How Much Evidence Will It Take You To Believe In God???

[pocaracas]

[*]

No answer, then... huh?

[*]

All radiometric dating methods are based on assumptions about events that happened in the past. If the assumptions are accepted as true (as is typically done in the evolutionary dating processes), results can be biased toward a desired age. In the reported ages given in textbooks and other journals, these evolutionary assumptions have not been questioned, while results inconsistent with long ages have been censored.  Therefore completely useless.

Guys, I see we've found an expert!

Do tell us, poor ignorant idiot atheists: what are those assumptions and why are they false, again?
Maybe you should start by telling us how those methods are supposed to work...?

Also, how did you arrive at thousands of years?

[Edward John]

[*]

All radiometric dating methods are based on assumptions about events that happened in the past. If the assumptions are accepted as true (as is typically done in the evolutionary dating processes), results can be biased toward a desired age. In the reported ages given in textbooks and other journals, these evolutionary assumptions have not been questioned, while results inconsistent with long ages have been censored.  Therefore completely useless.

[*]

Guys, I see we've found an expert!

Do tell us, poor ignorant idiot atheists: what are those assumptions and why are they false, again?
Maybe you should start by telling us how those methods are supposed to work...?

Also, how did you arrive at thousands of years?

[*]
Wait few more days after I am done with the 30/30 rule and I'll post the video.

YouTube video Called"Evolution VS Creation | Evolution a Myth Part 3/12"

[Minimalist]

[*]
All radiometric dating methods are based on assumptions about events that happened in the past. If the assumptions are accepted as true (as is typically done in the evolutionary dating processes), results can be biased toward a desired age. In the reported ages given in textbooks and other journals, these evolutionary assumptions have not been questioned, while results inconsistent with long ages have been censored.  Therefore completely useless.

[*]

You fucking asshole.  Do you manage to successfully delude yourself all day long with this bullshit?

Here's one of your own telling you that you are a shithead.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

Radiometric Dating

A Christian Perspective

Radiometric dating--the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements--has been in widespread use for over half a century. There are over forty such techniques, each using a different radioactive element or a different way of measuring them. It has become increasingly clear that these radiometric dating techniques agree with each other and as a whole, present a coherent picture in which the Earth was created a very long time ago. Further evidence comes from the complete agreement between radiometric dates and other dating methods such as counting tree rings or glacier ice core layers. Many Christians have been led to distrust radiometric dating and are completely unaware of the great number of laboratory measurements that have shown these methods to be consistent. Many are also unaware that Bible-believing Christians are among those actively involved in radiometric dating.

This paper describes in relatively simple terms how a number of the dating techniques work, how accurately the half-lives of the radioactive elements and the rock dates themselves are known, and how dates are checked with one another. In the process the paper refutes a number of misconceptions prevalent among Christians today. This paper is available on the web via the American Scientific Affiliation and related sites to promote greater understanding and wisdom on this issue, particularly within the Christian community.

[*]


They have to keep it simple.  That's all that christards like Eddie can handle.

[Edward John]

[*]
All radiometric dating methods are based on assumptions about events that happened in the past. If the assumptions are accepted as true (as is typically done in the evolutionary dating processes), results can be biased toward a desired age. In the reported ages given in textbooks and other journals, these evolutionary assumptions have not been questioned, while results inconsistent with long ages have been censored.  Therefore completely useless.

[*]

You fucking asshole.  Do you manage to successfully delude yourself all day long with this bullshit?

Here's one of your own telling you that you are a shithead.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

Radiometric Dating

A Christian Perspective

[*]


They have to keep it simple.  That's all that christards like Eddie can handle.

[*]

Atheists are Immoral, this proves therefore atheism is false along with Stalin, Hitler, Napolean and Lenin and all that.

[The Grand Nudger]

Can we get a new poe, this ones broken?

[Whateverist]

All you got to do is produce one god - just one - and I personally will concede the matter to you

Assuming this did happen, then how would we know that this life-form isn't just a more evolved and different life-form? If it conformed to humanity's preconceptions of what constitutes a god, then how would we know that it isn't just showing us what we want to see?  Would humanity accept such a life-form without  a god label?

Good question.  So long as the standard is 'superstitious' 'supernatural', presumably if we can detect it at all it must not be god.

[zebo-the-fat]

Science is constantly testing and questioning it's assumptions, if the tests fail then the assumptions are changed to fit the new evidence, that's why science is a more reliable model for reality than religion which tries to change the facts to fit with their assumptions.

[LastPoet]

The OP is a coward. Whohever he is he us abusing our forum leniancy. So be it it is only the replies to him being answered, something trolls love. Food for thought and all that shot.

[LastPoet]

Why aren't our most vaunted theists rising up about the poe sayings? One gets a free pass for lying for jesus? Is that a thing,

[Arkilogue]

It's a simple concept alright, even if it's not old.   

The oldest concepts in both early science and religion was of an infinite undifferentiated substance before the opening of the space of the universe within that substance.