typhonblue
Feminism--making the world safe for bigotry
Goddammit! It's like watching a ostridge tear apart a scarecrow.
Thank you PhoenixfenixRoy wont remove it, and i think he's been arrested for breaking the law. I'm not sure if its slated for demolishment yet.
himura_kenshin said:I believe that humans and dinosaurs coexisted.
I think carbon dateing is based on measuring how much carbon hasn't decayed. I'm guessing that carbon seperates and decays (atomicly?) after a creature dies. The only problem with this is that the older something is, the less accurate the process is. I doubt it ever gets more then 20% inaccurate though.himura_kenshin said:I honestly don't know anything about carbon dating. However, the first thing you linked to there (which i did not examine thoroughly) says the plates probably broke apart for the same reason they are moving today.
himura_kenshin said:Thank you for your contribution of aimless sarcasm. -_-
Therefore, at the time it dies, it should have the same percentage of carbon 14 that is in the atmosphere. over thousands of years however, the carbon 14 decays. Scientists can find how much carbon 14 decayed, and thus finding how old the skeletal remains are.
But seriously, all that I see here is that you obviously haven't understood much of the way evolution and science works, but you still try to make up all kinds of silly arguments to try to falsify the whole theory, and you believe in something (and I'm not talking about God) there isn't even the slightest piece of logic or reasoning behind.
And about the actual age of the earth, not only have I been taught at Biology that the earth is about 4,6 billion years old (NOT in our classes on evolution-theory btw), but also at Physics and Geography as well. The evidence is very convincing, if you only dared to take a good look at it.
And by the way, to say something about what was said earlier, evolution theory doesn't imply that free will doesn't exist, it only tells us a possible way how (complex) life came to be in this world.
himura_kenshin said:Eh... I asked a reasonable question which was met with a reasonable answer. It took me a while to understand the answer due to some misinterpretations of previous posts. I let that particular argument drop since it was met with a reasonable answer. I'm getting the idea that you have skimmed over or not really read this topic very thoroughly.
Um... I'm not about to base my beliefs on what you think is convincing.
"If i dared"? Um... i have taken into consideration everything i have seen and been told. I am not about to respond to this post by running off to read an entire text book in hopes of finding your so-called convincing evidence. If you've got such good arguments, maybe you can post them like everyone else.
If you don't believe in another realm, what is "free will"?
Pq g-1 IS a unit of measurement. Its like asking what unit grams are measured in...
Carbon 14 is radioactive. This simply means that it atomically breaks up into other elements. Its half life is 5730 years. This means that in 5730 years, a 100 gram sample will be 50 gram, and in another 5730 years, the 50 grams will be 25 grams, and so on.
Therefore, the rate of disintegration changes as there is less to disintegrate. (example, it take 5730 years for a 100 gram sample to lose 50 grams, yet it take 5730 years for a 2 gram sample to lose 1 gram, there is a HUGE difference in the rate of disintegration)
This actually pretty much answered my question. I mentioned just above here that there must be some specific factor that is different between clay and bone to change the Ai variable. If this factor could change in anyway over time, it would ruin the accuracy of the test.Bone does not change into other materials (not that i know of, again thats a biology question).
clay does not have carbon in it. Therefore, you cant carbon date it
Organic materials, such as paper, dead trees, dead animals, soil, or fossils all use the .255 Bq g. Cement or clay however, would not use the .255 Bq g
So, tell me, what DO you base your beliefs on? What exactly made you believe what the Bible says is true? And what made you believe that dinosaurs and human beings coexisted?
That's a difficult question, but just because I don't know the answer myself it doesn't mean there isn't one, right? I don't see why it would be impossible for "free will" to exist, just because I don't believe in another realm. Maybe we just have to redefine our current definitions of "free will" in order to make this possible.
However, I don't believe in 'free will' myself, I personally think that there's only a complex interaction between us and our environment. But it also depends on how one defines "free will" of course. I mean, in a way I do have "free will", because I have this distinct feeling that I can do and think whatever I want and when I want. But then again, if you really start to dig deeper and think about "why" and "how" you think and make your choices, and why it is that you're acting and responding in a certain way to something, I really don't get anywhere. My thoughts seem just to be running through my brain automatically, conjuring up images and thought patterns, combining them into something that hopefully make sense. I don't feel like I really control them, even if superficially I might think I do. Everything is only interacting with eachother according to the forces and laws of the universe (in my opinion).
And another realm? Sorry, sounds nice, but it doesn't solve a thing. Why can't there be 'free will' in the physical realm, but in the other realm (whatever that means) it suddenly isn't a problem at all? I think it's far too easy and simplistic to just say that there must be a spiritual realm somewhere and that somehow all explanations and also 'free will' must exist there. That's just a clever way of hiding yourself from the tough questions of life.
To tell you the truth, i have a problem with dating methods in general when they are used to determine the age of the world. Creationists use them too (Oil field pressure, supernovas, magnetic field, dust on the moon, so on). All dating methods basically assume that nothing out of the ordinary ever happened in the past. They make assumptions about the past based on the present.
This is a kind of lame example, but it get's my point across: Let's say i walk into the bathroom and the sink is running. The drain is plugged and the sink contains one gallon of water. Say i discover that an identical sink requires a certain amount of time to produce one gallon. Can i generalize how long the sink has been running? No; perhaps the drain wasn't closed yet when the sink was turned on. Perhaps someone took a shower and thinned the stream. Perhaps a worldwide flood added unaccounted for water into the sink . Again, not the best example, but you get my point.
People fear what happens to them after death, so they believe in god
Feel free to prove this statement wrong in any way you choose.