How Old is the Earth?

[BeyondET]

No, your writing is vague, unspecific, and often is not anchored to standard terminology. It is hard to comprehend.

You resort to ad hominems, because you can't comprehend what I'm saying.

 

[BeyondET]

Everything is in the Universe. "Locked"????

Did I say that no, you have no professionalism just more ad hominems

 

[BeyondET]

In general if a person knows what they are
talking about they can express it clearly.

And they tend not to just toss in inapplicable
cliches

That's a two way street Estrid.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Did I say that no, you have no professionalism just more ad hominems

"Professionalism?" This is a message board. I don't get paid to post here. I tell you I don't understand what you write because I don't. I do know the topic well enough.

 

[sjastro]

None has been presented.

Great example of denial mode.

 

[BeyondET]

"Professionalism?" This is a message board. I don't get paid to post here. I tell you I don't understand what you write because I don't. I do know the topic well enough.

You can't stop the sarcasm can you. Of coarse you don't get paid you have no couth.

 

[dwb001]

Great example of denial mode.

Pointing out that your opponent has failed to present any evidence for their position is now denial?
Call it what you will but you haven't provided the science that you want me to debunk.
I don't know how to argue against something that isn't presented.

 

[Pommer]

"Professionalism?" This is a message board. I don't get paid to post here. I tell you I don't understand what you write because I don't. I do know the topic well enough.

They pay me, yup $2000.00 every month, you should sign up for it!

 

[Pommer]

"Professionalism?" This is a message board. I don't get paid to post here. I tell you I don't understand what you write because I don't. I do know the topic well enough.

LQQks like it has been edited.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Great example of denial mode.

Dude's a troll, just leave him. Notice how every time you respond to him, he switches what he's saying each time. He doesn't care.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

What I didn't expect is how many people in the video linked below didn't know how old the earth is. And how far off they were. And I'm wondering how wide spread that lack of knowledge about the earth's age is. I don't know if that picture is due to creative editing or actual lack of knowledge.

It really a lot older than I am.

 

[sjastro]

Pointing out that your opponent has failed to present any evidence for their position is now denial?
Call it what you will but you haven't provided the science that you want me to debunk.
I don't know how to argue against something that isn't presented.

[Staff Edit]
I even provided a link which covered both the theoretical and experimental aspects of the science involved [Staff Edit].
So where is your critique of the link?

 

[Hans Blaster]

You can't stop the sarcasm can you. Of coarse you don't get paid you have no couth.

You have some sort of claim about stars being older than the Universe. Would you care to back that up in carefully written sentences?

 

[dwb001]

[Staff Edit]
I even provided a link which covered both the theoretical and experimental aspects of the science involved [Staff Edit].
So where is your critique of the link?

I don't have the time to go through some other paper.
How about you present your ideas and I counter them.

 

[sjastro]

I don't have the time to go through some other paper.
How about you present your ideas and I counter them.

Are you so completely and utterly inept?
This a test of your competence or more precisely the lack of it; if you want make grandiose claims of poking holes in the science then do need to demonstrate the skill level in order to do so.
Perhaps I should take the advice given and not feed the troll.

 

[dwb001]

Are you so completely and utterly inept?
This a test of your competence or more precisely the lack of it; if you want make grandiose claims of poking holes in the science then do need to demonstrate the skill level in order to do so.
Perhaps I should take the advice given and not feed the troll.

The deal was for you to present the theory.
Instead you allow others to present your theory.

Going over the paper we have the source being a meteorite. (So we impact and atmospheric contamination that I didn't see adressed in the article)
We have assumed age and cosmic conditions that are not verifiable.
There are enough "presumptions" and "considers" and "probablies" to make anyone wonder what good the final report was.

One paragraph was almost entirely made up of wishy-washy wording.

So yep... this paper does not look very solid. But solid enough to get peer reviewed and cited.

 

[Astrid]

That's a two way street Estrid.

Would be if I copied your poor example.

Unlike you, I don't claim knowledge I don't have.

 

[Astrid]

Are you so completely and utterly inept?
This a test of your competence or more precisely the lack of it; if you want make grandiose claims of poking holes in the science then do need to demonstrate the skill level in order to do so.
Perhaps I should take the advice given and not feed the troll.

I'll race you

 

[Hans Blaster]

Going over the paper we have the source being a meteorite. (So we impact and atmospheric contamination that I didn't see adressed in the article)

Look more carefully. It is almost certainly cited.

We have assumed age and cosmic conditions that are not verifiable.

That's what citations are for. The authors report on the things *they* tested and are reporting. The rest, including potentially prior analyses of the same samples, are reported via citation.

There are enough "presumptions" and "considers" and "probablies" to make anyone wonder what good the final report was.

Apparently you have problems with how we write scientific articles. What is uncertain, dependent, etc. is stated as so. We don't pretend that things are more certain or conclusive than they are.

One paragraph was almost entirely made up of wishy-washy wording.

Which one?

So yep... this paper does not look very solid. But solid enough to get peer reviewed and cited.

And you can base this on what experience you possess?

 

[BeyondET]

You have some sort of claim about stars being older than the Universe. Would you care to back that up in carefully written sentences?

I never said that either, quote where i said stars are older than the universe. Its apparent your playing word games, that's a bit immature young man.