Radioactive dating

dad said:

If the suspect claims to be Noah...yes.

Click to expand...

So we can't use DNA fingerprinting in a murder trial?

dad said:

If it is Noah, let's see the prints! That too much to ask??

Click to expand...

I guess you aren't going to address the question?

No, they simply help determine ratios. Your system then swings into gear and goes nuts on the ratio meanings!

Click to expand...

So we aren't allowed to determine what the ratios mean? We aren't even allowed to ask the question?

dad said:

? That is what you thought the creation debate was?

Click to expand...

You apparently think that the debate is about proving something before we are even allowed to look at the evidence. How do you prove something without looking at the evidence?

dad said:

Quack quack....prove the same state past ot it will not be permitted to be used in models of the past. Period.

Click to expand...

Quack quack, you are the one making the claim that it was different so the burden of proof is yours.

dad said:

You say you believe something then say it has nothing to do with belief! OK. Keep us posted on the hidden meanings of your queer utterances.

Click to expand...

Can you quote the text I said I believe something? Probably not, because I never said it.

dad said:

I think there may be a few slices missing in that pie.

Click to expand...

Yeah, me too, one of them is honesty.

Yay! Looks who's back!

dad said:

We all can play the belief game on what ratios mean. Some people used to think science had more, the way it mouthed off.

Click to expand...

Testable predictions based on the scientific method are not beliefs.

dad said:

Radioactive decay dating assumes the same laws existed.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. I am showing you how to test for a same state past so you don't have to assume.

So does all branches of science modeling the past. Be honest.

Click to expand...

Models that make accurate predictions are not beliefs.

dad said:

You apparently think that the debate is about claiming evidence without producing it. When pushed you feebly offer up same state past beliefs for evidence. Gong!

Click to expand...

Evidence is a set of observations that are consistent with the scientific model. You refuse to accept the evidence.

dad said:

Name a testable prediction based on the a same state in the past?

Click to expand...

The prediction is that dates based on K/Ar, U/Pb, and Rb/Sr ratios will produce the same dates using modern decay rates.

For example, if the K/Ar ratio is 50/50 then the calculated age is 1.25 billion years because the measured half life is 1.25 billion years. If zircons in the same layer had a 50/50 ratio of 238U/206Pb this would produce a date of 4.5 billion years. The ages wouldn't match and the same state model would be falsified. That is how it is testable. If the model is wrong then the data won't support it.

I am not talking about some belief that ratios are a result of an unproven same state past either.

Click to expand...

The measured decay rates and ratios are not beliefs. They are empirical observations.

dad said:

Name a far past model based on a same set of forces and laws that made an accurate prediction?

Click to expand...

See above.