- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Very interesting article on carbon dating
Posted on 7/5/17 at 8:41 am to tigersbh
Posted on 7/5/17 at 8:41 am to tigersbh
I skipped to the bottom so I could see the comments (of which there are none) and found this.
The "evidence" they are citing comes off the assumption that there was a global flood at the exact time listed in the bible. A pretty large assumption
Fossil fuels take 20-30 million years to generate at a minimum.
Again, this is assuming the earth is like 10,000 years old and that fossil fuels generation can defy the laws of physics. The reason there is so much fossil fuel is because earth has been around for millions of years.
I did that to one fricking paragraph. I will not read that entire POS
quote:
any age estimates using 14C prior to the Flood will give much older dates than the true age. Pre-Flood material would be dated at perhaps ten times the true age.d
The "evidence" they are citing comes off the assumption that there was a global flood at the exact time listed in the bible. A pretty large assumption
quote:
The Flood would have buried large amounts of carbon from living organisms (plant and animal) to form today’s fossil fuels (coal, oil, etc.)
Fossil fuels take 20-30 million years to generate at a minimum.
quote:
The amount of fossil fuels indicates there must have been a vastly larger quantity of vegetation in existence prior to the Flood than exists today. This means that the biosphere just prior to the Flood might have had 500 times more carbon in living organisms than today.
Again, this is assuming the earth is like 10,000 years old and that fossil fuels generation can defy the laws of physics. The reason there is so much fossil fuel is because earth has been around for millions of years.
I did that to one fricking paragraph. I will not read that entire POS
0
Posted on 7/5/17 at 9:56 am to tigersbh
So much ignorance.
Carbon dating is a very useful but highly limited dating tool. Carbon dating cannot, has not, and is not used to date anything over around 50,000 years. Very early on, carbon dating (cd) was discovered to be very variable, and methods to adjust for this variation make it usefully accurate for only recent times.
So some moron writes that cd dating of anything millions of years old is not accurate is frankly no duh!
The fact that an unscientific, unsophisticated, believer of someone's time calculation based upon their interpretation of the Bible, would mistakenly view this as scientific proof of their faith, is understandable. But the arsehole supposed "scientists" who wrote this to mislead the ignorant, are evil.
Faith is a great attribute. Challenging scientific beliefs is part of the scientific method, and a good thing. But misrepresentation of anything is always wrong!
I defend your right to believe in the Christian God, so do I.
You have the right to think that Creation occurred in the last 10,000 years, and I will believe that it is over 14 billion years old.
But no one has the right to mislead others with fake facts.
Carbon dating is a very useful but highly limited dating tool. Carbon dating cannot, has not, and is not used to date anything over around 50,000 years. Very early on, carbon dating (cd) was discovered to be very variable, and methods to adjust for this variation make it usefully accurate for only recent times.
So some moron writes that cd dating of anything millions of years old is not accurate is frankly no duh!
The fact that an unscientific, unsophisticated, believer of someone's time calculation based upon their interpretation of the Bible, would mistakenly view this as scientific proof of their faith, is understandable. But the arsehole supposed "scientists" who wrote this to mislead the ignorant, are evil. Faith is a great attribute. Challenging scientific beliefs is part of the scientific method, and a good thing. But misrepresentation of anything is always wrong!
I defend your right to believe in the Christian God, so do I.
You have the right to think that Creation occurred in the last 10,000 years, and I will believe that it is over 14 billion years old.
But no one has the right to mislead others with fake facts.
Posted on 7/5/17 at 10:00 am to tigersbh
I am sure they went into their study with an open mind, allowing the data to direct the opinion.
Posted on 7/5/17 at 10:31 am to tigersbh
I wish meatspin.com was still a website so i could link you to that "interesting article"
Posted on 7/5/17 at 10:38 am to tigersbh
Carbon dating has always been suspect. It's only considered accurate up to 50,000 years ago
quote:
It is assumed that the rate of decay has remained constant over time, and yet more than 50% of radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples of northeastern North America have been deemed unacceptable after investigation. Even if the rate of decay is constant, without knowledge of the exact ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14in the initial sample, the dating technique is subject to question.
Volcanic ejecta of Mount Rangitoto (Auckland, New Zealand) was found to have a potassium-40 age of 485,000 years, yet trees buried within the volcanic material were dated with the carbon-14 method to be less than 300 years old
Posted on 7/5/17 at 10:39 am to tigersbh
Answers in Genesis? Seriously...frick you.
This is from their own website:
They don't do science. Science is about finding out answers to questions. As they state, they START OUT wi8th answers. All they then do is take facts and then attempt to cram them into their already held beliefs. and like they state, if they can;t do that, then if they contradict what they already believe then those facts can;t be facts and are dismissed.
Ken Hamm and his folks at AiG are literally the worst.
This is from their own website:
quote:
Section 4: General The following are held by members of the Board of Answers in Genesis to be either consistent with Scripture or implied by Scripture:
Scripture teaches a recent origin for man and the whole creation, spanning approximately 4,000 years from creation to Christ.
The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages, but are six [6] consecutive twenty-four [24] hour days of creation.
The Noachian Flood was a significant geological event and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time. The gap theory has no basis in Scripture.
The view, commonly used to evade the implications or the authority of biblical teaching, that knowledge and/or truth may be divided into secular and religious, is rejected.
By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.
They don't do science. Science is about finding out answers to questions. As they state, they START OUT wi8th answers. All they then do is take facts and then attempt to cram them into their already held beliefs. and like they state, if they can;t do that, then if they contradict what they already believe then those facts can;t be facts and are dismissed.
Ken Hamm and his folks at AiG are literally the worst.
Posted on 7/5/17 at 10:42 am to tigersbh
quote:
However, using a more realistic pre-Flood 14C /12C ratio reduces that age to about 5,000 years.
shite, I thought pre-Flood referred to anything before August 2016?
Posted on 7/5/17 at 10:54 am to League Champs
quote:
Carbon dating has always been suspect.
It's not a question of it being suspect, but valuable for certain things only. These guys know this, but pretend they don't.
It would be funny were it not so sad that people argue about whether science understands topics like this well enough, while doing so on a computer. There's absolutely no thought put into what it would mean IF scientists were THIS WRONG about the age of the earth...wouldn't they have been wrong about so many of the basic concepts that power our daily lives? We live in a world created by science at this point...to pretend that when those things don;t disagree with your world view they can be correct but when they do they have to be false while ignoring they can't be both is simple hard to comprehend.
Love the way this guy puts this...
LINK
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News