- Jan 17, 2005
- 44,905
- 1,259
- Country
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
The universe...whether it is all the same...focus man.Those lurkers would see you apparently forgetting wat this thread is about, because they are capable of actually reading previous posts to know what we are discussing.
Great. So...where is it? In hiding? In the desert?I know because there is evidence to say that they are wrong.
The point was that you are in no position to say. Did you not call the folks of old some demeaning things, and cast dirt on their writings?Did you know Moses? So how do you know that the accounts are true?
Yes, they are the same basis, of course. This is news? You assume the present state existed and decay. Whether we use that to explain a little pile of isotopes of one rock or material or another, it could not matter. Ho hum.Lol, you really think Uranium-lead dating is the same as Rubidium strontium dating? You are displaying your ignorance of how radiometric dating works, and not convincing anyone.
Well, resay it plainly, and let's have a look at what is what.That's not what I said, is it? Why are you distorting what I said?
If the one negates the other, why expect such ballyhoo and fooferall?But you make such a big noise about the bad, one would think that you would be fair and make an equivalent noise about the good.
Well, if there is ANYTHING on your little page that indicates that a same state past is not the basis, now is a good time to show us. But I think we all know that that old present state past is what your techniques are all about.Oh, I'm sorry. You asked for the names of the different techniques and what they are based on. That page provides it, doesn't it.
You can't get more than 4500 years of decay any which way you want to dream. The daughter material didn't get here by decay, I would guess.And since in the present state we can't get 3 million years of radioactive decay in a few thousand years, we know that your idea is wrong. Simple.
No. The match is 100% pin fantasy land. In reality, you can't back that up. let's see you try for a change. Let's educate the lurkers.Yes, it did get here by decay, because what we see matches exactly with what we'd see if it did get here by decay.
So you talk to Buzz?I'd get a more sensible response out of him, because you certainly don't have one.
I agree. So?? It is the bit you claim came about by decay we are looking at...not what hasn't decayed. Sometimes I wonder about you...Because sometimes not all the parent material has decayed yet.
Upvote
0