RE: Atheism is a religion
January 29, 2012 at 2:20 am
(This post was last modified: January 29, 2012 at 2:27 am by Undeceived.)
(January 28, 2012 at 8:30 pm)Blam! Wrote:(January 28, 2012 at 2:46 pm)Undeceived Wrote: Let me endeavor to explain what evolution really is—what scientists don’t tell you:Of course, hypothesis itself isn't enough unless not analyzed through by scientific methods. However, evolution has been demonstrated through by scientific method means. And you can't discredit the science by pointing out the refutable flaws. If the errors are refutable, then it can be refuted. The errors of radioactive dating has been refuted and they still point the age of Earth to 4.54 billion years. The fossils through by many types of radioactive datings, they show the similar results. Your claims of confirmation bias in the science are pointless, because the science is refutable and thus without bias.
‘Hypothetically’ is not a science. Understanding this, you, the atheist, bypass evolution’s driving points and focus instead on the physical evidence: dating. Dating is based on assumption and therefore not reliable. If you assume the earth is old, you date with K-Ar and get billions of years; if you assume the earth is young, you date life forms with C-14 and get 6,000-10,000 years. Both are supported.
Really, this is getting nowhere and you have yet to provide the evidence of your own god. You claimed the creationism as a science despite the lack of evidence to support the existence of your god. Creationists are obviously biased liars, because they attributed and favored their god into science without evidence.
checkmate, Undeceived.
I probably wasn't clear. ALL old-age dating techniques would be wrong if the earth turns out to be young. You must know a ballpark age before you choose a technique. Scientists rightly say C-14 dating is inaccurate or unusable for objects over 80,000 years. So too are the methods Rb-Sr, K-Ar, U-Pb ect. inaccurate or unusable for objects under 80,000 years. We know this because we have tested K-Ar and others on rocks we know to be 200~ years old. The results came out to millions or billions of years. Page down to Table 1 in this link:
http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/..._Earth.htm
Science can't refute itself on topics it isn't sure about. Dating with our current knowledge is like trying to figure out how a sextant works. You may try a hundred different brands of sextant, fifty different types, but if you don't know which side is up you might as well not be using one at all.