07 Oct 09
Originally posted by Hand of HecateMay I quote one sentence from your link:
I would really like your thoughts on this:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/4000.htm
I'm convinced.
"Oh sure, some stubborn evolutionists are going to start talking about carbon-dating"
Do creationists deny carbon dating? How about other radiological datings?
Radiological datings are based on our current atomic theory. Do creatioinsts denying the existance of atoms?
This link shows one crazy creationist. Is it a requirement to be crazy to be a creationist?
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasthey say that carbon dating is flawed because the magic pixie fairy randomly makes radioactive isotopes dissapear and appear. so objects appear between several billions-several thousands years old. makes perfect sense.
May I quote one sentence from your link:
"Oh sure, some stubborn evolutionists are going to start talking about carbon-dating"
Do creationists deny carbon dating? How about other radiological datings?
Radiological datings are based on our current atomic theory. Do creatioinsts denying the existance of atoms?
This link shows one crazy creationist. Is it a requirement to be crazy to be a creationist?
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by Hand of Hecatei just realized i can do this as well.
I would really like your thoughts on this:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/4000.htm
I'm convinced.
only instead using the bible and support creationism i shall use the harry potter series to prove that wizards exist. and dragons. and everything you throw at me i shall label it stupid and claim that harry potter makes more sense.
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by ZahlanziBut you don't use carbon dating on objects several billion of years old. So you don't obviously don't know much about radiometric dating. Yet you have very strong opinion against it?
they say that carbon dating is flawed because the magic pixie fairy randomly makes radioactive isotopes dissapear and appear. so objects appear between several billions-several thousands years old. makes perfect sense.
Do you believe in atoms?
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by FabianFnascarbon dating as in all the isotope dating methods. i thought i made it clear when i mentioned the magic pixie fairy making radioactive isotopes dissapear(as in any isotopes used in a wide variety of dating methods)
But you don't use carbon dating on objects several billion of years old. So you don't obviously don't know much about radiometric dating. Yet you have very strong opinion against it?
Do you believe in atoms?
but of course you missed the point of my post. again. perhaps it is early in sweeden and you haven't had your cofee yet.
perhaps some helpful tags are needed
<sarcasm>
<bold>they</bold> say that carbon dating is flawed because <italic>the magic pixie fairy</italic> randomly makes <bold>radioactive isotopes <editorComment>All isotopes not just C14</editorComment></bold> dissapear and appear. so objects appear between several billions-several thousands years old. <extraSarcasm>makes perfect sense.</extraSarcasm>
</sarcasm>
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by ZahlanziYes, it's early in Sweden, but I had my coffee alright. 🙂
carbon dating as in all the isotope dating methods. i thought i made it clear when i mentioned the magic pixie fairy making radioactive isotopes dissapear(as in any isotopes used in a wide variety of dating methods)
but of course you missed the point of my post. again. perhaps it is early in sweeden and you haven't had your cofee yet.
perhaps some hel ...[text shortened]... ions-several thousands years old. <extraSarcasm>makes perfect sense.</extraSarcasm>
</sarcasm>
Sorry I missed the sarkasm.
Can we start over again, this time without sarkasm...?
Why does creationists that radiometric dating is flawed?
It's based on the atomic theory. Does creationists not believe in the existance of atoms?
I would be even more glad if "Hand of Hecate" answers this...
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by ZahlanziDo it! You can even provide photographic evidence. 😀
i just realized i can do this as well.
only instead using the bible and support creationism i shall use the harry potter series to prove that wizards exist. and dragons. and everything you throw at me i shall label it stupid and claim that harry potter makes more sense.
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by Palynkawhat is this evidence word you speak of? didn't i just say the harry potter series is true? what more do you want? anything is explained in the books. if it is not explained in the books it is dishonest rambling by unethical so called scientists.
Do it! You can even provide photographic evidence. 😀
07 Oct 09
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnassarkasm aside, the magic pixie fairy IS the explanation . though creationists won't admit to the fairy.
Yes, it's early in Sweden, but I had my coffee alright. 🙂
Sorry I missed the sarkasm.
Can we start over again, this time without sarkasm...?
Why does creationists that radiometric dating is flawed?
It's based on the atomic theory. Does creationists not believe in the existance of atoms?
I would be even more glad if "Hand of Hecate" answers this...
basicaly, isotope dating techniques take a radioactive isotope and knowing its half life and what it turns into, it measures the quantities. therefore you have a date with a reasonable margin of error. it won't help you name the time of day a dinosaur died but it will give you a rough estimate.
now creationists claim these isotopes may be made dissappear and appear by external events thus making the dating method unreliable. their problem (from our perspective, they don't see it a problem) is that they mostly do not explain what those events are. they also do not explain why dinosaur fossils span according to paleontologists accross milions of years since they claim they existed just before the flood(kelly says there were dinos on the arc but moving on). thus the magical event tampering with isotope/end product ration would have to randomly affect it. or there would have to be several different such events. all the while ignoring the fact that all dating methods require just that, that the sample be reasonably free of impurities.
and of course there is my favourite theory, that god created things with a memory, that trees popped into existence already hundreds of years old, that the rocks appear to be old but in fact aren't and so on. which lead to the apparition of a movement called "last thursdayim" which says the universe only appears old but god created it with a memory, last thursday. every thursday.
edit: more to read and maybe better and more accurately explained.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope_dating
07 Oct 09
Originally posted by ZahlanziThat's funny people actually saw Jesus who wrote The Bible, I don't recall anyone seeing Harry Potter😕
i just realized i can do this as well.
only instead using the bible and support creationism i shall use the harry potter series to prove that wizards exist. and dragons. and everything you throw at me i shall label it stupid and claim that harry potter makes more sense.
07 Oct 09
2 edits
Originally posted by daniel58Daniel, how can you be stunningly ignorant of your own religion? Is your bible full of big, colorful pictures by any chance?
That's funny people actually saw Jesus who wrote The Bible, I don't recall anyone seeing Harry Potter😕
Edit: I envision that Genesis in your bible is full of pop up pictures of Adam and Eve riding dinosaurs through the garden of eden.