Zanchief wrote:Well the popular belief (amongst morons) is that carbon dating is inaccurate, not wrong. So assuming that carbon dating is 50% inaccurate (which it isn’t) than the nothing has changed in the article.
IE Mindia is a douche.
What proof do you have that either radiometric or carbon dating methods are accurate? Hint: You don't have that proof. However, I can provide conclusive proof that both of those "scientific dating methods" have been extremely inaccurate. Care to challenge me on that, fruitcake?
Did you miss the part where they pointed out that you can't carbon date stuff more than about 60,000 years old? Lucy is FAR older than 60,000 years. How then could an "initial carbon dating" be wrong, if it would be impossible for them to have ever done one?
To be fair, there are situations where external factors can throw off carbon dating results, ie, if the sample you want to test is in a situation where it could be effected by more modern carbon deposits onto the surface of the material. Fortunately, based on the conditions necessary for bones to fossilize, they're mostly immune to such influence; it applies more to stuff we pull out of glaciers and suchlike, as I recall.
Oh, and saw something recently that showed how the theories of human evolution were revised recently. For a while, since we hadn't found any other potential ancestor hominids (hominids are a really rare fossil, we weren't that common back then), it looked somewhat like humans had a unique family tree that was more a straight line, where all other animals looked like a complex bush. Well, the same paleontologist who found Lucy back in the 60s recently figured that theory was wrong, and went out and managed to find an entirely new species of homnid that could potentially be our ancestor, that was contemporaneous to other hominids we alerady knew about. So, turns out our family tree is no different than any other animal.
Mindia wrote:Hmm, funny how this turned into personal attacks against me in current affairs. Did I say anything about any of you in this thread? I merely posted an article I read on Yahoo news and laughed about it. How is that threatening or offensive to any of you? Grow up already. I know most of you believe in all this evolution business, and I'm not slamming you for it. I actually respect your opinions about it. But here you go again slinging mud around and getting all personal. Think about what you're doing.
Gidan wrote:Why because it goes against what the bible says?
it doen't
if your creation myth only goes back 6000ish years, a 1,000,000+ year old fossil kind of does go against it
Does my creation myth specify how time was measured? Before you go on complaining about my answer, tell me this: Your faith does not affect me, why does mine affect you so much?
If anyone wants a simple explanation of how Carbon dating works in layman's terms, send me a PM. I'm not going into it here with Mindia jerking up the thread simply because he can't fit it into his SDA belief "system"
wtf do you mean qualified? Did you dig up his college records? Maybe he read it in popular science? He doesn't need a fucking doctorate to have a basic understanding of carbon dating. All he has to do is read a Michael Chriton novel.
No, I do not have a degree is Physics... but you hardly need one to understand carbon dating. What I *DO* have is years of study and practice working with radiological materials - so I have been trained to understand their properties.
Mindia - I don't see a DD after your name - but you appear willing and able to spout off about Christianity. We should disregard you since you're not "qualified", right?
Why is it that christians get so frightened if people question the creation story. You do not need to believe 100% of the bible to believe in Christ 100%. In all seriousness, do you really truely deep down believe in the Garden of Eden? As a christian, I believe in Christ without believing in a large part of the bible. Does that mean i'm burning in hell?
Haylo wrote:Why is it that christians get so frightened if people question the creation story. You do not need to believe 100% of the bible to believe in Christ 100%. In all seriousness, do you really truely deep down believe in the Garden of Eden? As a christian, I believe in Christ without believing in a large part of the bible. Does that mean i'm burning in hell?
According to Mindia, you can only call yourself a Christian if you have the Bible memorized and believe it word for word.
So yes, in short, according to Mindia you're going to hell.
I'm very much confused at this current trend of disdain for people educating themselves on topics they are currently discussing by using a search engine or online knowledgebase such as google or wikipedia. Isn't it better to attempt to back up your arguement with facts up front, considering most times you'll get some cockvirus that doesn't like what you have to say asking you to back up your statements with proof?
Sorry, I didn't mean to derail. Just needed to post my statement of confusion.
Don't thank God - thank the Pope! He's the real power behind the Catholic church.
Speaking of which, I just watched a movie on John Paul the II. It was a regular movie with actors and stuff and I can't remember the name of it. It was well done I enjoyed it.
Minrott wrote:wtf do you mean qualified? Did you dig up his college records? Maybe he read it in popular science? He doesn't need a fucking doctorate to have a basic understanding of carbon dating. All he has to do is read a Michael Chriton novel.
Thanks man... I needed that!
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
I prefer the New International Version (NIV) which is written in plain English with no thou's, thy's, etc. It also has what Jesus spoke in red text. Easy reading.
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Mindia wrote:I prefer the New International Version (NIV) which is written in plain English with no thou's, thy's, etc. It also has what Jesus spoke in red text. Easy reading.
I'm wondering if such a translation would cater to those teens in high school who found Shakespeare hard to grasp.
Thanks man... I needed that!