Radioactive dating

[dad]

Radioactivity and radiation has always existed and it will until the universe goes cold.

Dad! do you ever intend to learn about anything other than myths, fables and miracles?

Thanks for the fable about what always existed. Prove it. Until then you are a teller of tall tales.

 

[dad]

Says the person who has to ignore all of the observations.

In the example using hourglasses, as observers, we did not ignore any of the hourglasses representing different isotopes. Learn the difference between ignoring present state decay, and trying to foist this onto the past where you observe squat.

Still waiting for an explanation as to why all of those independent ratios produce the same ages.

No ages are actually involved, you misread the ratios on purpose now, because you have no excuse.

 

[dad]

The evidence is consistent ages derived from radiometric dating for at least 3 different and independent isotope series. You haven't refuted an ounce of this evidence.

There are ratios no ages. Nothing to refute. You don't get to foist silly beliefs onto isotopes and expect that others need to refute the beliefs!

 

[dad]

No it is not. It is a series of evidence-free claims, made by people writing well after the supposed events. People who cannot even identify themselves, in the majority of cases. Claims made that are unable to be supported by anyone else existing at the supposed times.

You have an opinion. I, on the other hand have history and a record that spans human existence on the planet. I have looked into prophesy so I know better. Much much much better! I also have Jesus as a Friend, so there is no doubt as to what He is all about. He promised to have Himself and the Father come IN to us and make themselves MANIFEST to us. They did. No science can argue that.

 

[Loudmouth]

In the example using hourglasses, as observers, we did not ignore any of the hourglasses representing different isotopes. Learn the difference between ignoring present state decay, and trying to foist this onto the past where you observe squat.

You haven't shown why a different state past would necessarily produce the same ages using K/Ar, U/Pb, and Rb/Sr radiometric dating in the present. The evidence still stands.

 

[Loudmouth]

There are ratios no ages.

When we plug those ratios into the equations based on their observed decay rates, they all produce the same ages. That is the evidence.

 

[Jan Volkes]

Thanks for the fable about what always existed. Prove it. Until then you are a teller of tall tales.

What would prove it to you? words in a book? words like in the bible? will words do the trick? if the words in the bible are enough to make you believe in a god the words about the past should give you no trouble, or do you pick and choose which words you want to believe? [I suppose you must because I'm sure you don't believe the words in the Quran do you?]

I am convinced that religions addle the brain, I have encountered too many addled brained religionists to think otherwise.
[Present company excepted of course]

 

[SteveB28]

You have an opinion.

No, I have fact. It is a simple fact that, apart from the Bible, you have absolutely no basis for your contention that there was a "different state" in the past. None. The Bible, written by anonymous people over a wide time span, making claims about events that they could not possibly verify and that no-one since has been able to verify. You have zero evidence.....you have, rather, a wish and a hope.

I, on the other hand have history and a record that spans human existence on the planet.

No, you do not. You have a series of claims made by largely anonymous people. And you have believed those `claims on face value alone. You have the same quantity and quality of evidence to support those claims as does the Muslim who claims that Mohammed rode his horse to heaven for a midnight chat with god......exactly zero!

I have looked into prophesy so I know better. Much much much better!

As have Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, etc, etc.....So what?

I also have Jesus as a Friend, so there is no doubt as to what He is all about.

My great grandson has 'special friends' too. We expect that he will grow out of them as he matures.

He promised to have Himself and the Father come IN to us and make themselves MANIFEST to us. They did. No science can argue that.

Absolutely correct. Scientific enquiry confines itself to that which is real!

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Science IS. That's what matters here. Need a bunch of links to show that science uses present laws and physics?
Because, absent any evidence for that state in the past that they claim, neither you, nor they are in no more an authoritative a position than I am when I make the claim that "The sky used to be tangerine!

What are you missing here? With absolute confidence can bible believers accept Genesis.

You can't prove the universe was operating under different laws of physics at any time in the past.

 

[Jan Volkes]

What would prove it to you? words in a book? words like in the bible? will words do the trick? if the words in the bible are enough to make you believe in a god the words about the past should give you no trouble, or do you pick and choose which words you want to believe? [I suppose you must because I'm sure you don't believe the words in the Quran do you?]

I am convinced that religions addle the brain, I have encountered too many addled brained religionists to think otherwise.
[Present company excepted of course]

Is that it dad? nothing more to add?

 

[dad]

No, I have fact. It is a simple fact that, apart from the Bible, you have absolutely no basis for your contention that there was a "different state" in the past. None.

Yes I have the fact that science cannot prove the state it assumes and claims. Absolute demonstrated fact that you confirm by your repeated observed classic failure to do so.

No, you do not. You have a series of claims made by largely anonymous people. And you have believed those `claims on face value alone. You have the same quantity and quality of evidence to support those claims as does the Muslim who claims that Mohammed rode his horse to heaven for a midnight chat with god......exactly zero!

Any informed intelligent person would know that the vast armies of prophesies in the bible are not anywhere near the same category as the so called prophesies in any other books on earth.

My great grandson has 'special friends' too. We expect that he will grow out of them as he matures.

The year 2015 is set to my Friend. The Temple in Jerusalem that was torn down not a stone left on another is just one of the 100% accurate prophesies of my Friend. Billions through many centuries have experienced the power of my Friend in their lives.

Absolutely correct. Scientific enquiry confines itself to that which is real!

Great, so confirm the first life form. Confirm your claimed same state past.

Sorry, you don't get to mouth the word real, and then expect sane rational men will limit that it be defined by the limited powers of observation and sight of the blind little so called science mice!

 

[dad]

You can't prove the universe was operating under different laws of physics at any time in the past.

Science can't prove it operated under fishbowl earth laws. That detonates your case something fierce. Blows it to smithereens.

 

[SteveB28]

Science can't prove it operated under fishbowl earth laws. That detonates your case something fierce. Blows it to smithereens.

Science can't "prove" anything. It doesn't claim to do so. It claims to provide the best current explanation for a set of facts. It does so by making assumptions and then testing those assumptions (hypotheses) against the evidence we have available to us. ALL explanations are tentative and are ALWAYS subject to revision or complete rejection.

One of our assumptions is that the set of physical laws we see in operation have so existed since the planet formed.. All available evidence supports that assumption.

So, if you have any EVIDENCE for your ridiculous "changed state", you should present it. Otherwise you world will going on quite happily working under our current understanding which appears to be working very well.

The impolite would tell you to "put up or shut up".

 

[dad]

Science can't "prove" anything. It doesn't claim to do so.

It claims things as if it were true and uses definite criteria and assumptions and basis for the claims. That means they claim it is proven in effect.

It claims to provide the best current explanation for a set of facts.

The best based on a small selected godless baseless criteria.

It does so by making assumptions and then testing those assumptions (hypotheses) against the evidence we have available to us.

Utterly false. Test the same state past? test the same state future? Test decay in the far past?? Test time in the far universe? You be well and truly busted.

ALL explanations are tentative and are ALWAYS subject to revision or complete rejection.

Except that most explanations are cited as facts and truth.

One of our assumptions is that the set of physical laws we see in operation have so existed since the planet formed.. All available evidence supports that assumption.

Circular and false. NO evidence supports that ONLY your belief system interjected upon the evidences supports that in your mind.

So, if you have any EVIDENCE for your ridiculous "changed state", you should present it. Otherwise you world will going on quite happily working under our current understanding which appears to be working very well.

I have the word of the Almighty God. I have the demonstrated abject total fail of science to be able to know or prove any state in the far past. I have the spiritual experiences of mankind that illustrate that there is more than the physical. I have history and ancient history. The spirits in Egypt and the long life spans claimed in Sumer and other facts of history all support me. I have it all.

 

[SteveB28]

It claims things as if it were true and uses definite criteria and assumptions and basis for the claims. That means they claim it is proven in effect.

Outside of mathematics, show me the science that claims proof.

The best based on a small selected godless baseless criteria.

Godless? Definitely. Why would science concern itself with the imaginary?

Except that most explanations are cited as facts and truth.

Show me evidence of a science making such claims. You are uttering falsehoods.

I have the word of the Almighty God. I have the demonstrated abject total fail of science to be able to know or prove any state in the far past. I have the spiritual experiences of mankind that illustrate that there is more than the physical. I have history and ancient history. The spirits in Egypt and the long life spans claimed in Sumer and other facts of history all support me. I have it all.

So, all you have is fantasy and wishful thinking and unsubstantiated claims.

As we thought. Thank you.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes I have the fact that science cannot prove the state it assumes and claims.

Agreement between independent radiometric dating methods is that proof.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Science can't prove it operated under fishbowl earth laws. That detonates your case something fierce. Blows it to smithereens.

Sorry, you can't prove that. You can only assert that.

 

[dad]

Outside of mathematics, show me the science that claims proof.

When fables of universe origins or first life forms or human origins are recited, they inevitably do so as if they were talking facts.

Godless? Definitely. Why would science concern itself with the imaginary?

It is imaginary to leave God out. They live in fantasy land.

Show me evidence of a science making such claims. You are uttering falsehoods.

No problem. A panel of scientists cooked up this dark comedy..

" A panel of scientists at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science described the situation in 2000, and it still holds true. Astronomers generally agree that the sun will burn up its hydrogen fuel supply sometime in the next 5 billion to 7 billion years. As it does, gravity will force the sun to collapse into its core, which will ratchet up the heat on the remaining hydrogen and cause the sun to expand into a red giant.

At this point, the sun will swallow the Earth.

"Earth will end up in the sun, vaporizing and blending its material with that of the sun," said Iowa State University's Lee Anne Willson. "That part of the sun then blows away into space, so one might say Earth is cremated and the ashes are scattered into interstellar space."

By then, the sun will be hot enough to burn all its stored helium and the sun will fluctuate in size. The sun isn't quite massive enough to explode in an awesome supernova, so it will merely collapse into a relatively cool white dwarf.

Perhaps a moot point, though, because we'll most likely be long dead before this occurs. As the sun revs up to its red giant phase, it's getting about 10 percent brighter every billion years. At that rate, scientists estimate that all the water on the planet will evaporate in the next billion years."

http://www.livescience.com/32879-what-happens-to-earth-when-sun-dies.html

Hoo ha.

 

[dad]

Sorry, you can't prove that. You can only assert that.

Yes I can prove science is concerned with physical laws. Get a grip.

 

[dad]

Agreement between independent radiometric dating methods is that proof.

That is proof that fanatical religionists who obsess on godless circular reasoning are unable to separate same state past fantasy from actual reality and evidence.