Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 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: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age of mankind, dating, and the flood
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 100 of 224 (708713)
10-12-2013 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by NoNukes
10-12-2013 11:09 AM


Re: You cannot catch fish with stinky bait (but you can catch crabs)
You are correct in what you posted.
But it is annoying when creationists, such as Mindspawn, claim over and over that scientific dating methods are all wrong, sometimes with errors up to > 50,000 times, but then are unable to support those claims.
But we've given them the chance to present their evidence, and the glaring lack of such evidence is very telling.
(And no, the title is not a snide at anyone, that's just how you catch crabs and shrimp.)
Edited by Coyote, : typo

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by NoNukes, posted 10-12-2013 11:09 AM NoNukes has not replied

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


(1)
Message 115 of 224 (709187)
10-22-2013 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by mindspawn
10-22-2013 3:54 AM


Re: Objection unfounded
Radiocarbon dates of marine shells are not reliable and have to be re-calibrated:
http://www.folk.uib.no/...gerud%20and%20Gulliksen%201975.PDF
All radiocarbon dates are calibrated. Calibration converts the conventional age into a calendar age.
Marine shells have to be corrected for what is called the reservoir effect. This is because some of the carbon they absorb is older, "reservoir" carbon from deep water. That carbon is not in contact with the atmosphere. This correction, like the rest of radiocarbon dating, is well-understood and easily done. Scientists just collect modern (but pre-atomic bomb) marine shells and determine the "offset" in any given area.
Your objection, then, that marine shells are "unreliable" is incorrect. With the reservoir correction they are quite reliable.
Diatoms naturally produce carbon. So we have to be careful to take that carbon producing effect into account when dating shells of creatures that produce carbon:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2008/01/080123150516.htm
Diatoms, most of which are far too tiny to see without magnification, are incredibly important in the global carbon cycle, says Thomas Mock, a University of Washington postdoctoral researcher in oceanography and lead author of the paper. During photosynthesis, diatoms turn carbon dioxide into organic carbon and, in the process, generate oxygen. They are responsible for 40 percent of the organic carbon produced in the world's oceans each year.
Your understanding of this paper in relation to radiocarbon dating is flawed. It simply does not say what you think it does, nor does what it says have anything to do with radiocarbon dating.
The diatoms are simply converting the carbon from one form into another. They are not changing the ratio of the isotopes.
So the carbon ratio is most likely overexpressed in these shells, as is often observed in organisms that produce shells, combined with an overestimated timeframe, produces the "co-incidence".
This is absolutely wrong. The ratio of the isotopes is not changed.
It is incredibly difficult to discuss these matters with you when you simply google up an article, read a few lines, and jump to the conclusion that the article supports your argument when in reality it says something entirely different.
You are demonstrating that you simply do not know enough about science in general, and radiocarbon dating in particular, to carry on a meaningful debate.
Edited by Coyote, : spelling

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by mindspawn, posted 10-22-2013 3:54 AM mindspawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by JonF, posted 10-22-2013 1:40 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 119 by mindspawn, posted 10-23-2013 7:16 AM Coyote has replied

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


Message 125 of 224 (709262)
10-23-2013 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by mindspawn
10-23-2013 7:16 AM


Re: Objection unfounded
I admit I am partially ignorant on radiocarbon dating and do Google a lot, and am still learning. While learning I also probe a lot to test the validity of an argument. I feel that is what this forum is supposed to be about, promoting "understanding through discussion" but I do understand if you no longer wish to discuss this. With a bit of patience we can get through this.
Here are some links, mostly written by religious scholars. I have not checked these to make sure the links are still current, but if you google you can find them if they are not.
When you read these articles, try to do so with an open mind, not your current attitude that they have to be all wrong. You'll never learn anything otherwise.
ReligiousTolerance.org Carbon-14 Dating (C-14): Beliefs of New-Earth Creationists
Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
This site, BiblicalChronologist.org has a series of good articles on radiocarbon dating.
Tree Ring and C14 Dating
Radiocarbon WEB-info Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Waikato, New Zealand.
Radiocarbon -- full text of issues, 1959-2003.
Edited by Coyote, : Fix link

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by mindspawn, posted 10-23-2013 7:16 AM mindspawn has not replied

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


Message 132 of 224 (709951)
10-31-2013 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by mindspawn
10-31-2013 4:41 AM


I accept your capitulation
Since you are unable to defend them, you will now please stop making those outlandish claims about dating.
You had your chance here and you came up with nothing.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by mindspawn, posted 10-31-2013 4:41 AM mindspawn has not replied

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


Message 138 of 224 (710125)
11-01-2013 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by RAZD
11-01-2013 9:10 PM


Re: You [won't] say it here
Mindspawn has not been doing well on refuting current radiometric dating methods, and I doubt he will be participating much more in these threads.
I think that he has run out of "what ifs" to try to rationalize his beliefs, and is hesitant to participate any further because those beliefs might not be able to withstand the evidence we've been providing.
At this point we're seeing one of several typical creationist retreats: in this case the problem is blamed on unfair moderation, rather than the poor quality of his arguments.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by RAZD, posted 11-01-2013 9:10 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by RAZD, posted 11-02-2013 3:52 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 141 by mindspawn, posted 11-03-2013 5:13 AM Coyote has replied

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


Message 145 of 224 (710220)
11-03-2013 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by mindspawn
11-03-2013 5:13 AM


Re: You [won't] say it here
Coyote, you are welcome to start a one on one public discussion if you would like. I feel bad that this thread was started by you in response to my request and yet I haven't given it the attention it deserved. Other than the moderation problem there are just too many posts in these public forums for me to keep up with.
There is no moderation problem. There is only your habit of posting imaginary "what-ifs" as if they were evidence, coupled with chasing any convenient rabbit hole you can fall into.
If you had any serious evidence you would have posted it by now.
The issue of this thread is the accuracy of radiocarbon dating, but you have wandered into fantasies about sea water intrusion into one varve series while ignoring all the evidence that points to radiocarbon dating being sufficiently accurate to demolish both the young earth and global flood at 4,350 years ago claims.
But, I'll play the game of a one-on-one thread if you like.
However, I'm not going to chase you down rabbit holes. You'll stick to the topic or you'll be talking to yourself.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by mindspawn, posted 11-03-2013 5:13 AM mindspawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by RAZD, posted 11-03-2013 9:35 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 166 of 224 (737967)
10-02-2014 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by djufo
10-02-2014 8:22 PM


Although scientists invent fictional scenarios, historical data from previous civilizations put the flood around 10-13,000 years ago.
Archaeological data shows there was no global flood at that time.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by djufo, posted 10-02-2014 8:22 PM djufo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Percy, posted 10-03-2014 7:48 AM Coyote has not replied

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


Message 175 of 224 (738052)
10-04-2014 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by djufo
10-04-2014 12:23 PM


Different carbon dating, although not completely accurate due to the exposure of high radiation levels in the area at that time, suggest evidence of a general flood at multiple different times. Some studies suggest 2,000-3,000 BCE, others suggest 5,000 BCE.
This is nonsense. Radiocarbon dates are calibrated against items of known age and any such factors are accounted for. See the various threads here for a lot of good information on the subject.
Also, the folks to find any evidence of a global flood during the past several thousand years would be archaeologists and other scientists who deal with the soil -- and we have not found any such evidence.
We do see evidence of an older flood though, occurring at the end of the last ice age. Google "channeled scablands" for the details. The point of this is that we can see the results of a small flood at the end of the ice age but can't see the results of a purported global flood more recently. That's because the global flood did not happen.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 12:23 PM djufo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 3:29 PM Coyote has replied

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


Message 177 of 224 (738067)
10-04-2014 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by djufo
10-04-2014 3:29 PM


You didn't address a single thing I wrote.
We have archaeological evidence that there was no global flood anywhere near 4,350 years ago. I have personally tested upwards of 100 sites containing that approximate time period and there has been no evidence of a flood in any of them.
Rather, what I see is evidence of continuity in mtDNA, human cultures, fauna and flora, and sedimentation. This is evidence that there was not a flood at that time period.
My colleagues have tested tens of thousands of sites with similar results.
So, don't bother telling me about old myths when I have seen the real evidence first-hand.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 3:29 PM djufo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 4:35 PM Coyote has replied

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


(1)
Message 181 of 224 (738088)
10-04-2014 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by djufo
10-04-2014 4:35 PM


Have you excavated and tested the area of mesopotamia which is the area where the most common historical data of an ancient flood comes from?
A global flood as described in the bible covered the entire world. Evidence should be found worldwide. It is not.
Historical data is all well and good, but the absolute lack of physical evidence in archaeological sites kills off the flood myth completely.
P.S. Define "myth"
Most everything you have posted here.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 4:35 PM djufo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 10:25 PM Coyote has replied

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


Message 185 of 224 (738108)
10-04-2014 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by djufo
10-04-2014 10:25 PM


Coyote: Have you excavated and tested the area of mesopotamia which is the area where the most common historical data of an ancient flood comes from?
I have not but my colleagues have.
But it doesn't matter. If there is a claim for a global flood, as there is in the bible, then anywhere that claim is found to be incorrect is sufficient to disprove the claim!
You seem to want to accept old tribal myths instead of real world evidence. That's not a very good bet.
And again, you have failed to present any evidence for your position.
But I can present evidence for mine: mtDNA evidence from On Your Knees Cave in southern Alaska (10,300 years ago) and Anzick in western Montana (12,600 years ago) produced a rare haplotype, D4h3. That haplotype is found among living individuals all along the west coasts of North and South America.
If there was a global flood which wiped out everyone but Noah and his kin some 4,350 years ago you could not have the continuity of mtDNA that is shown in the above examples.
In other words, no global flood. Get used to it--the global flood is a myth that is contradicted by real world evidence.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by djufo, posted 10-04-2014 10:25 PM djufo has not replied

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


Message 195 of 224 (738233)
10-06-2014 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Pressie
10-05-2014 10:08 AM


Re: Talking nonsense
Some of my forebearers were what you would call Bushmen. Those relatively small guys were digging for roots in the Kalahari. Getting sea food on beaches. And specialists in hunting antelopes. No flood legends involved. They have been here for at least 40 000 years.
That's another example of the continuity of mtDNA that disproves the idea of a global flood during the past 40,000 years.
Such a flood would have to produce a discontinuity of mtDNA, among other discontinuities.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Pressie, posted 10-05-2014 10:08 AM Pressie has not replied

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


Message 211 of 224 (738393)
10-09-2014 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 210 by djufo
10-09-2014 6:09 PM


You are getting a bit off topic.
Please try to stick with the thread's main subjects.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by djufo, posted 10-09-2014 6:09 PM djufo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by deerbreh, posted 12-03-2014 2:59 PM Coyote has seen this message but 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