Dating processes why the big differences?

by Crazyguy 21 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Crazyguy

  Viviane are you stating that all the dating processes used were monipulated by the makers of the documentary?  Or these guys that dated the material not experts in their field?  It looked to me as though these guys were all in good faith trying to date the material best they could using their specific technology.  It looked as though out side sources were trying to stop them. I would think if there was a conspiracy by the creators of the show or the ones in it, they would of had some consistency in the dating not the wide range of dating that came out.

  Im not sure if this happens at other sites as well but how can any dating science be taken seriously if no two can come up with the same timeline?
• 

  Viviane

  Viviane are you stating that all the dating processes used were manipulated by the makers of the documentary?

  Did I say that?

  Or these guys that dated the material not experts in their field?

  Did I say that?

  I would think if there was a conspiracy by the creators of the show or the ones in it, they would of had some consistency in the dating not the wide range of dating that came out.

  They guys who created the material the documentary is based on are Vedic creationists. Like every other creationist out there pushing an agenda that doesn't comport with reality, they seek to cause confusion. They use outliers or mistakes and distort data to prop up their agenda. Their agenda, BTW, is to push their version of creationism. Consistent scientific results show the opposite of what they want, it's in their interest to have conflicting results. There is no conspiracy, they are simply and utterly misrepresenting data in every way they can.

  Im not sure if this happens at other sites as well but how can any dating science be taken seriously if no two can come up with the same timeline?

  You are being lied to and falling for it.
  
• 

  RichardHaley

  Science in general does seek knowledge and rewards those who discover it. However many corporations, and institutions hold the financial reigns of science and scientist. This can be and sometimes is to the detriment of progress in a given direction. Much of science is driven by the military or powerful corporations with those agendas satisfied first and foremost then the public receives benefits in a trickle down manner. Profits almost always supersede benefits. 

  Don't get me wrong, I love science, it is just that to think it can't also be tampered with by those with power is being naive. Ultimately truth wins out but sometimes it can take decades or more. The above documentary is some proof of that IMHO. I prefer to examine the message on not the messenger. To condemn the information on the basis of an ad hominem attack of the writers/directors could allow one to miss some very interesting facts. 

  
  
• 

  Crazyguy

  I maybe being lied to but I am not falling for it, thats why I asked the question. I know from my research of several different subjects that people have an agenda and will lie. Hell im an ex jw how can I not know. I dont really care about this documentary even though it was interesting again my question was related to the science of dating material and why there seems to be no consistency in the results.
• 

  Viviane

  Ultimately truth wins out but sometimes it can take decades or more. The above documentary is some proof of that IMHO.

  How, specifically, are two non-scientists creationists making standard anti-science and disproven creationist claims proof that mega corporations or governments are distorting science, evidence and hiding the origins of man for profit?
  
• 

  Viviane

  I dont really care about this documentary even though it was interesting again my question was related to the science of dating material and why there seems to be no consistency in the results.

  The people behind the documentary are creationists with an agenda the requires discrediting known science and evidence.
  
• 

  RichardHaley

  Just how "are two non-scientists creationists making standard anti-science and disproved creationist claims" in this video/documentary? 
• 

  Viviane

  Just how "are two non-scientists creationists making standard anti-science and disproved creationist claims" in this video/documentary?

  Hi, have you met Google? If not, Google wanted me to remind you that I'm not your research assistant. She also wanted me to let you know that, if you don't know anything about this video and the people behind it, maybe, just maybe, you shouldn't be debating it's merits. That's called an argument from ignorance. Google it!
  
• 

  RichardHaley

  The history of the Hueyatlaco archaeological site has been controversial from the very beginning. This in fact is what makes it so interesting. Renown scientist from many fields have been on both sides of this issue since the 1960s. The debate may be unwarranted or not (depending on your views) but the documentary draws attention to the debate which is an established event in modern history. Much of what is in the documentary can be found on Wikipedia but in the documentary you actually get to see interviews with some of the people involved with the events. This in itself gives this documentary some merit. Is it being spun to some degree or is the story told with some bias? No doubt. But then we are all adults and can come to our own conclusions. 
• 

  Viviane

  This in itself gives this documentary some merit.

  Oh? Please explain specifically and clearly why a documentary by two non-scientist creationist pushing discredited, distorted and proven dishonest pseudoscience deserves any merit.

  Is it being spun to some degree or is the story told with some bias? No doubt. But then we are all adults and can come to our own conclusions.

  Given that all you are doing is pushing credence to pseudoscience and changing the subject as often as you can, not all of us are acting or thinking like adults.