I don't know how many of you have looked at age estimates for both the universe and the earth over time. What to me is an interesting observation is that an age is calculated on "best" information at the time. Then comes along an anomalous set of observations that do not conform to the then age calculated.
To correct this, a new age is calculated which then pushes back that start time.
It seems to me that we have an essential problem here in that whatever metrics we use to calculate the start event time, something will come along which upsets that apple cart.
Mayhaps, we need to look at the various methodologies in use and see what alternatives might be a better fit for the data we collect. It seems to me that these age calculations are based on a number of unverifiable presuppositions.
It might be better to say that we just do not know as we keep getting anomalies that throw whatever estimates we have into doubt, instead of stating with the current confidence that we do.
Just because we do not know now, does not mean that we won't develop the tools at a later date that will clarify the problem. Being honest that we do not know should never be a problem for anyone. It should be an opportunity to rethink the matter and try something else to see if we can solve things another way.
Engineering has to deal with this kind of dilemma and though it may take decades or longer to develop the understanding of why something works or does not work, many times understanding does come even while using the techniques in the mean time.
To correct this, a new age is calculated which then pushes back that start time.
It seems to me that we have an essential problem here in that whatever metrics we use to calculate the start event time, something will come along which upsets that apple cart.
Mayhaps, we need to look at the various methodologies in use and see what alternatives might be a better fit for the data we collect. It seems to me that these age calculations are based on a number of unverifiable presuppositions.
It might be better to say that we just do not know as we keep getting anomalies that throw whatever estimates we have into doubt, instead of stating with the current confidence that we do.
Just because we do not know now, does not mean that we won't develop the tools at a later date that will clarify the problem. Being honest that we do not know should never be a problem for anyone. It should be an opportunity to rethink the matter and try something else to see if we can solve things another way.
Engineering has to deal with this kind of dilemma and though it may take decades or longer to develop the understanding of why something works or does not work, many times understanding does come even while using the techniques in the mean time.