- May 11, 2015
- 17,420
- 3,593
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I realize that your post is still not on the topic.You realize that YOU didn't start this thread, right?
I realize that your post is still not on the topic.
You just joined the very long list of people that are putting up a post that has nothing to do with the topic. Also one that is a personal attack. I am not the subject here, deep time is the subject and you should limit your comments to deep time.You just achieved the world record for irony!
You just joined the very long list of people that are putting up a post that has nothing to do with the topic. Also one that is a personal attack. I am not the subject here, deep time is the subject and you should limit your comments to deep time.
Of course it is circular by definition. We go by the known rate of decay. So the age is determined by what we think we know the rate of decay is. Far to often in science what we think we know to be true, turns out not to be accurate.Let me ask, what is your understanding of the use of "index fossils" with respect to relative dating? Is it circular reasoning? If so why?
Of course it is circular by definition. We go by the known rate of decay. So the age is determined by what we think we know the rate of decay is. Far to often in science what we think we know to be true, turns out not to be accurate.
Do you have a dating method you'd like to discuss?
Of course it is circular by definition.
We go by the known rate of decay. So the age is determined by what we think we know the rate of decay is. Far to often in science what we think we know to be true, turns out not to be accurate.
"Radioactive decay rates, thought to be unique physical constants and counted on in such fields as medicine and anthropology, may be more variable than once thought."
http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2010/100830FischbachJenkinsDec.html
I do not think it makes any difference if the rates are accurate or not.So you think the decay rates are wrong? Different? Askew?
The rate is not consistent. It has to be adjusted. So you are assigning the date or age that you think it should be based in the adjustments you use to determine the so called know rate of decay.How is dating geologic strata with index fossils circular reasoning?
The subject is deep time. In the beginning of deep time James Hutton thought the earth was millions of years old. Now modern deep time theory holds that the earth is billions of years old. The age itself does not matter as long as you are consistent enough to date something so you can assign it to the right age. As new information become available old information is found not to be accurate......why?
Plants discriminate against carbon dioxide containing 14C. That is, they take up less than would be expected and so they test older than they really are. Furthermore, different types of plants discriminate differently. This also has to be corrected for.
Second, the ratio of 14C/12C in the atmosphere has not been constant—for example, it was higher before the industrial era when the massive burning of fossil fuels released a lot of carbon dioxide that was depleted in 14C. This would make things which died at that time appear older in terms of carbon dating.
So to determine the known decay rate is not going to be a very simple process and is subject to error.
The rate is not consistent. It has to be adjusted. So you are assigning the date or age that you think it should be based in the adjustments you use to determine the so called know rate of decay.
You just joined the very long list of people that are putting up a post that has nothing to do with the topic. Also one that is a personal attack. I am not the subject here, deep time is the subject and you should limit your comments to deep time.
As new information become available old information is found not to be accurate.
Lots of things in life have to be calibrated, just don't ask me to trust in your calibrations. With deep time it really does not matter and it does not need to be accurate. If you were working for NASA then that maybe a different story because if you do not get it right then there is a chance that people are going to die. You do not have that sort of life and death consequences for errors with radiometric dating calibrations so the results are not that important. Of course if your working for the oil companies then there maybe a huge profit motive to get it right.That is why a calibration scale is used.
Why don't you quit attacking me and stick to the subject. I do not need to listen to anymore of your trumped up charges from your kangaroo court. This is Christmas and you people should be happy and rejoicing in the Lord for all the benefits you have received from Him. For God is good all of the time and this is our chance to give Him thanks and praise.Seems like a lot of folks, have the same observation.
Does that mean anything to you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?