greatest show on earth (page 11)

jgnat

Isn't the joy of inquiry worth it in itself?

cofty

The internet and you tube is full of debates with Dakins and Christians

Its not about Dawkins - evolution is the work of thousands of scientists.

I have listened to literally dozens of debates, I have yet to hear a creationist say anything interesting.

For starters carbon datting is flawed.

No its not. Carbon 14 dating has its limitations that are well known by scientists.

Nobody uses C14 to date fossils it has too short a half-life. Its only useful for items that are up to around 10 000 years old

There are many radiometric clocks that are used to date ancient rock. Each of them go at their own specific speed and multiple independent closks can be used to date the same samples.

I wrote a summary of it here... (posts 5270 + 5317)

And here is an excellent article by a scientist who is also a christian...

Dr. Wiens has a PhD in Physics, with a minor in Geology. His PhD thesis was on isotope ratios in meteorites, including surface exposure dating. He was employed at Caltech's Division of Geological & Planetary Sciences at the time of writing the first edition. He is presently employed in the Space & Atmospheric Sciences Group at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

First edition 1994; revised version 2002.

Radiometric dating--the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements--has been in widespread use for over half a century. There are over forty such techniques, each using a different radioactive element or a different way of measuring them. It has become increasingly clear that these radiometric dating techniques agree with each other and as a whole, present a coherent picture in which the Earth was created a very long time ago. Further evidence comes from the complete agreement between radiometric dates and other dating methods such as counting tree rings or glacier ice core layers. Many Christians have been led to distrust radiometric dating and are completely unaware of the great number of laboratory measurements that have shown these methods to be consistent. Many are also unaware that Bible-believing Christians are among those actively involved in radiometric dating.
This paper describes in relatively simple terms how a number of the dating techniques work, how accurately the half-lives of the radioactive elements and the rock dates themselves are known, and how dates are checked with one another. In the process the paper refutes a number of misconceptions prevalent among Christians today. This paper is available on the web via the American Scientific Affiliation and related sites to promote greater understanding and wisdom on this issue, particularly within the Christian community....... more

cantleave

Unstop, I am very disappointed. You have read this book yet you have not given one single intelligent rebuttal for us to debate. Did you actually understand it?

James Brown

The internet and you tube is full of debates with Dakins and Christians you have to do your own leg work and research. It can take years.

You made a claim and I asked for an example. Thats all.

Bait....:--->>>>

For starters carbon datting is flawed.

Switch ....:--->>>>

Dawkins knows it but he ignores it, because he has the agenda of disproving God. He is going to do and say anything he can to forward his agenda

No bait and switch I answered you and told you do your own research.

You dont want to research because you have an agenda.

Thats not bait and switch.

cofty

Did you actually understand it?

Did you actually read it?

450 pages of fascinating science and so far you haven't referred to a single thing

cantleave

But I do know that you can not know the unknowable.

Define unknowable? How do you know the processes by which life came into existence are "unknowable"?

cofty

James - why do you just ignore every piece of evidence and explanation that has been offered to you in the past few pages?

besty

No bait and switch I answered you and told you do your own research. You dont want to research because you have an agenda.

I asked you for an example of a FACT that Dawkins is ignoring. (please check the definition of 'fact' if you are unsure)

So far you have not provided one - what you have done instead is cast doubt on Dawkins motives (and mine as well incidentally)

Bait -> Switch.

cantleave

You dont want to research because you have an agenda.

By research do you mean read peer reviewed scientific papers, or poorly argued creationist website and you tube videos?

cantleave

James, please explain how Professor Dawkins ignores the flaws of Radio Carbon Dating? That was your assertion!

greatest show on earth

Share this