Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,352 Year: 3,609/9,624 Month: 480/974 Week: 93/276 Day: 21/23 Hour: 1/6


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Is It Science? ⇒

Six possible things for creationists to disbelieve before breakfast

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Six possible things for creationists to disbelieve before breakfast
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 8 of 35 (712687)
12-06-2013 2:35 AM 		Reply to: Message 1 by Coyote
12-04-2013 10:25 PM

YEC response
Here’s one response from one of our local YEC’s after a report yesterday on our most popular news service
News24
​
The comment from one YEC called Drikus Greyling, involved carbon dating.
​
This is a truly a questionable report in the sense that it is not really possible to date human remains accurately after 50 000 years. Carbon 14 dating is the closest to the accurate dating mechanisms for once living material (even though there are proven flaws), but it is only reliable up to 50 000 years, and after 100 000 years nearly no carbon 14 is left in once living remains. So in short, this looks like a sensation seeking wannabefamous researcher (maybe the funding is running low).
​
YEC’s only read creationist propaganda. They preach that carbon dating is the only dating technique available. And they tell complete untruths about how and when the method is used.
​
Nothing about the significance of the find, though. He’s probably waiting for Kent Hovind to comment before he repeats the untruths.
​
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
​
Edited by Pressie, : Spelling
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Coyote, posted 12-04-2013 10:25 PM Coyote has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by NoNukes, posted 12-06-2013 10:34 AM Pressie has replied
  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010

Normal Thread Display
Message 14 of 35 (712972)
12-08-2013 11:35 PM 		Reply to: Message 9 by NoNukes
12-06-2013 10:34 AM

Re: YEC response
I disagree.
​
I the report published the journalist made it clear that dating was done by DNA and geological methods.
​
quote:
The age of the bones has been hard to determine. A rough estimate from analysing the DNA is around 400 000 years, which supports what Meyer said is the current view of the anthropologists excavating the site.
​
Todd Disotell, an anthropology professor at New York University, said geological techniques suggest the remains are older than 300 000 years but it's not clear by how much. By comparison, modern humans arose only about 200 000 years ago.
​
Greyling thinks that carbon dating is the only dating method around.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by NoNukes, posted 12-06-2013 10:34 AM NoNukes has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by NoNukes, posted 12-10-2013 10:24 PM Pressie has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024