Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,220 Year: 5,477/9,624 Month: 502/323 Week: 142/204 Day: 12/4 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Assumptions involved in scientific dating
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 86 of 222 (827348)
01-23-2018 6:59 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by DOCJ
01-23-2018 6:16 AM


Re: Questions
All of the evidence so far seems to show that you are not looking for the truth but rather looking for anything that will support your desired results. The links you provide are great evidence that that is your sole goal.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by DOCJ, posted 01-23-2018 6:16 AM DOCJ has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by DOCJ, posted 01-23-2018 8:46 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 95 of 222 (827361)
01-23-2018 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by DOCJ
01-23-2018 8:46 AM


Re: Questions
Sorry but in addition to using bare links being against forum rules, what you have provided has NOTHING to do with science or reality. There is no reasonable doubt when it comes to dating methods. Only willful liars and the willfully ignorant make such assertions.
DOCJ writes:
The reasonable doubt and scientific evidence falsifying bb, inflation, decay, etc which ARE not even theoretical has been provided.
Sorry again but that is simply bullshit. No such scientific evidence has been presented.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by DOCJ, posted 01-23-2018 8:46 AM DOCJ has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by DOCJ, posted 01-23-2018 10:39 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 103 of 222 (827372)
01-23-2018 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by DOCJ
01-23-2018 10:39 AM


Re: Questions
It is actually factual. You still have not presented any scientific evidence and just bullshit as expected. I am not presenting an argument but rather simply pointing out that you have continued to avoid presenting either an argument or any scientific evidence.
Content free bullshit posts are really discouraged here.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by DOCJ, posted 01-23-2018 10:39 AM DOCJ has not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 110 of 222 (827382)
01-23-2018 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Stile
01-23-2018 11:43 AM


Re: Questions
Not the horse you are looking for anyway.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Stile, posted 01-23-2018 11:43 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 147 of 222 (827432)
01-24-2018 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Percy
01-24-2018 8:34 AM


Re: his really stupid "Questions"
Percy writes:
The Earth's magnetic field can have an effect on the rate of C-14 production because 14C is produced by cosmic rays striking 14N in the upper atmosphere, and the varying strength of the Earth's magnetic field varies the amount of cosmic rays striking 14N atoms. Solar flares can distort the Earth's the magnetic field and also affect 14C production.
It might be worthwhile also pointing out that the amount of 14C produced has absolutely no significance when looking at 14C decay. The decay rates remain the same regardless of how much is produced.
Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Percy, posted 01-24-2018 8:34 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by Taq, posted 01-24-2018 11:12 AM jar has not replied
 Message 151 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2018 1:32 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 34136
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 153 of 222 (827446)
01-25-2018 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by NoNukes
01-25-2018 1:32 AM


Re: his really stupid "Questions"
NN writes:
The production rate is important because we cannot do dating without establishing that the C14/C12 ratio was when the object died or otherwise stop exchanging carbon with the atmosphere.
Not really. Unless the crazy electric universe folk can show that their fields selectively effect 14C and 12C differently the ratios would still be the same.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2018 1:32 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by NoNukes, posted 01-25-2018 1:05 PM jar 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