07-31-2014 01:39 PM
100 1234
tools
  1. PeterByrne's Avatar
    Prove the earth is 4.5 billion years old and while you're at it prove how it came to be. I don't want your theories. I want undeniable proof. Ready, set, go....
    sent using tapatalk app
    07-31-2014 09:09 AM
  2. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Prove the earth is 4.5 billion years old and while you're at it prove how it came to be. I don't want your theories. I want undeniable proof. Ready, set, go....
    sent using tapatalk app
    Do you even know what a scientific theory is? I would guess not. Do you know what radiometric dating is? I'm guessing it's no. So why don't you find that out first then come back ask those questions again. I don't have the desire or time to talk to some of your level of ignorance.
    07-31-2014 09:09 AM
  3. Wam1q's Avatar
    Prove the earth is 4.5 billion years old and while you're at it prove how it came to be. I don't want your theories. I want undeniable proof. Ready, set, go....
    sent using tapatalk app
    That is not a claim or a guess. It is the calculated age using lead-dating.
    N_LaRUE likes this.
    07-31-2014 09:10 AM
  4. phlamethrowre's Avatar

    Come back when you actually have a better argument.

    I don't have an argument. I have the reality that you can no more prove your beliefs than I can. The difference between you and I is that I understand that.
    07-31-2014 09:13 AM
  5. phlamethrowre's Avatar
    That is not a claim or a guess. It is the calculated age using lead-dating.

    How do you go about testing lead dating for accuracy going back 4.5 billion years, exactly??
    Andrew Martin4 likes this.
    07-31-2014 09:14 AM
  6. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    I don't have an argument. I have the reality that you can no more prove your beliefs than I can. The difference between you and I is that I understand that.
    I don't have 'beliefs' I have evidence backing me and 1000s of scientist, experiments, studies and theories. What do you have? A book written by sheep hearders. Yeah I can see the similarity.
    Scienceguy Labs likes this.
    07-31-2014 09:15 AM
  7. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    How do you go about testing lead dating for accuracy going back 4.5 billion years, exactly??
    Why don't you go find out and instead of maintaining your ignorance?
    07-31-2014 09:15 AM
  8. Wam1q's Avatar
    How do you go about testing lead dating for accuracy going back 4.5 billion years, exactly??
    This figure was determined by C. C. Patterson. When he used the technique of uranium-dating to determine lead, he always got widely varying results. That was because there was a lot of lead pollution. With trial and error, he at last built an ultra-clean lab and determined lead in a meteorite with great accuracy. He calculated the time it needed to form that amount of lead and came to this figure of 4.5 billion years.
    Scienceguy Labs likes this.
    07-31-2014 09:20 AM
  9. Pete's Avatar
    Um guys. phlamethrowre is doing as his name suggests, flame-baiting the thread. Best to ignore it and move on with the thread, or let it die.
    07-31-2014 09:22 AM
  10. worldspy99's Avatar
    Prove the earth is 4.5 billion years old and while you're at it prove how it came to be. I don't want your theories. I want undeniable proof. Ready, set, go....
    sent using tapatalk app
    Where is undeniable proof that the Earth is 6000 years old and not a day older since 4.54 billion is much older than 6000 years?
    07-31-2014 09:23 AM
  11. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Um guys. phlamethrowre is doing as his name suggests, flame-baiting the thread. Best to ignore it and move on with the thread, or let it die.
    Trolls irritate me. Ignorant ones even more so...
    Scienceguy Labs likes this.
    07-31-2014 09:23 AM
  12. Pete's Avatar
    Trolls irritate me. Ignorant ones even more so...
    Walking away doesn't mean that you lose the argument (even a pointless one like this), it just means you have better things to do with your day.. :D

    A decent argument requires opponents to each supply a premise, and reasoning to support their intended conclusion. Our friend here isn't supplying any part of that argumentative contract, therefore the discussion falls apart.
    a5cent and Beijendorf like this.
    07-31-2014 09:31 AM
  13. BatteryLife's Avatar
    Please stop using the word 'prove'. I have never heard anything in science that could be proven, unlike maths. Theories are there for a reason...

    OFF TOPIC ALERT 😒
    07-31-2014 09:33 AM
  14. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Walking away doesn't mean that you lose the argument (even a pointless one like this), it just means you have better things to do with your day.. :D

    A decent argument requires opponents to each supply a premise, and reasoning to support their intended conclusion. Our friend here isn't supplying any part of that argumentative contract, therefore the discussion falls apart.
    I wasn't trying to win the argument. There was no argument. Just conjecture on their part. Bold statements of 'prove it to me'. That's not an argument.

    I was hoping to get them to go investigate some things. I know it's sometimes futile but doesn't hurt to try.
    Scienceguy Labs likes this.
    07-31-2014 09:36 AM
  15. Pete's Avatar
    I absolutely get you, but he really has no concrete belief in his contrived creationism. If there was an attempt at discussion and learning, I would have been all over it too.
    Scienceguy Labs likes this.
    07-31-2014 09:45 AM
  16. phlamethrowre's Avatar
    Some people are too "smart" for their own good. Science, as it relates to the origins of the universe is nothing more than a belief system, much like the religions of the world. If you are too "smart" to comprehend that then so be it.
    sent using tapatalk app
    07-31-2014 09:51 AM
  17. phlamethrowre's Avatar
    please stop using the word 'prove'. I have never heard anything in science that could be proven, unlike maths. Theories are there for a reason...

    Off topic alert 😒

    this⬆⬆⬆
    07-31-2014 09:54 AM
  18. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    Some people are too "smart" for their own good. Science, as it relates to the origins of the universe is nothing more than a belief system, much like the religions of the world. If you are too "smart" to comprehend that then so be it.
    sent using tapatalk app
    What exactly does 'too smart' mean? What's wrong with speculating about the origins of the universe and formulating a theory about it?

    Understand this, science isn't an absolute. It's a flowing and changing thing. Being wrong is a part of the reality of science, so is argument. People seem to have difficulty understanding that.
    07-31-2014 09:56 AM
  19. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    this⬆⬆⬆
    Well they're right. You were the one using it...
    07-31-2014 09:57 AM
  20. phlamethrowre's Avatar
    What exactly does 'too smart' mean? What's wrong with speculating about the origins of the universe and formulating a theory about it?

    Understand this, science isn't an absolute. It's a flowing and changing thing. Being wrong is a part of the reality of science, so is argument. People seem to have difficulty understanding that.

    There is nothing wrong with speculation and theories, nothing at all, as long as the speculators and theorist remember that their speculations and theories are just that. When they start tossing them around as fact and somehow more legitimate than someone else's beliefs, that's when it become a problem.

    I'm not anti-science. I just understand it for what it is and what is is capable of. Without it our world would much much different. Science will never answer some questions, it will never tell me where I came from. If you are willing to accept science's theory about where you came from then more power to you. That is your right.
    07-31-2014 10:06 AM
  21. phlamethrowre's Avatar
    Well they're right. You were the one using it...

    I used it to make a point and you backed me up on that point. I thank you for that.
    07-31-2014 10:07 AM
  22. Indistinguishable's Avatar
    I liked this thread better when we were talking about "difference" between 4,450 million and 4.45 billion.
    07-31-2014 10:07 AM
  23. phlamethrowre's Avatar

    Understand this, science isn't an absolute. It's a flowing and changing thing. Being wrong is a part of the reality of science, so is argument. People seem to have difficulty understanding that.
    This is what I've been saying from the beginning if this conversation.

    Since this is true, how did we end up disagreeing??
    07-31-2014 10:14 AM
  24. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    There is nothing wrong with speculation and theories, nothing at all, as long as the speculators and theorist remember that their speculations and theories are just that. When they start tossing them around as fact and somehow more legitimate than someone else's beliefs, that's when it become a problem.
    A scientific theory is not a guess. It's evidenced. For those of us who are not scientist it is 'fact' because the details they discuss are things that it doesn't change what we know.

    Here's something to keep in mind when you think of a scientific theory, just so you understand better. What you're using, electronics, is many scientific theories working together. Same goes for electricity. You can see for yourself, science theories are very different than what you think the word implies. They are workable, usable things.

    I'm not anti-science. I just understand it for what it is and what is is capable of. Without it our world would much much different. Science will never answer some questions, it will never tell me where I came from. If you are willing to accept science's theory about where you came from then more power to you. That is your right.
    You may not be anti-science but you have a thinking that science shouldn't tread in places that makes you uncomfortable. That's just too bad. Science may not answer all questions but it does a good job at answering many and will continue to do so, whether you like the idea or not.

    Where did you come from? Stars. You, me and every living thing on this planet and in the universe came from exploding stars. We are star dust. The line between the living and non is a thinner line than you would be comfortable with. We may never know exactly how life started but we'll have a good idea about how. Probably very soon. We have a good idea what happened after it started though. It's called evolution.
    Scienceguy Labs and Pete like this.
    07-31-2014 10:16 AM
  25. N_LaRUE's Avatar
    This is what I've been saying from the beginning if this conversation.

    Since this is true, how did we end up disagreeing??
    This is not where you started from and we are still in disagreement. Your understanding of my statement is incorrect.
    07-31-2014 10:17 AM
100 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-02-2014, 09:30 AM
  2. New to the WP world!
    By ultra99 in forum Nokia Lumia 920
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-29-2014, 08:38 PM
  3. Does the Dell Venue 8 pro come with 8.1?
    By Ryzzlle in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-29-2014, 08:28 PM
  4. Book radio cabs in India with the new Mega Cabs app
    By WindowsCentral.com in forum Windows Central News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-29-2014, 04:20 PM
  5. Backlight bleed at the top half of the screen?
    By KPAkiller in forum Nokia Lumia 930
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-29-2014, 04:09 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD