Posted on 07/30/2009 10:42:38 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
The fatal flaw with radioactive dating methods
--snip--
This illustrates the problem with the radioactive dating of geological events. Those who promote the reliability of the method spend a lot of time impressing you with the technical details of radioactive decay, half-lives, mass-spectroscopes, etc. But they don’t discuss the basic flaw in the method: you cannot determine the age of a rock using radioactive dating because...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
“I’ve read it cover to cover several times.
Now what”?
Well it appears you need some help, I did, and still do. After all, you didn’t pick up science books for the very first time and understand them.
I’d suggest perhaps a Christ centered program.
You should understand the scriptures, as I said, moves one outside their comfort level.
Prepare to be challenged outside your own understanding!
Challenge God. Dare Him to prove Himself real to you.
But be prepared for the consequences. Don't do it unless you really mean it and have the intention of acting on it should you be convinced.
“I’ve read it cover to cover several times.
Now what”?
Well it appears you need some help, I did, and still do. After all, you didn’t pick up science books for the very first time and understand them.
I’d suggest perhaps a Christ centered program.
You should understand the scriptures, as I said, moves one outside their comfort level.
Prepare to be challenged outside your own understanding!
Great job, I see you came to the same conclusion virtually everyone else did: you’re an angry 13 year old, rather you responded or not.
Well, I’ll give you that you did have that 1-2% of the 11-12 year old age group to impress.
2 thumbs up!
You should take a shot at learning English. It makes reading your ad hominems easier if you have some semblance of literacy.
Of course, you’ll still sound like an idiot and you’ll still be wrong, but at least you’ll have grammar and spelling on your side.
Oh wait...you misunderstand, you see, you lost: game, set and match several HOURS ago now. Your work is finished here!
There’s no “fool’s bank” if that’s what you’re trying to accomplish here.
yup...something smells all right, but it’s not your apron!
Yeah, it’s the entire cretin swamp that has that o-deer....
Unlike most atheists?
With the leading influential atheists in the history of the world having names like Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse-tung, Ho Chi Minh, Kim Il Sung, Fidel Castro,....
...how come the atheist organizations haven't yet apologized for the atheist slaughter of more innocents in one century than all the religious people since the beginning of time?
With all due respect, I don't think you have read the paper he supplied. It is admittedly rare to see a source posted on FR that directly refutes another's claim, but this is one example. The paper posted is directly on point with regards to the central question, "How can scientists know what the original amount of a given radioactive element was, so they can then calculate its age given the half-life?"
This problem and its solution is described in the paper you so flippantly dismissed. Read starting from page 4 here.
I did read the page, and in fact was familiar with its arguments prior to seeing it anywise. And yes, I did disregard it because it does nothing but engage in a slightly more complicated argument by handwaving, without really interacting with the root premise of the argument it is challenging.
“I’d prefer not to spend my time and my life “serving” a fictional character.”
Are you a gambler? You must be a gambler! You see, if you look at the simple averages of you happening without some sort of design or purpose then it’s more likely you are the one that is fictional; not God. I guess you increase your chances of being if you’re a single-celled organism, but then I suppose we wouldn’t be having this conversation now would we...
But if you want to roll those dice then the law of averages suggests you’re the one more likely to wind up in the lake of fire than I would wind up rotting in the non-existent afterlife. I’ll take my chances, you take yours.
“I can learn all you mentioned and more (and I’m quite certain that I am far more of a Christian - by behavior - than most ‘thumpers) without deluding myself.”
Tut, tut... you can’t be a Christian without accepting the premise of Christ (Who he said He was): that He is the Son of God and that he is not just “a” way, but the “only” way to heaven. You can emulate righteous behavior but it means little, and certainly doesn’t mean you’re a Christian. Without faith, what you do doesn’t amount to squat.
By the way, if you meant to shock me with your little “fictional character” thing I’ve been around a little too long for that. I’ll let you know who God is (to the best of my ability and knowledge), but you’re just as welcome to trample the Word and believe what you like. I’m only responsible for bringing the medicine. If you want to take the pill you’ll have to shove it down on your own.
But you also said Christians are hypocrites. Are you far more of a hypocrite?
- by behavior - than most 'thumpers
Behaviorally, you're just another raving atheist. So, tell us why you think you are far better than most Christians.
“So, tell us why you think you are far better than most Christians.”
Yes, yes and yes... I left out a couple of points in my reply to filo.
Gracias, Amigo.
GG
What is it that gives meaning to YOUR life Filo?
Well then, good luck with your life!
Thank you for your support sir.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.