Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 7249

I’ve heard all that [from TalkOrigins], I’m a big science buff. Although I doubt you will find the evidence to support those theories in a forum. Opinions? Butt loads. Evidence? No. Out of the many arguments, carbon dating is what’s most referred to. However, Carbon 14... has a trusted accuracy of just over 10,000 years (kind of funny about that huh?) And it is 'assumed' accurate up to 50,000 years. If you hear of carbon dating into millions of years, you are hearing a very confused and illogical report. Even still, nobody can prove carbon dating to be accurate... [And] I am quite well aware of the meaning of Theory. Maybe you should try to learn it.

Dust, Internet Infidels 11 Comments [5/1/2004 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1
Robbie

On the contrary, dear Dust. If you hear of reports of dating into millions of years, it is most likely not carbon dating at all, but one of the myriad other types of samples available, i.e., K-Ar, which has a half-life of 1.3 billion years.

Asshole.

1/4/2008 11:30:37 AM

Mandy

Carbon dating is accurate for the purposed it is actually used for. That does not include dating fossils, other radiometric dating methods are used for that.

Dust is ignorant for someone who claims to be a big science buff. A few minutes of research on the internet would show him that he is talking nonsense.

1/4/2008 11:46:07 AM

Jack Bauer

No evidence given at TalkOrigins? I find that rather difficult to believe.

The 50,000 year limit to carbon dating is dervied from 10 half lives. After ten half lives have elapsed, 99%+ of the C14 is depleted so there is bugger all left to measure. Accuracy is a function of the ability to determine C14 levels, there is no assumption.

1/4/2008 12:29:32 PM

Laurel

You, Sir, are no science buff.

You remind me of the 19-year-old kid whose website says he has "two PhDs and a doctorate," or the fuckwit who claimed he knew The Law of Attraction works because he is a physicist and quantum mechanics prove it. What makes dumb people think their dumbness is so fucking smart?

1/4/2008 1:04:07 PM

Hawker Hurricane

When I first started lurking on message boards many years ago, I noticed there sure were a lot of Ph.d's who couldn't spell, CIA operatives who were talking about classified materials, army officers who couldn't tell a tank from a helicopter, fighter pilots who didn't know that the base they claimed to be stationed on didn't have a airfield...

And lots of people who claimed to be experts on a subject while not knowing even the basics.

1/4/2008 2:09:22 PM

Whoever

"Butt loads" of opinions? Is that where they came from?

1/4/2008 2:17:36 PM

Felis >:3

"...I'm a big science buff."

Fuck off.

12/4/2011 11:29:20 AM

Philbert McAdamia

Dust thou art and dust thou remaineth.

12/4/2011 12:46:17 PM



C14 dating is calibrated to around 35,000 years.
the calibration charts are different depending where on earth your sample lived. Typically several samples are tested and the results compared to confirm the date found. Carbon dating has several volumes of things to consider when obtaining and preparing samples.


12/4/2011 10:15:33 PM

rw23

> I’m a big science buff.

You may be enthusiastic but you're not knowledgeable.

12/5/2011 1:41:50 AM

atheist

He's a big science buff?
Does that mean he's the night janitor at the local science museum?


12/5/2011 5:15:15 AM
1