Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-20-2019 7:41 AM
23 online now:
caffeine, Diomedes, Heathen (3 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Happy Birthday: Percy
Post Volume:
Total: 851,620 Year: 6,657/19,786 Month: 1,198/1,581 Week: 20/393 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Radiometric Dating Really that Accurate?
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5386
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 45 of 114 (28325)
01-02-2003 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Watson
01-02-2003 3:36 PM


quote:

Carbon 14 is a heavey radioactive form of carbon used in dating
archaeological and geological materials says Webster. A Asteroid
rich in Uranium, Cobalt, and Barium. scattered over the landscape
I beleive would change the outcome of carbon 14 dateing more or less.

Carbon 14 is only useful up to about 50,000 year ages, so it's more for archaeological rather than geological dating. And it's only applicable to things that were once alive. I don't see any real influence of U, Co, or Ba on it either: C-14 is primarily formed by cosmic rays hitting nitrogen atoms in the atmosphere. And what do those three have in common anyway?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Watson, posted 01-02-2003 3:36 PM Watson has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5386
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 109 of 114 (77754)
01-11-2004 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by johnfolton
01-11-2004 1:04 PM


Re: more misinformation
Acutally the bible says he sits on the circle of the earth

We know that. And Hebrew has distinct words for "circle" - the flat thing - and for "sphere" or ball. Sounds that flat-earthers to me: the same folks are frequently young-earthers, and for identical reasons.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by johnfolton, posted 01-11-2004 1:04 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5386
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 112 of 114 (77780)
01-11-2004 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by johnfolton
01-11-2004 1:19 PM


sound more like an inference that the earth is round,

Exactly. Round, as in disk-shaped. And immovable, too: there's lots of scriptural backup for both, and just as much scientific evidence for either as for a young earth. But that's another thread, and one that's been ridden to death already.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by johnfolton, posted 01-11-2004 1:19 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019