Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Uniformitarianism & Age of Creationists' Earth
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 25 of 54 (484332)
09-27-2008 9:45 PM


Soft tissues?
The issue of soft tissues is still being debated.
A recent study suggests that what were described as soft tissues in dinosaur bones were actually a bacterial biofilm.
Did Dinosaur Soft Tissues Still Survive? New Research Challenges Notion
Stay tuned; more research will get to the bottom of this.
In the meantime creationists haven't a clue as to what is going on as they conduct no research and for the most part don't study science. (Its just "evilution" you know. Not a proper field to actually study.) Their pronouncements on science can be taken as apologetics and safely ignored.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Granny Magda, posted 09-27-2008 10:29 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 27 of 54 (484352)
09-27-2008 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Granny Magda
09-27-2008 10:29 PM


Re: Soft tissues?
I agree with you completely.
I wish more folks would exhibit the understanding of science that you do.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Granny Magda, posted 09-27-2008 10:29 PM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 36 of 54 (484459)
09-28-2008 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by b0ilingfrog
09-28-2008 5:37 PM


Carbon 14 etc.
Even Carbon 14 the math makes my head spin but here is what I do know about all of them. They all assume uniformity. Is the rate of C-14 entering the biosphere a constant?
That one thing you know about radiometric dating is wrong, at least as it pertains to carbon 14 dating.
Uniformity is not assumed! It has been known for 50 years (since shortly after the C14 method was developed) that the levels of C14 in the atmosphere vary (see de Vries 1958).
That is why all C14 dates today are corrected for atmospheric variation! There are several other corrections that are done, but we won't trouble you with them yet.
I think it was Coyote that said I wouldn't believe anything he had to say. I restate that the evidence is the same I choose to question the manner in which it is interpreted.
Not all interpretations fit the evidence equally well. You could interpret the data to mean that the moon is made of green cheese, but you would look like an idiot.
That is the case with the young earth idea. It is a religious belief, and its adherents, when they deal with science, twist, ignore, and manipulate the data to make it fit their a priori belief. That doesn't make their interpretation right.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by b0ilingfrog, posted 09-28-2008 5:37 PM b0ilingfrog has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024