JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

Forums

7/18/2015 3:56:03 AM
1
As true as this is, it's now a very solid theory.
English

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Carbon 14 dating (radioactive decay) is limited to 40-60k years. Anything extended beyond that is done so at extremely low confidence (1% and decreasing every ~5-6k years). The timeline required for the theory to hold true is not supported by the scientific methodology that it claims to use. Taking it to the extremes of "special consideration" which is the common explanation given, it still doesn't overcome the inate limitations of the method itself or any principles of radioactive half lives. The science simply doesn't support it.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Carbon dating has almost nothing to do with evolution. You need to be talking about the fossil record.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Fossil records are a part of the theory of evolution. The claim being that some animals evolved from dinosaurs millions of years ago based off a technology limited to going back 60k years. See the hole?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Edited by Stickman Al: 7/19/2015 6:58:30 PM
    Carbon dating is only one part of radiometric dating. There are other isotopes that have much longer half lives that are used in dating older things. Whilst you are correct that carbon dating is only accurate to about 60,000 years, that's not what scientists are using to date fossils. This is a common misconception. I suggest you do some reading about the dating methods they use and address those instead. Here's a quote; The best-known absolute dating technique is carbon-14 dating, which archaeologists prefer to use. However, the half-life of carbon-14 is only 5730 years, so the method cannot be used for materials older than about 70,000 years.Radiometric dating involves the use of isotope series, such as rubidium/strontium, thorium/lead, potassium/argon, argon/argon, or uranium/lead, all of which have very long half-lives, ranging from 0.7 to 48.6 billion years. Subtle differences in the relative proportions of the two isotopes can give good dates for rocks of any age. Scientists can check their accuracy by using different isotopes.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • The creatures that revolved from dinosaurs are birds. (They specifically evolved from theropods.) There is fossil evidence of this.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • It is a shame that the dating of those fossils is limited to 60k years. Otherwise it would be relevant to the theory.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Carbon-14 dating isn't the only way to date things. Scientists can date the rock layers that fossils are found in, and even if they couldn't, the simple presence of fossils makes them hard to deny, even if the dating isn't 100% accurate.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • [quote]Carbon-14 dating isn't the only way to date things. Scientists can date the rock layers that fossils are found in, and even if they couldn't, the simple presence of fossils makes them hard to deny, even if the dating isn't 100% accurate.[/quote] It isn't the only way to date things but is the only method used to date fossils. Indirect measurements even using thorium dating are still indirect and are of low confidence by the nature of an indirect measurement. The radiocarbon dating accuracy is closer to less than 0.001% accurate (It is actually magnitudes less accurate than that as it is not a linear extrapolation). So by your logic, the Shroud of Turin, by its simple presence, makes Jesus and ergo Creation by the Christian God hard to deny (even if dating isn't 100% accurate). Every theory has its holes when you pull it apart (both creation and evolution).

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Did you skip over the part where I said they used other methods to date the rock layers?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon