|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 58 (9200 total) |
| |
Allysum Global | |
Total: 919,258 Year: 6,515/9,624 Month: 93/270 Week: 6/83 Day: 0/6 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Assumptions involved in scientific dating | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Yeah, I was waiting for some creationist to come along. Especially with K-Ar dating, as one of my old lecturers (in the US they would call them Professors and he got his PhD in some area of Geochronology from Harvard many years ago), has been providing me with information on how he used to do K-Ar dating on some formations of the Barberton Sequence...in the 1980's. Since then he has been getting more accurate dates in his research with other methods.
Those mining companies are not stupid! They still pay him to date those rocks. They say more accurate dates (instead of 3.8 billion +- 50 million years) 3.8 +-20 million years will provide them with more accurate predictions on what will be found underground. I'm still waiting for some YEC to use YEC methods for exploration and mining... They don't seem to want to put their money where their mouths are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
So, Faith, let's discuss the 'assumptions' you think involved in scientific dating. That's what this threat is about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
ICANT disappeared about those 'assumptions'. ICANT knows that he/she can't defend those claims.
My bet is that ICANT will just carry on spreading the same untruths about the nature of geological dating systems to people not educated in geology (probably 99.9999999999%) of people regardless of the evidence. I mean in my country only around 3000 living people have had any formal education in geology out of a total population of more than 50 million living people. In a country where the economy is very dependent on mining. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Yet, they still keep on going around those "assumptions" on the CMI website, where people are not allowed to comment without severe restrictions on what evidence is allowed. They don't even allow direct measurements...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Faith writes: You should try it, Faith. This thread is about those "assumptions" those creationists keep talking about. You do know that there's lots of evidence for those "evolutionist assumptions" . This is the threat to discuss those "assumptions". As for the "assumptions" scientific dating is based on, I just don't get into dating issues at all if I can help it. ICANT disappeared. Obviously ICANT is not able to handle reality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Faith writes: I disagree. Relative dating is very, very important in describing the coal deposits I, personally, work on. Remember those exploration and mining companies? Sure: absolute or "scientific" dating is irrelevant if relative dating is all it takes to find oil or do other practical geological work Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
ICANT writes: Changing the subject, again?
No my goofy idea is that in the far distant past the earth was smaller than it is today. I believe that is also the scientific view as the earth grew bigger over millions of years.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
ICANT writes: Nope.
The first assumption you have to make is that the universe is x years old,...ICANT writes: Nope.
A constant rate of decay,...ICANT writes: Nope.
... an isolated systemICANT writes: Nope.
... in which no parent or daughter element can be added or lost,...ICANT writes: Nope. ... and a known amount of the daughter element present initially. You seem to always be wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
My favourite one was
quote:This guy is stupid. That's not an ASSUMPTION.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
That's right. No point in running DNA tests to determine paternity. We must refer only to eye-witness accounts of penis depositing sperm into vagina. And not any old sperm. We must have eye-witness accounts of the exact sperm out of millions penetrating and fertilizing the egg...and recreate the same sperm cells doing exactly the same years afterwards in a lab. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Creationists, Where Art Thou?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
DOCJ writes: That's exactly the opposite of what I've understood from what edge wrote. ... In interpreting your response, it does seem as if you do not care about the accuracy of dating... In my field, accurate dating is paramount in trying to predict what will be found underground. Modern dating systems work extraordinarily well. Maybe you, personally, do have a big problem in you trying to find "The Truth (Pty. Ltd)" instead of looking for models providing the best explanations for what is observed (the truth)? Maybe it's because you don't know what scientific methods involve?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
I looked at you first link. A few sentences in it says:
Your source writes: Nonsense. We can disregard your link. The Universe is expanding at an accellerating rate. ...The visible universe is static and much smaller than we thought... In the meantime, why do all the major exploration and mining companies I've ever worked with accept radiometric dating as accurate? Are they all stupid?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
The first one was economical with the truth. No reason to look at the rest.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member (Idle past 202 days) Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
PaulK, the person is trying to address the believers. They will believe whatever he says regardless what is shown in reality.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024