d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Globe Earth
Prev1179717981799180018011933Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 47,030
Joined: Sep 5 2016
Gold: 100.00
Jan 22 2024 01:22am
Quote (addone @ Jan 21 2024 10:12pm)
Next line explains it. Reading is hard especially when it proves you wrong.


but whats the mechanism?
Member
Posts: 16,100
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Jan 22 2024 01:56am
Quote (TiStuff @ Jan 22 2024 08:22pm)
but whats the mechanism?


Literally tells you if you keep reading.

Just in case you are confused there multiple other methods used to date things. The earth is way older than 6000 years old. You just been slurping the koolaide all this time. You desperately want it to be true otherwise the bible is a lie. So you go out of your way to find the smallest technicalities grasping at smallest straws.

Just like flat earth cult no amount of evidence will convince you. The world is telling you 1+1=2 but your cult convinced you 1+1=3. There is no point of debating someone who outright rejects basic reality and facts for unsubstantiated claims and magic. And has no evidence for their beliefs. (Logical fallacies and personal anecdotes are not evidence)
Member
Posts: 47,030
Joined: Sep 5 2016
Gold: 100.00
Jan 22 2024 02:40am
Quote (addone @ Jan 21 2024 11:56pm)
Literally tells you if you keep reading.

Just in case you are confused there multiple other methods used to date things. The earth is way older than 6000 years old. You just been slurping the koolaide all this time. You desperately want it to be true otherwise the bible is a lie. So you go out of your way to find the smallest technicalities grasping at smallest straws.

Just like flat earth cult no amount of evidence will convince you. The world is telling you 1+1=2 but your cult convinced you 1+1=3. There is no point of debating someone who outright rejects basic reality and facts for unsubstantiated claims and magic. And has no evidence for their beliefs. (Logical fallacies and personal anecdotes are not evidence)


it doesnt

you understand you can just as easily be guilty of what you accuse me of

to clarify things deep time dating is based on assumption that cant be tested\observable
Member
Posts: 21,942
Joined: Jul 5 2009
Gold: 12,162.15
Jan 22 2024 03:17am
Wish i owned a thread with this many pages
Member
Posts: 16,100
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Jan 22 2024 03:20am
Quote (TiStuff @ Jan 22 2024 09:40pm)
it doesnt

you understand you can just as easily be guilty of what you accuse me of

to clarify things deep time dating is based on assumption that cant be tested\observable


I can back up my claims of 1+1=2 you cannot back up your cultish pseudo-science of 1+1=3 without personal anecdotes and faulty logic. Belief requires no evidence, but facts requires proof. You speak only of unsubstantiated beliefs.

Dating anything old requires a time machine to confirm without assuming period. All the dating methods out there however can be checked vs known things (like tree rings, rocks, sediment layers, fossils, historical objects etc) and against each other to achieve fairly accurate data. Some of the methods are more accurate than others yet when we combine all of them they give us fairly accurate dates. Sure the accuracy drops off after certain number but it's not a even a question if the earth is 6000 years it's more of a question if the earth is 4.5 billion or 4.3 billion. We are way past the point. Maybe 1000 years ago you could of made an argument to an uneducated peasant but today this is laughable.
Just like 2000 years ago some people believed earth is flat in today's day and age we laugh at them and remind them with evidence to return back to reality.

So once again this is a reminder to return back to reality. Forget bible and Christian fairytales instead start thinking for yourself and use evidence/facts not beliefs and personal anecdotes.
Member
Posts: 47,030
Joined: Sep 5 2016
Gold: 100.00
Jan 22 2024 03:27am
Quote (addone @ Jan 22 2024 01:20am)
I can back up my claims of 1+1=2 you cannot back up your cultish pseudo-science of 1+1=3 without personal anecdotes and faulty logic. Belief requires no evidence, but facts requires proof. You speak only of unsubstantiated beliefs.

Dating anything old requires a time machine to confirm without assuming period. All the dating methods out there however can be checked vs known things (like tree rings, rocks, sediment layers, fossils, historical objects etc) and against each other to achieve fairly accurate data. Some of the methods are more accurate than others yet when we combine all of them they give us fairly accurate dates. Sure the accuracy drops off after certain number but it's not a even a question if the earth is 6000 years it's more of a question if the earth is 4.5 billion or 4.3 billion. We are way past the point. Maybe 1000 years ago you could of made an argument to an uneducated peasant but today this is laughable.
Just like 2000 years ago some people believed earth is flat in today's day and age we laugh at them and remind them with evidence to return back to reality.

So once again this is a reminder to return back to reality. Forget bible and Christian fairytales instead start thinking for yourself and use evidence/facts not beliefs and personal anecdotes.


original conditions are assumed.

you never stated the mechanism that cause the production of atmospheric c14 to vary

obviously your argument is weak if you have to keep referring to "flat earth"

This post was edited by TiStuff on Jan 22 2024 03:28am
Member
Posts: 17,563
Joined: Mar 5 2016
Gold: 27.45
Warn: 40%
Jan 22 2024 04:04am
Quote (TiStuff @ Jan 22 2024 10:27am)
original conditions are assumed.

you never stated the mechanism that cause the production of atmospheric c14 to vary

obviously your argument is weak if you have to keep referring to "flat earth"


you need to understand that c14 is denied by flat earthers, just like anything proving flat earth theory cannot work.

get it striaght and right : c14 is known because of science, not because flat earthers discovered it.

I'd even go as far as stating that every discovery we made through history, none of them can be attributed to flat earthers. shocking isn't it ? :)

anyways, what's the fuss about c14 ? :p

This post was edited by Melatonina on Jan 22 2024 04:05am
Member
Posts: 52,224
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
Jan 22 2024 04:40am
Quote (TiStuff @ Jan 21 2024 06:04pm)
i dont see you actually refuting any of it. i havent seen anyone ever even try to refute the atmopheric14 argument


I don't see you explaining how radiocarbon dating doesn't ever work in any situation ever except on zircon-bound helium or atmospheric c14.

Quote (park18 @ Jan 22 2024 03:17am)
Wish i owned a thread with this many pages


They get closed automatically after 50,000 replies. That's the max.

This post was edited by Santara on Jan 22 2024 04:41am
Member
Posts: 15,801
Joined: Jul 9 2021
Gold: 291.00
Jan 22 2024 04:44am
Quote (TiStuff @ Jan 22 2024 12:40am)
it doesnt

you understand you can just as easily be guilty of what you accuse me of

to clarify things deep time dating is based on assumption that cant be tested\observable


How old do you think the earth is?
Member
Posts: 16,100
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Jan 22 2024 05:01am
Quote (TiStuff @ Jan 22 2024 10:27pm)
original conditions are assumed.

you never stated the mechanism that cause the production of atmospheric c14 to vary

obviously your argument is weak if you have to keep referring to "flat earth"


Wtf you even talking about original conditions are assumed? The article clearly stated that there are two methods counting rings of bristlecone pines and the other is radiocarbon-date the wood then measure against the rings. We can check this against thousands of trees and get an accurate reading every time. Or is counting against your religion. Can't even have a civil conversation here when the other person struggles with reading and basic concepts like maths. Feel like I am talking to a child.

Come back when you read the article I posted in its entirety. Maybe read it 3 times just to make sure.

Quote (ChocolateCoveredGummyBears @ Jan 22 2024 11:44pm)
How old do you think the earth is?


He doesn't, just reads any pseodo scientific literature churned out by highly biased Christian propaganda channels and thinks its the ultimate truth.

This post was edited by addone on Jan 22 2024 05:06am
Go Back To General Chat Topic List
Prev1179717981799180018011933Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll