Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 12:57 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
#1
The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely

When atheistic origin science gives dates, they seem to violate standard scientific practice. Real science gives a number and an error range. But atheistic origin science many times quotes a number without any error range. You will read things like 123 million years ago. Why the lack of an error range? What is the error range? How is that error range determined? This bad scientific practice shows that atheistic origin science is not real science.

To show why the real error range destroys atheistic origin science consider the following cases.

Case 1 – Determination of an intermediate species.

Ancestor 120 million years ago
Intermediate 115 million years ago
Descendant 110 million years ago

Seems straightforward. Now consider these same numbers with error ranges.

Ancestor 120 million years ago +- 10 million years
Intermediate 115 million years ago +- 10 million years
Descendant 110 million years ago +- 10 million years

Based on these numbers, then this could be the case.

Ancestor 113 million years ago
Intermediate 115 million years ago
Descendant 118 million years ago

That is the descendant came first, then the intermediate, then the ancestor. So that is now shown to be false.

Case 2 – determination of the rock layers

Top layer 100 million years
Middle layer 110 million years
Bottom layer 120 million years

Seems straightforward. Now consider these same numbers with error ranges.

Top layer 100 million years +- 10 million years
Middle layer 110 million years +- 10 million years
Bottom layer 120 million years +- 10 million years

Based on these numbers, then this could be the case.

Top layer 108 million years
Middle layer 118 million years
Bottom layer 112 million years

So the middle is the bottom and the bottom is the middle. That would be very hard to explain if these layers exist over a vast area.

Now combine the fossils in the out of order layers and ancestors are more recent than descendants. In fact the dates from case 1 and case 2 may conflict.

So the error ranges may put all the dates of the rock layers and fossil record in jeopardy.

What are the error ranges?

How are they determined?
Reply
#2
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
Could you tell us the species in your 2 examples?

Must be specific Grace.
Reply
#3
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely

[Image: travis_wut-w.jpg]

[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#4
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
LOL.
READ!

Just one example, Lucy.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.10....21183/pdf

and where they found her:
[Image: lucyStratigraphy_zpsd147f0ea.png]
Reply
#5
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
Now I know you are a moron and no longer worth responding to.

When dates are given, they are always approximate.

Do you really think when a date is given of 120 million years, scientists actually mean exactly 120,000,000?

You're are a troll or a moron. You pick.

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
#6
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
Jeez, I hope nobody is taking this carpet bombing seriously. All of SavedByGraceThruFaith's threads are the same thing with just a little variation.
Reply
#7
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
(October 5, 2013 at 4:28 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: You're are a troll or a moron. You pick.

"You've got moron in my troll!"

"You've got troll in my moron!"

It's two delicious fails in one!

[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]
Reply
#8
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
(October 5, 2013 at 4:04 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: You will read things like 123 million years ago. Why the lack of an error range? What is the error range? How is that error range determined? This bad scientific practice shows that atheistic origin science is not real science.

You know how you will tell that it's really bad science?

When it is Oct, 5th 2023 and the age isn't given as 123,000,010 million years ago.

Do you really enjoy being this willfully ignorant?

You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
Reply
#9
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
I wonder what the next thread in this fascinating series will be. Probably a 12 paragraph dissertation on how the theory of gravity is impossible and really it's God's love that is holding all matter together.
[Image: cinjin_banner_border.jpg]
Reply
#10
RE: The dates given by AOS for past events may actually disprove evolution entirely
(October 5, 2013 at 5:50 pm)Darwinian Wrote: I wonder what the next thread in this fascinating series will be. Probably a 12 paragraph dissertation on how the theory of gravity is impossible and really it's God's love that is holding all matter together.

QM assumes a boson field permeating all of space-time... so maybe god is controlling this field! Tongue
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Good Christians only may answer... Gawdzilla Sama 58 9936 September 18, 2018 at 3:22 pm
Last Post: Bob Kelso
  While Judaism may have had forced marriage war booties, i think it reasons is for it Rakie 17 3904 August 2, 2017 at 2:17 pm
Last Post: Thumpalumpacus
  Lol the bible is actually ok with pedophilia, proof from passage Rarieo 80 22880 July 29, 2017 at 12:50 am
Last Post: Astonished
  Christianity actually condones murder Rolandson 50 9942 January 21, 2017 at 10:09 pm
Last Post: Wyrd of Gawd
  Truth in a story which is entirely dependent upon subjective interpretation Astonished 47 5871 January 10, 2017 at 8:57 am
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Catholicism would actually be the most likely controlled Christianity Rolandson 10 1917 January 1, 2017 at 11:44 am
Last Post: Redoubtable
  What do non-fundamentalist Christians actually believe? Fromper 66 24129 June 30, 2016 at 7:08 pm
Last Post: vorlon13
  You Can't Disprove a Miracle Rhondazvous 155 16028 March 18, 2016 at 11:05 am
Last Post: Cyberman
  Hi, I'm a Christian. Help Me Disprove My Religion! WishfulThinking 265 59394 October 11, 2015 at 9:20 am
Last Post: Cyberman
Question Dear Christians: What does your god actually do? Aractus 144 48711 October 9, 2015 at 6:38 am
Last Post: robvalue



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)