If different kinds of people had completely new design features you might have a point. Since they don't you don't.
Thank you for demonstrating why you are insufferable. You know what people mean yet you play semantics.
I have to say if you've never been to a creation museum you should totally go. They are absolutely hilarious. Humans running around with dinosaurs, comically inept attempts to hand wave away geology, and invariably an exhibition on the evils of evolution.
Okay it's also a little sad that some people have been duped into believing this nonsense. Mostly funny though.
What's amusing is no clock directly measures time. They all derive the time measurement from measuring frequency. Whether that frequency counts:
- Orbits of Earth around the sun
- Pendulum Swings of a grandfather clock
- Ticks of an Escapement of a windup pocket watch
- Piezo-electric vibrations of quartz in a modern digital watch
- Atomic vibrations in an atomic clock
- Radiactive decay in Carbon14 or other radioactive elements.
What's also amusing is if we didn't understand radioactive decay well enough to use it for radiocarbon dating we wouldn't understand it well enough to reliably use it in the RTGs that power Voyager, Pioneer, Curiosity and other deep space probes.
Who says we don't understand radiocarbon decay?What's also amusing is if we didn't understand radioactive decay well enough to use it for radiocarbon dating we wouldn't understand it well enough to reliably use it in the RTGs that power Voyager, Pioneer, Curiosity and other deep space probes.
I didn't say that either. I told you to keep in mind that you're measuring ratios. Why do you do that?I guess all those lab reports and experiments I did were wrong because I said I measured time
Good thing nobody believes that.
Of course, the sudden appearance and then subsequent almost instantaneous disappearance of a volume of water sufficient to cover the entire surface of the earth... That totally happened.
Where did it come from? Where did it go? God magic, of course! That's science!
Who says we don't understand radiocarbon decay?
I didn't say that either. I told you to keep in mind that you're measuring ratios. Why do you do that?
No one in this thread.
You however have insinuated we don't understand how to use radioactive decay to date things. Or that you maynot believe in radiometric dating. Whatever that means.
No one in this thread.
You however have insinuated we don't understand how to use radioactive decay to date things. Or that you maynot believe in radiometric dating. Whatever that means.
Yeah, you gotta love the evidence they require to believe universally accepted scientific theories yet they believe stuff like this:
It would require 4,525,000,000,000 cubic kilometers of additional water not currently on Earth for the flood to happen as it's stated in the bible.
For reference, all of the water currently on Earth including lakes is estimated to be roughly 1,359,843,000 cubic kilometers and according to real science the amount of water on Earth hasn't changed in millions of years (except the small amounts we have taken with us into space).
We aren't even getting into the fact that this would have killed off every last bit of plant life on the Earth and the extreme water pressure would have left some sort of geological proof. Hell we should be able to observe effects from the sheer weight put on the crust of the earth.
Then you have the issue of atmosphere displacement. Sure some of the atmosphere would have mixed with all of the new water but since the water now takes up 2/3 of our atmosphere the majority of it would have been pushed into space and boiled off.
Lastly, where the hell did all of that water go? As we can see with our current oceans, water evaporates and then falls back down. It doesn't leave the atmosphere so it should still be here, and the massive amount of energy required to evaporate that water, pretending it magically escapes the atmospheres, would be absurd.
THAT shit is believable but the Theory of Evolution, backed up the tons of science, naw, fuck that shit!
No I haven't. I've only pointed out that we measure ratios, not dates. You can do with that what you will.No one in this thread.
You however have insinuated we don't understand how to use radioactive decay to date things. Or that you maynot believe in radiometric dating. Whatever that means.
Whoa wait a minute, we don't date things with radioactive decay. We find ratios.
Just for fun I took your 4,525,000,000,000 km^3 of water number and used Wolfram Alpha to convert it to a rain rate.
I came up with 40 days of 2.5 M/s of rain across the entire earth. Or in inches per hour 364,000 in/hr. :O
If we take the biblical size of the ark and multiply the rain rate by the area of the ark we get a flow rate equal to 85% of the Mississippi River over the top of the ark for 40 days straight. Pretty good roof!
Well I'm convinced now.
Straw man much?Just for fun I took your 4,525,000,000,000 km^3 of water number and used Wolfram Alpha to convert it to a rain rate.
I came up with 40 days of 2.5 M/s of rain across the entire earth. Or in inches per hour 364,000 in/hr. :O
If we take the biblical size of the ark and multiply the rain rate by the area of the ark we get a flow rate equal to 85% of the Mississippi River over the top of the ark for 40 days straight. Pretty good roof!
Well I'm convinced now.
Nobody in this thread said that. Who were you talking about?Wasn't talking to you.
No I haven't. I've only pointed out that we measure ratios, not dates. You can do with that what you will.
Nobody in this thread said that. Who were you talking about?
Straw man much?
Will you at least admit that a limit of a dating method has absolutely no bearing on how old something is? Can you be honest enough to do that? I have not admitted "carbon dating is real" either. I'm not going to argue with you about how accurate carbon dating is, it doesn't matter to me.
Measuring the ratios of samples is pretty straight forward.So do you think carbon dating is real?
Maybe he can find himself a brain.Why yes. I'm going to see Wicked today so the scarecrow will be there. How did you know?
Yes, that would be absolutely ridiculous levels of rain fall. Too bad that isn't what anybody thinks happened.Wouldn't rain rates that high atomize pretty much everything? Would that be like a fireman's hose (500 gpm) or even worse?