What is the difference between evidence, fact, and proof?

[Loudmouth]

Multiple samples are just that – multiple samples. You cannot verify the age for sample 1 by checking the age for sample 2.

You can verify the age of a specific sediment by sampling several samples within that layer.

This is comparable to going into a room and checking the ages of the people therein by having one person ask each person his or her age and averaging out the ages to determine the age of those people in the room who were not asked.

What is wrong with that? If the average and sampling are incorrect, then you can disprove the earlier measurement by measuring the age of the other people in the room. It is still verifiable.

 

[Zosimus]

You can verify the age of a specific sediment by sampling several samples within that layer.

Speculation.

What is wrong with that? If the average and sampling are incorrect, then you can disprove the earlier measurement by measuring the age of the other people in the room. It is still verifiable.

What's wrong with "that" is that we have already established that C14 dating results in the destruction of the sample. Accordingly, although you can go back and ask the same child again you cannot do the same thing with C14 dating.

 

[Loudmouth]

Speculation.

How is it speculation?

Is there some physical barrier preventing you from collecting samples from that same layer?

What's wrong with "that" is that we have already established that C14 dating results in the destruction of the sample.

There are many samples in the same layer.

Accordingly, although you can go back and ask the same child again you cannot do the same thing with C14 dating.

YOu don't have to ask the same child again if your claim is that the layer is from a narrow age range. All you need to do is date more samples from the same layer.

 

[Zosimus]

How is it speculation?

You are making multiple assumptions. You are assuming that everything in that layer is the same age. How do you know this? You don't. The layer is made up of multiple discrete particles.

Is there some physical barrier preventing you from collecting samples from that same layer?

Completely irrelevant.

There are many samples in the same layer.

Completely irrelevant.

YOu don't have to ask the same child again if your claim is that the layer is from a narrow age range. All you need to do is date more samples from the same layer.

Which will prove what exactly? Oh, that's right... NOTHING.

 

[Loudmouth]

You are making multiple assumptions. You are assuming that everything in that layer is the same age.

False. If scientists were assuming that, why would they take multiple samples from that layer? Why would they use different minerals and different isotope pairs to make sure that the results agree with one another?

All someone has to do is show that samples from that same layer dates to different ages in order to falsify the conclusions.

Completely irrelevant.


Completely irrelevant.

When you flatly declare something to be irrelevant, I know that it has completely destroyed your argument.