Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,920 Year: 4,177/9,624 Month: 1,048/974 Week: 7/368 Day: 7/11 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Dates and Dating ⇒

Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III)

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III)
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 120 of 357 (370365)
12-17-2006 10:20 AM 		Reply to: Message 119 by johnfolton
12-17-2006 10:13 AM

Re: Tale of Two Charts
You need the free Adobe Acrobat Reader to read PDF files. Go to http://www.adobe.com and download it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by johnfolton, posted 12-17-2006 10:13 AM johnfolton has not replied
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 135 of 357 (374131)
01-03-2007 6:22 PM 		Reply to: Message 134 by Casey Powell
01-03-2007 6:16 PM

Re: Trying to date rocks is a problem
Actually, none of that is true. Radiometric dating is highly reliable, and has been confirmed by a number of seperate methods.
​
Much like a pan balance corrobrating a kitchen scale, the methods corroborate each other because, due to their different mechanisms, it's impossible for a given circumstance to affect them in the same way.
​
You're completely misinformed about radiometric dating, JF. I suggest you ask some questions and learn from the real geologists who post here. I know I've learned a lot from them.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Casey Powell, posted 01-03-2007 6:16 PM Casey Powell 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