The Earth is a lot older than 6000-10,000 years, get over it!

reply to post by romanmel

Originally posted by romanmel

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Masterjaden

 

People commonly make the mistake of interchanging 'carbon' for 'radiometric'...typically because creationists use them interchangeably.

Why be a hater?

I'm not hating, I'm pointing out something that is true.

You started a thread only to demean those who may not buy your ideas.

No, I started a thread to educate those who do not accept what has been proven by science.

If you believe something else, so be it, but why degrade others?

Uh..the old "let it be" argument. I'm sorry, but these people are wrong on matters of science and are trying to influence the science curriculum very actively.

Have you no better thing to do with your time than start conflicts?

I'm not here to start conflicts, I'm here to educate people about science.

If you have time on your hands why not volunteer to help the poor?

Well, you clearly had time to write out this post. It might be because I don't really have all that much time or money. I just spend a few hours in the evening when I'm tired posting.

Others have a right to believe what they will, without you offering your "education", which they did not ask for..

And they didn't have to go into this thread. And they do have a right to be wrong. Just because they have a right to disagree doesn't mean they get to also be right.

reply to post by v0ice0freas0n


>See, in your haste to point out that I had responded in a laughable manner, you failed to see that I
>was actually replying to this statement:

>>"Psst! 'Science' is really all just smoke and mirrors... And is actually just an inside joke.

>>(Everything that (you know) 'Science' knows is just pure nonsense. And I would be more happy
>>to go into that, since it's essentially OT, just PM your objections and the link and I'll met you
>>there. ) "

You little revisionist you...

>By calling "Science" as a whole into question, I think it is reasonable for me to assume that you
>reject the vaidity of the findings and applications of such a game of smoke an mirrors. Any
>advancement in medicine in the past hundred years is directly attributable to our scientific
>understanding of the world around us. If science is nothing but smoke and mirrors, why has life
>expectancy for those in the developed world doubled?

Sorry brother, but you are seriously OT...

As a courtesty to the OP...

>> just PM your objections and the link and I'll met you there. ) "

Not to mention the victim of perception due to a flawed frame of reference.

I'm a huge fan of Science... Unfortunately, what you are (and the OP ) are talking about is 'Science'.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul


Well, I'm not talking about the age of the universe...but....

Is 15 billion years not a time? You said time has no reference point correct?

We also know nothing about dark matter and dark energy yet you claim we know everything there is to know about matter? Therefore, we can calculate time and distance. How can that be if we know nothing about dark energy and dark matter?

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


You have no time to help the poor?

It is my observation that most all athiests never do anything with compassion to their fellow man.

They are angry and self centered and proud

Without religious people, there would be little charity in the world.

How many soup kitchens, clothing banks and homeless shelters can you number that athiests have started?

Oh yeah, you are too busy "educating"..

Originally posted by romanmel
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

You have no time to help the poor?

It is my observation that most all athiests never do anything with compassion to their fellow man.

They are angry and self centered and proud

Without religious people, there would be little charity in the world.

How many soup kitchens, clothing banks and homeless shelters can you number that athiests have started?

Oh yeah, you are too busy "educating"..

Charity Navigator.
Alternative Gifts International
Amnesty International
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Doctors Without Borders
Freedom from Hunger
FINCA International
Heifer International
International Aids Vaccine Initiative
Kiva – Loans that change lives
Mercy Corps
Oxfam International
Partners In Health (PIH), Health Care for the Poor
PATH A catalyst for global health
Pathfinder International Changing Lives, Saving Lives
Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc.
Second Harvest
Southern Poverty Law Center
TechnoServe – Business Solutions to Rural Poverty
The Nature Conservancy
UNICEF
WHO World Health Organization
givingaid.richarddawkins.net...

theres plenty more, just do a quick google

He considered it "absurd to doubt that a man might be an ardent theist and an evolutionist"[155][156] and, though reticent about his religious views, in 1879 he wrote that "I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. – I think that generally ... an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind."

Wiki

Even Darwin wasn't totally sold there is no God. We all find religion on our death bed.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Thanks for the insight Carl Sagan. As if no one knew this outside of the Westboro Baptist Church...

Based on this, it looks like radioactive decay has qualities we don't quite understand. Specifically, it appears it can be influenced (in this case only slightly), by external factors. This, to me, diminishes the certainty with which you can say that radiometric dating provides a reliable standard of dating. It doesn't prove a 6,000 year creation, but it points out the arrogance of saying that we know enough about the way things work to definitively state what did or didn't occur before scientific data was ever taken. The 15 billion year view is speculation based on data, a bet. Maybe it's a good one, but maybe it's not. We've been looking at radioactive decay for less than a century - how do we know this process doesn't change over time, or could have been altered by a significant event or two?

reply to post by romanmel

Show much bigotry lately? Know who Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are? Two atheists who, individually, made the two largest charitable donations in American history. Then there's Robert Wilson, who not only donated over $22M, but donated it to a Catholic archdiocese to set up a scholarship fund for needy inner-city youth. And those are just three individuals. But atheist organizations never do anything philanthropic, do they? Guess you've never heard of the Council for Secular Humanism's SHARE (Secular Humanist Aid and Relief Effort) program, or philanthropic works by the Atheist Alliance International, the International Humanist and Ethical Union, or The Thomas Paine Foundation.

It's easier to be a bigot, blind, and wrong than to see the good in people you don't agree with and be right.

reply to post by timepolarity

That article has been beaten to death on these boards already. If you go back to the original research behind the article, the alterations in decay rate follow a 33-day cycle (which means that over the span of years, the averages still hold) and amount to fractions of a percent variance from the averages at their peaks.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Holly crud, I can't beleive the amount of nay sayers on this thread. People, get over you religions and look at the facts. The world is actualy 4.something billion years old indeed. Just look at any geology text book, an Atlas what ever. A book that doesn't say "Bible" on the cover. And one proof that the Earth is older than 6000 years old...FOSSILES - FOSSILES - FOSSILES

Originally posted by timepolarity
Based on this, it looks like radioactive decay has qualities we don't quite understand. Specifically, it appears it can be influenced (in this case only slightly), by external factors. This, to me, diminishes the certainty with which you can say that radiometric dating provides a reliable standard of dating. It doesn't prove a 6,000 year creation, but it points out the arrogance of saying that we know enough about the way things work to definitively state what did or didn't occur before scientific data was ever taken. The 15 billion year view is speculation based on data, a bet. Maybe it's a good one, but maybe it's not. We've been looking at radioactive decay for less than a century - how do we know this process doesn't change over time, or could have been altered by a significant event or two?

And I'm pretty sure massive solar flares can affect the rate of decay. And we know nothing about neutrino's and what that does.

PS...it goes back to my point about science and religion. Religion stops at faith but science keeps contradicting itself every decade or so. We will never figure this stuff out. We just need to worry about the future of the Universe instead of the past.

reply to post by simonsayz


Those are not charity organizations.

They are political groups with an agenda.

Bill Gates foundation is for giving mercury laden vaccines to third world children to soft kill them.

The goal of the elites of the world, as represented by those groups you mention, is to reduce the Earth's population to 500 million. Compassion through death.

Not my idea of helping....

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


You think that we've verified Einstein's ideas and you say I'M ignorant of the science. You are a fool.

Tell me how we've verified time dilation? please? I'm all ears, show me the science, because I can guarantee you that based on the empirical results of any experiment done that you would say validates it, I can give you an alternate explanation of the evidence that is just as much if not more plausible...

For instance, if you were to bring up the atomic clock experiments that purportedly show that time dilates when close to a gravitic source, it is just as likely that a strong gravitic source affects the rate of atomic oscillation as opposed to time actually dilating... so when I say IF Einstein's theories are correct, I mean exactly that, IF!!!

Of course, if you thought for yourself instead of being in awe of supposed field of study experts, then you may have considered that possibility as well.

Just like if you thought for yourself you would've considered the explanation for the supposed increase in the rate of acceleration of the expansion of the universe could be due to space stretching and increasing the rate of time, which would better explain red shift and blue shift than the current theory as well.

I hate to do all of your thinking for you. Wake UP!!!!! look at actual evidence and do some thinking.

Stop accepting whatever science tells you. The only historic scientific fact is that science is never currently accurate....

Jaden

Done here for a while, I have to do some work.

reply to post by romanmel


Then so is every religious organization in the United States. Guess who spends more on lobbying - "Christians" or atheists?

reply to post by iterationzero


Are you serious??? Do you know why Bill gates and Warren Buffet made those donations??? To avoid taxes...

Bill Gates created the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation to donate money to, so that he could claim it as a deduction, so instead of paying taxes on 40 billion dollars, he only paid on HALF of what was left of his income AFTER the donation.... so instead of paying 36% of 40 billion, he paid 36% of 2.5 billion or there abouts, while he maintained control over ALL OF IT....

Wow.... I can't believe how naive people can be....

Jaden

Originally posted by romanmel
reply to post by simonsayz

 

Those are not charity organizations.

They are political groups with an agenda.

Bill Gates foundation is for giving mercury laden vaccines to third world children to soft kill them.

The goal of the elites of the world, as represented by those groups you mention, is to reduce the Earth's population to 500 million. Compassion through death.

Not my idea of helping....

edit on 16-5-2011 by romanmel because: typo

i can say the same for churches...it's to brainwash people to convert and also to have followers being blinded accepting an imaginary being

you questioned about atheist charity and here i gave it to you and then you say something bad about it
Grow up

reply to post by Masterjaden


and you don't think churches or anyone affiliated don't have to pay taxes?

back then when i was young i worked at cvs...nuns goes in a buy stuff and are tax exempted...that bs to me...they chose to be nuns...they chose to start a church why do they get that priviledge

bill gates and warren buffet will give away their money when they die...they aren't leaving things for their kids

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by timepolarity

 

That article has been beaten to death on these boards already. If you go back to the original research behind the article, the alterations in decay rate follow a 33-day cycle (which means that over the span of years, the averages still hold) and amount to fractions of a percent variance from the averages at their peaks.

My point is not that this shows some change in decay rate, but it does show that decay rate CAN be altered by external factors. What if the same force that causes this cyclical change occurred in a non-cyclical way at some point in the past? How can you say that it hasn't? For radioactive decay to be reliable, it has to be an isolated process, one that cannot be changed by something outside it. Since we know that's not true anymore, we can't be certain of the process's history. We can't extrapolate backward with certainty anymore.

reply to post by simonsayz


I just wanted to point out that the list of secular organizations were just that: secular organizations. This doesn't mean they are ran by atheist and each could have very well been inspired by the teachings of Jesus, Buddha, or any other representative of a religion.

Lack of church affiliation does not equate to atheism.