimed by the evolutionists, the atmosphere would be saturated with this helium. But it isn't. Where did it go? It can't escape to space. The simple answer, of course, is that the earth isn't really that old.
The Comet Mystery
Comets, as they orbit the sun, are literally torn apart by gravitational forces, internal explosions, and solar winds. Short period comets can't exist for more than 10,000 years. Most astronomers believe that comets originated at the same time as the solar system. That limits the age of the solar system to about 10,000 years.
SUMMARY
Putting this all together, there is growing evidence that the solar system is certainly less than 10,000 years old. As mentioned at the beginning, the issue is particularly important, as if the solar system is less than 10,000 years old there is not enough time for man to have evolved from a lower form.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
本來那篇文章不值得一提。不過你既然這麽執著，我就給你大致說說它的問題吧：
首先，看看這位作者提出的幾點：
第一，放射性同位素碳定年法：他討論了這個方法的幾個前提假設。應該說對這些假設的探討都是嚴肅的。但他的結論比較有個人的傾向性：
假設1：活的生物體與環境處於（C14/C12比例的）平衡狀態下。
他的質疑是：生物會吃了老一點的食物（別的生物），因此會攝入舊的（C14/C12）比例從而改變其體內的（C12/C14）比值。
他的無知在這裏大大的現了一回：這些可以吃的“老一點的食物”能有多老？了不起幾年、幾十年吧（尤其是在沒有冰箱的自然條件下）？可是這點時間根本就在放射性碳定年法的誤差範圍內。而且“生物吃了幾十年老的食物”的幾率和占它們食物的比例有多大呢？你自己來回答這個簡單問題吧。
假設2：大氣中的（C12/C14）比值（在漫長的歲月中）保持不變。
這個假設是值得仔細推敲的。但他的質疑所用的證據——Velikovski的假說--就根本不值一提。金星的形成早有定論，並有無數的天文學觀察證據所支持。Velikovski的假說根本就是一個科幻小說。拿一個科幻小說式的假說來置疑有無數證據支持的科學理論和實踐，充分顯示了他的無知。
當然，拋開他的質疑，我們都可以也應該（用科學的方法，而不是科幻小說）置疑這個假設2。
在實踐上，科學家們往往不會輕易相信一個/次的定年結果。他們總要用從不同的地方收集到的不同的樣品來反複驗證。同時，他們有時也會有機會收集到古代的大氣樣品（比如封在冰層裏的，古代容器裏的，等等），這就可以直接做比較了。這樣大量的比較的結果指出：這個假設在一定的實驗誤差範圍內相當準確。因此可以用（同時要扣除一些已知的變化）。
假設3：樣品處在封閉係統內。
科學家們也知道有些樣品不在封閉係統內。但他們可以用上麵所說的辦法（用許多不同的樣品）來反複驗證。
假設4：樣品內沒有C14的放射產物。
我不知道有這個假設。因為測量的是（C14/C12）的比例，而不是放射產物的比例。
第二，其它定年方法：
1。樹環定年法
這老兄自以為是的攻擊了一番，卻沒想到樹木再老，也不會老過幾萬年。因此根本不能拿來定幾萬到幾十億年的年代。因此他的攻擊基本上沒什麽用。光這樣一個低級的錯誤就可以讓他這篇文章拿個不及格（如果當term paper來交的話）。
2。月球塵土
這位老兄不知道是從哪裏得到的月球落塵數據（有可能是Slusher）？這個數據的牛皮吹的太大了（還有別的計算到284英尺厚的塵土）。而且那些計算結果都被發現是錯誤的。現在的計算結果發現那月球上的塵土厚度隻有很薄的一層（例如有一個結果是大概隻有1/3英寸厚）而已。
3。地球磁場的衰變
這個好象是創造論者整天拿來說的事。但並沒有科學根據。科學上對地球磁場的發現是：在大部分時間內，地球的磁場並沒有多少變化。但有周期性的倒轉。而且這個周期可以用來與別的定年法互相驗證，效果很好。
4。地球的自轉和月球的遠離
這位老兄的小學數學真的是不行。按照他的4cm/year的數據，要想讓地球和月球相接觸，也得要94億年（地球的年齡是大約46億年）。即使是他所說的20億年，也遠遠超過了他宣稱的一萬年。
5。缺失的氦
他真的沒玩過/見過氦氣球？他不知道氦氣會一直往上升？這些氦氣最後就在大氣層的頂端慢慢的逸散掉了。這麽簡單的常識都沒有，學什麽人攻擊科學的結論？
6。彗星問題
一個人不需要多少天文知識就可以看出他的論點有問題。他說：“Short period comets can't exit for mor than 10,000 years.”人們不禁要問，那“long period comets”呢？它們能存在多久？
他的論點就好象是在計算一個家族活著的人的年齡時，說：“既然這個家族的最小的人的年齡隻有3個月，這個家族活著的人的年齡不可能超過3個月。”
實際上早年跟太陽係一起形成的彗星大多數已經被各大行星和太陽“吃”掉了。現在的彗星絕大部分是從奧托雲（太陽係外圍的一大團塵埃）來的。
你看，這樣一篇垃圾文章不拿個大0蛋還有什麽公正評分可言？
------------------------------------------------------------------------
原文如下：
HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?
Compiled by Rev. Jack Barr
Both creationists and evolutionists spend a great deal of time trying to find the exact age of the earth, and for a good reason. As extensive evidence continues to unfold that indicates the earth is less than 10,000 years old, the evolutionary theory falls apart. If the earth is truly less than 10,000 years old, it would be impossible for man to have evolved from a lower order in that amount of time.
Let's look for a moment, at how evolutionists date the age of the earth.
HOW THE RADIOCARBON DATING METHOD WORKS
The radiocarbon dating method was developed by Professor Willard Libby from California, for which he was awarded a Nobel prize. It is quite accurate in many applications for which the specimens are only a few thousand years old.
Here is how it works. The stratosphere above our earth is bombarded with cosmic rays from the sun, which converts the N14 in the stratosphere to radioactive carbon, or C14. This weak isotope is a part of our environment, and is absorbed by all living organisms (plants and animals) along with another version of carbon, C12, which is not radioactive. As long as the organism is alive, the ratio of C12 to C14 in the organism is theoretically the same as that of the environment; that is, the organism is in balance with the environment.
Once the organism dies, there is no longer a carbon intake. The amount of C12 in the organism remains constant, but the radioactive C14 decomposes with a half life of 5730 years into nitrogen. Nitrogen is a gas, which leaves the organism. This means after 5730 years, there will only be half as much C14 as when the organism died. Thus, by measuring the ratio of C12 to C14, one can (at least theoretically) determine when the organism died.
For practical reality, however, this doesn't always work. Researchers testing the shell of a live clam showed this live clam had been dead for 300 years. Dried up seal- carcasses only thirty years old have tested as old as 4600 years. Fresh carcasses often date as old as 1300 years.
Why is this so?
Radiocarbon dating makes several assumptions. If any of these is wrong, the results can be in error.
Assumption 1:
The Living Organism is in Balance with the Environment
This method assumes the C14 is absorbed by the organism at the same rate as the C12 from the environment. This is not always true. Some organisms have some type of internal metabolism that can reject the C14 more effectively than the C12. At death, then, these organisms have abnormally low C14 levels and appear much older than they really are.
In addition, while living the organism may eat and metabolize organic material that is old, thus loading their own system with the outdated organic material that returns the false reading.
Assumption 2:
The C12/C14 Level of the Atmosphere has remained constant.
Another assumption made in radiocarbon dating is that the ratio of C12 to the radioactive C14 has remained constant for thousands of years. Scientists today have a growing conviction that this ratio has not been constant. Immanuel Velikovsky and other scientists believe that cataclysmic events in the history of the earth could have radically altered the stratosphere, affecting the amount of C14 created.
Velikovsky, writing in WORLDS IN COLLISION, believed that the history of the earth was dramatically altered by the close approaches of Mars and Venus. The book described Venus as originally a planet which passed the earth as a comet only 3500 years ago and was captured by our solar system. Velikovsky believed the flood, the parting of the Red Sea as the Israelites escaped Egypt, the manna from heaven, and the day the sun stood still as the Israelites battled their enemies were all related to natural events.
For years several noted astronomers vigorously blocked the publishing of this book by Macmillan, as these concepts were contradictory to their own theories and the publishing would have affected their own income and status. With the landing of the astronauts on the moon, however, the dust levels that should have been several feet high for the Big Bang theory were found as only a few inches high, giving credence to Velikovsky's theories and giving him fresh recognition during the last years of his life.
Today more and more scientific evidence gives proof to Velikovsky's theories. The Bible describes the long life- times of early man, perhaps due to the increased cloud cover at that time. The lower levels of C14 at that time would make the current samples appear older than they actually are. Evidence exists that the earth's magnetic poles switch occasionally, as old samples often show magnetic patterns that do not match with he current magnetic alignment. Tropical plants have been found buried in Sweden that could not have there unless Sweden was, at one time, a lush tropical paradise.
Assumption 3:
The dating method assumes the sample is in a closed system.
Once the organism has died, the theory assumes the only continuing process is the decay of the C14. This, in fact, is seldom true. Ground water can leach C14 from a rock. Heat, changes in the magnetic field, and other factors can affect the ratio of C12 to C14.
Assumption 4:
There are no daughter elements in the sample originally.
There is no way to know how much radioactive daughter elements are actually in the sample at death. Other elements can affect the ratio.
OTHER DATING METHODS
Other dating methods are often used that have similarities to the radiocarbon method. One popular method is potassium-argon dating. Radioactive potassium is found in small quantities in some rocks. This decomposes into calcium and argon. Another alternative is uranium-lead dating. With uranium-lead dating, radioactive uranium decomposes into lead and other elements. The half-life is a long 4 1/2 billion years. All of these suffer from the same basic assumptions.
Tree-Ring Dating
Another method of dating that is popular with some scientists is tree-ring dating. When a tree is cut, you can study a cross-section of the trunk and determine its age. Each year of growth produces a single ring. Moreover, the width of the ring is related to environmental conditions at the time the ring was formed.
The Bristle cone Pine, found particularly in California, is a very old tree, with specimens supposably dating as old as 7000 years. Scientists have studied the rings on these trees in an attempt to date the tree and the origins of the earth.
Unfortunately, this dating method leaves much to be desired. Ring patterns vary considerably between trees of similar ages. To resolve the discrepancies, patterns are compared between several trees, with the attempt made to identify common years in several ring patterns. The key rings that are used to align different trees are the rings for drought years, or the narrowest rings. In some cases, however, a drought year ring may be missing altogether, falling on the ring for an adjacent year.
This leads to what is known as the ''missing ring'' problem. To solve this, the scientists fall back to radiocarbon dating to identify the rings more completely. This, in turn, leads to circular logic; if the radiocarbon dating is incorrect, the resulting ring dating will also be incorrect. In the final analysis, the BRISTLE CONE Pines still hide their secret.
HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?
There are many methods that can be used to find the actual age of the earth, as various effects can be measured over a period of time and used to establish the historical time line.
The Shrinking Sun
Since 1836, observations of the sun indicate it is shrinking about five feet an hour. Studies show this has been true for at least 400 years. At this rate, 100,000 years ago the sun would be twice as large as it is today. Twenty million years ago the sun would have touched the earth.
The Moon's Dust
Interplanetary dust and meteors is depositing dust on the moon at the rate of at least 14,300,000 tons per year. At this rate, if the moon were 4.5 billion years old there would be at least 440 feet of dust on the moon. The astronauts, however, found a layer only 1/8 to three inches thick. Three inches would take only 8000 years. Even evolutionists believe the moon is the same age as the earth, giving the earth's age as only 8000 years.
The Magnetic Field
The earth has a magnetic field that is constantly decreasing due to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The half-life of the magnetic field is 1400 years. Only 2800 years ago the magnetic field would be four times as strong as it is now. Only 10,000 years ago the magnetic field would be as strong as a magnetic star and be a nuclear power source as the sun. For this reason the earth could not be more than 10,000 years old.
The Earth's Rotation
The rotation of the earth is gradually slowing down at about .00002 seconds a year. The lost energy is transferred to the moon. The moon, therefore, is slowly moving away from the earth at about 4 centimeters a year. This would put the moon in contact with the earth less than 2 billion years ago. Yet, if the moon were closer than about 11,500 miles, the moon would be broken into tiny pieces, much as the rings of Saturn.
The Missing Helium
Helium is generated as radioactive uranium decays. This is known as radiogenic helium, and is the primary source of helium in the earth's atmosphere. If the earth were really 4.5 billion years old as claimed by the evolutionists, the atmosphere would be saturated with this helium. But it isn't. Where did it go? It can't escape to space. The simple answer, of course, is that the earth isn't really that old.
The Comet Mystery
Comets, as they orbit the sun, are literally torn apart by gravitational forces, internal explosions, and solar winds. Short period comets can't exist for more than 10,000 years. Most astronomers believe that comets originated at the same time as the solar system. That limits the age of the solar system to about 10,000 years.
SUMMARY
Putting this all together, there is growing evidence that the solar system is certainly less than 10,000 years old. As mentioned at the beginning, the issue is particularly important, as if the solar system is less than 10,000 years old there is not enough time for man to have evolved from a lower form.
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.
