666...the Devils Moving Average

[TM_Direct]

Carbon Dating: What Do The Experts Think?
Carbon Dating can best be summed-up with the following statement by T. Save-Sodebergh and I.U. Olsson (Institute of Egyptology and Institute of Physics, respectively, University of Uppsala, Sweden) in their publication, C-14 Dating and Egyptian Chronology in Radiocarbon: "If a C-14 date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely 'out of date' we just drop it." This illustrates the fact that accepted carbon dates are not necessarily accurate dates -- they are merely selected dates. "It should be no surprise, then, that fully half of the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half come to be accepted" (Robert E. Lee, "Radiocarbon, Ages in Error," Anthropological Journal of Canada, Vol. 19, No.3, 1981, pp.9, 29).

 

[axeman]

Ok..fair enough.

"how come when life started again, the dinosaurs didn't come back???? "


Why would they???


TM... you are making some big assumptions here, mainly:

1) Given a certain environment, that exactly the same creatures will evolve in said environment
2) The environment was the SAME after the meteor strike.


Neither of these 2 things are proven or even assumed.


Now this is just a GUESS.... but I would wager that even given
the EXACT same environment, if you could play god, turn back time, and roll the evolutionary dice, you would NOT get the exact same species. In fact, I would WAGER, that you could get wildly different species every time you tried this and would almost NEVER get the same species twice.

This is merely a guess based on my understanding of random or nearly random mutations and the process of selection.

Order matters, and there is no way you could guarantee the same order of random mutations.


peace

axeman

Quote from TM_Direct:

Axe you are missing my point..... I am being facetious....I believe dinosaurs existed ...I believe they existed before man....But i was also shocked to find out how little we have....I thought gowing up that there were just thousands and thousands of skeletal remains but it turns out there are very few and even fewer in tact ( complete) the majority are a piece of arm and a reconstruct....regarding evolution: I don't understand and this is about the 5th time ive mentioned this so bare with me or answer it...If the world was created by stars colliding...if these chemicals mixed and became plant cells, and then became animal cells, and then amoebas ect..then fish....finally dinosaurs for 200 million years.......THEN this so called Meteor hits engulfing earth in a dark cloud like state for a hundred thousand years and destroying all life......how come when life started again, the dinosaurs didn't come back???? the same elements were here..the same chemicals......where is t-rex????

 

[TM_Direct]

. C-14 Dating Embarassments

1. Errors in Judgement

-coal from Russia from the Pennsylvanian era supposedly 300 million years old, was dated only 1680 years (Radiocarbon, Volume 8)

-natural gas from Mississippi and Alabama should have been 50 to 135 million years old yet C-14 dated it 30 000 and 34 000 years old respectively (also Volume 8)

-bones from a saber-tooth tiger, found in the LaBrea tar pits (near Los Angeles) were supposedly between 100 000 and 1 000 000 years old, were given a date of 28 000 years (Radiocarbon, Volume 10)

2. Oops

-a freshly killed seal dated by C-14 showed that it had died 1 300 years ago (American Journal, Volume 6)

-living mollusc shells were dated at up to 2300 years old (Science, Volume 14)

-living snail shells showed that they had died 27 000 years ago (Science, Volume 224)

 

[TM_Direct]

Quote from axeman:

Ok..fair enough.

"how come when life started again, the dinosaurs didn't come back???? "


Why would they???


TM... you are making some big assumptions here, mainly:

1) Given a certain environment, that exactly the same creatures will evolve in said environment
2) The environment was the SAME after the meteor strike.


Neither of these 2 things are proven or even assumed.


Now this is just a GUESS.... but I would wager that even given
the EXACT same environment, if you could play god, turn back time, and roll the evolutionary dice, you would NOT get the exact same species. In fact, I would WAGER, that you could get wildly different species every time you tried this and would almost NEVER get the same species twice.

This is merely a guess based on my understanding of random or nearly random mutations and the process of selection.

Order matters, and there is no way you could guarantee the same order of random mutations.


peace

axeman

HEY....I don't have those answers and neither do you ....If i had those answers....I'd be GOD

 

[axeman]

Notice that no where does he assert that carbon dating
is inaccurate.

He points out that some researchers are not being honest,
and rejecting evidence that doesnt align with their expectations.

This is one of the reasons the scientific method requires lots of
review, replication, etc, from OTHER researchers.

Some humans make errors. Some humans outright CHEAT.
This must be accounted for.
I've heard that some scientists have gone as far as
faking finds to get more funding.
Although I don't have a reference, knowing human nature,
I'm pretty sure this has happened at least once.
They give the real scientists
a black eye. Its pathetic.

And if it is completely 'out of date' we just drop it."
The scientists should come up with a better theory instead.
This is simply dishonest and outrageous.

peace

axeman

Quote from TM_Direct:

Carbon Dating: What Do The Experts Think?
Carbon Dating can best be summed-up with the following statement by T. Save-Sodebergh and I.U. Olsson (Institute of Egyptology and Institute of Physics, respectively, University of Uppsala, Sweden) in their publication, C-14 Dating and Egyptian Chronology in Radiocarbon: "If a C-14 date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely 'out of date' we just drop it." This illustrates the fact that accepted carbon dates are not necessarily accurate dates -- they are merely selected dates. "It should be no surprise, then, that fully half of the dates are rejected. The wonder is, surely, that the remaining half come to be accepted" (Robert E. Lee, "Radiocarbon, Ages in Error," Anthropological Journal of Canada, Vol. 19, No.3, 1981, pp.9, 29).

 

[Gordon Gekko]

Quote from axeman:

We have been around about 1% or less the time of the dinos.

axe,

i once heard an awesome statement, but i can't recall it exactly. it was something like, if you were to put the existence of life on earth on a 12 hour clock, humans have only been here for like a fraction of the last second or something.

 

[axeman]

That's my point.

So why were you asserting that the SAME dinosaurs/species SHOULD
have reappeared?

You don't KNOW that they SHOULD have.
I already admitted that I didn't.
That's why I use the word WAGER a lot

I can only provide a little bit of logical evidence.
I can somewhat deduce that you probably won't get the same species based on an understanding of mutations and selection.

In the book "The Blind Watchmaker", the author wrote a fairly
simple computer program which created an "environment" and
allowed for random mutations, and "selection".

He would run the simulation through millions of "passes" to see
what kind of life would "generate".

He got all kinds of whacky creatures generated every time he ran
the program, even in the same "environment".
That's what I would have predicted as well.
Interesting stuff...and GREAT book. Must read for the layman.


peace

axeman

Quote from TM_Direct:





HEY....I don't have those answers and neither do you ....If i had those answers....I'd be GOD

 

[TM_Direct]

Does this mean you won't go to church with me on sunday??? I may be the lecturer.

you should read the bible....whether you accept it or not it is one of the few historical books from the beginings of time that is still in existence...sure it has a middle-eastern Judeo-Chirstian slant..but it is one of the best sources of history man has.

 

[axeman]

Yes... that was a quote by Carl Sagan.

He was the MASTER of putting things into perspective.
Mind blowing stuff.

Actually... he compared it to a calendar.
We appeared during the last day of the year,
during the last second on Dec 31st near midnight.
Something like that.

I might have the book it is in on my bookshelf.
I'll see if I can find it.

peace

axeman

Quote from Gordon Gekko:


axe,

i once heard an awesome statement, but i can't recall it exactly. it was something like, if you were to put the existence of life on earth on a clock, we humans were only here like a fraction of the last second or something.

 

[Gordon Gekko]

Quote from axeman:

Yes... that was a quote by Carl Sagan.

He was the MASTER of putting things into perspective.
Mind blowing stuff.

Actually... he compared it to a calendar.
We appeared during the last day of the year,
during the last second on Dec 31st near midnight.
Something like that.

I might have the book it is in on my bookshelf.
I'll see if I can find it.

peace

axeman

axe,

check this out: http://www.upfromdragons.com/01mirror.htm

the quote i heard did use a clock, but they probably just stole the idea from Sagan. i actually think that clock example is in those evolution DVDs i've been recommending.