Why Won't They Carbon Date This? (page 6)

Perry

Very bad analogy Terry .... equating the moon distance to "millions of years".

Here's a better analogy, let's say you and I were walking in the woods and we smelled the stinking rotting flesh of an animal. (This is exactly how the dinosaur bone above reportedly smelled) Would you think that it was a fresh kill or one that happened millions of years ago? Other than what someone is manipulating you to believe, why would you think any differently about a dinosaur bone with original soft tissue inside?

shamus100

Jesus Christ, Poopsie, we're having a serious discussion here about buffalo and dinosaurs. Apperantly I'm unread and probably stupid for not 'getting' this.

If you're going to snoop, share the popcorn.

poopsiecakes

shamus100

That's better.

poopsiecakes

Please carry on - this is extremely entertaining interesting.

metatron

I will avoid ridiculing you because I think you have a point about dating methods. However, I will point out that Failure of Dating Methods does not equal Creationism is True.

In the case of dinosaurs, in particular, Creationism fails even if they are only a few thousand years old. Preserved soft tissue and DNA traces of a T. Rex have been found but keep in mind that we are disputing about a huge, vicious predator - a horrific monster.

And a loving God made this stuff? Really? Was He smoking dope during that Creative Day?

metatron

shamus100

You have the words backwards there, Poops.

Apperantly I'm quite unread for not understanding the correlation between buffalo and T-Rex. I await the plethora of reading material that will be produced to indicate said truth. (pffft....)

cptkirk

i'm going to email this thread to dawkins, i'm sure he loves people like jaguarbass invoking his name.

bohm

I agree with shamus. Apparently only bookish old types are able to understand how bronze-age man hunted dragons on the plains. Since Jaguarbass thump this standard, it is only fair to ask what it is -- so go on jaguarbass, please share a bit more information about yourself so we can work towards becoming examples of scientific rigor and clear thinking such as yourself.

Perry seem to be OT on his own damn topic. But no worry folks, the perry-repellant is this:

Perry:

What evidence is there the structures you show in the image are (a) from a dinosauer and (b) that the residues which can be verified to have come from the original animal could not be 65M years old.

For all your huffing and puffing, if I took a dump on a fossil, it would both smell bad, be biological and not 65M years old. So unless you can demonstrate (a) and (b) i am not impressed at all.

Why Won't They Carbon Date This?

Share this