Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 5 minutes ago, Francie, said: Yes that was my point, that's why I said radiometric dating an not carbon,I know they say carbon dating for upto 50 or 60,000 years,but that's far from accurate also,how come there's carbon found in diamonds supposed to be millions of years old,I could get lists of f**k ups from both dating systems Yes it is accurate, tried & tested, explain why it isn't accurate? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mr moocher 988 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 Diamonds are formed in the earths crust as magma rises diamonds are pusheed up so id say they are very old Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 Radio carbon dating is accurate to around 60,000 years because after that the traces of carbon are so small their radiation is swamped out by background radiation. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,307 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 11 minutes ago, Goly said: Yes it is accurate, tried & tested, explain why it isn't accurate? Il get to that in a minute,another dramatically wrong radiometric dating,potassium argon dating mount ngaruhoe in New zealand erupted in the 1950s an they dated the rocks to be 3.5 million years old,thats two known dates of recent volcanic rocks completely dated wrong. How so if its so accurate goly? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 4 minutes ago, Francie, said: Il get to that in a minute,another dramatically wrong radiometric dating,potassium argon dating mount ngaruhoe in New zealand erupted in the 1950s an they dated the rocks to be 3.5 million years old,thats two known dates of recent volcanic rocks completely dated wrong. How so if its so accurate goly? Why have you moved the goalposts yet again Francie, you do this all the time when you are shown to be wrong? Lol As for your examples, potassium-argon dating is not suitable for dating rocks only decades because it measures the decay of potassium over millions of years, it's a method designed for really ancient samples. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,307 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 2 minutes ago, Goly said: Why have you moved the goalposts yet again Francie, you do this all the time when you are shown to be wrong? Lol As for your examples, potassium-argon dating is not suitable for dating rocks only decades because it measures the decay of potassium over millions of years, it's a method designed for really ancient samples. How have I moved the posts mate? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 5 minutes ago, Francie, said: How have I moved the posts mate? You must be on a wind up, you started blabbering about how carbon dating isn't accurate and when proven wrong you move on to potassium-argon dating and then you try and deny it, you're a diamond mate. Lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,307 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 6 minutes ago, Goly said: You must be on a wind up, you started blabbering about how carbon dating isn't accurate and when proven wrong you move on to potassium-argon dating and then you try and deny it, you're a diamond mate. Lol Goly you haven't proved me wrong on nothing mate,I'm talking about all the dating techniques not just the one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 Just now, Francie, said: Goly you haven't proved me wrong on nothing mate,I'm talking about all the dating techniques not just the one. Well, carbon dating proves the earth is much older than the bible states, carbon dating is accurate within that time frame, the bible is wrong, so, if it is wrong about the age of the earth what does that tell us? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,307 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 8 minutes ago, Goly said: Well, carbon dating proves the earth is much older than the bible states, carbon dating is accurate within that time frame, the bible is wrong, so, if it is wrong about the age of the earth what does that tell us? OK prove me wrong then,give us all an example of carbon dating that proves the earth is older than 8000 years? What item was carbon dated? I could give you a load of instances when carbon dating was terribly wrong. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 4 minutes ago, Francie, said: OK prove me wrong then,give us all an example of carbon dating that proves the earth is older than 8000 years? What item was carbon dated? I could give you a load of instances when carbon dating was terribly wrong. You're impossible or you must taking the piss mate? The sooner you snap out of this and accept that the bible is wrong here the better. Lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie, 2,307 Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 2 minutes ago, Goly said: You're impossible or you must taking the piss mate? The sooner you snap out of this and accept that the bible is wrong here the better. Lol The old lefty response,makes a claim,an can't back it up when asked lol All the dating methods are based on ASSUMPTIONS,which vary for many a different reason,suck it up it ain't accurate or trustworthy. I'm away to do some football coaching,ta ta for now 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 Just now, Francie, said: The old lefty response,makes a claim,an can't back it up when asked lol All the dating methods are based on ASSUMPTIONS,which vary for many a different reason,suck it up it ain't accurate or trustworthy. I'm away to do some football coaching,ta ta for now You have some cheek you hahahaha, you get exposed as being wrong and then you move on to the next gotcha moment and rince & repeat. Typical, exposed and then it's time for a walk or football coaching. Lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Goly 879 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 You've been exposed again mate, you're now posting sources that you think prove your argument but this source mentions the earth being millions of years old, you can't write it..lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.