(October 11, 2015 at 1:03 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:(October 11, 2015 at 12:59 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: @Randys brother (or as I'll hereafter refer to you, Poe): Your "evidence" for the untrustworthiness of radiocarbon dating is an amateurish cartoon clip in which radiocarbon dating is not mentioned once?!? As for the actual content of the video, why don't you do a little research? I'm sure, if you're honest, you'll soon enough discover the Mack truck-size holes in the presentation.
And if you're not honest about it, you will only (1) confirm my dim view of what passes for Christian honesty, or (2) confirm to me that you are a Poe.
Yeah, I have to agree with you on that. When I see someone posting stuff that's that blatantly dishonest about the subject, I can no longer take them seriously enough to waste my time interacting with them.
1. Liar
2. Poe
3. Accepts that the USGS is not insane, and that there's a rational basis for radioisometric dating.
I also agree that if the dating methods were used to confirm that a piece of wood was Jesus's cross (or somesuch), they'd be all about it.
I'm surprised you guys are drawing this conclusion from your attempt to discourse reasonably with him (I'm actually really surprised at what you've managed to get him to say) and not from the fact that he is quite obviously a troll.
Love atheistforums.org? Consider becoming a patreon and helping towards our server costs.