• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Evolution of what?

Dan From Smithville

Dan From Smithville

He who controls the spice controls the universe.
Staff member
Premium Member
Eli G said:
What science says about it: "in some cases, geological processes such as metamorphism or recrystallization can reset the isotopic system, leading to inaccurate results."

Are you a scientist? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
It'f funny how you figure things. Science is right when you think it supports your position, but wrong when it completely eviscerates it.:cool:
 
Dan From Smithville

Dan From Smithville

He who controls the spice controls the universe.
Staff member
Premium Member
Eli G said:
Nah, I don't talk to people with obsessions. Don't waste your time like that.

Have a nice day.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised someone of your beliefs doesn't talk directly to others. I mean, I have no fear of you. I'm just a little bunny.

You have a bright, beautiful, bountiful, benevolent, bodacious day too.;)
 
Bear Wild

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
Eli G said:
A constant "shaping" of the theory. Like a new version of a fiction story. It's that.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what fiction story you are talking about. A good theory should adjust as more information is known. This is what makes a theory so effective. The newer studies are starting reveal how much the environment influences genetic expression. This makes the theory such a powerful explanation. It is connecting genetics with environment. There is no other explanation that accounts for this. The shaping is going both ways as changes in genetics shapes the environment and the environment shapes the genetic expression. This is a factual based story. The only fiction has been coming from those trying to disprove.
 
E

Eli G

Well-Known Member
No matter how many flowers you throw into the sewage waters, they will not smell better.

If the basis of a theory is false, no matter how much you try to embellish it, it will not become true.
 
McBell

McBell

Unbound
Eli G said:
No matter how many flowers you throw into the sewage waters, they will not smell better.

If the basis of a theory is false, no matter how much you try to embellish it, it will not become true.
Click to expand...
Until such time as you start addressing evolution and not one of the strawmen you call evolution, there is no reason to take you seriously.
 
IndigoChild5559

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Eli G said:
What science says about it: "in some cases, geological processes such as metamorphism or recrystallization can reset the isotopic system, leading to inaccurate results."

Are you a scientist? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You quoted from Quora, which is just a collection of people on the internet stating their opinions. Would you like to find a valid scientific site?
 
McBell

McBell

Unbound
Eli G said:
What do you mean? Is it not true what it says? :oops:
Click to expand...
It means you quote mined.

You completely left out this part of the paragraph you mined your quote from:

Overall, when used appropriately and with careful consideration of potential sources of error, modern radiometric dating methods are valuable tools for determining the ages of geological materials.​


The question being answered is:

How accurate are modern radiometric dating methods?​
​
The full answer given is:

Modern radiometric dating methods are generally considered to be accurate within certain limitations. These methods rely on the decay of radioactive isotopes in rocks and minerals to determine the age of geological materials. The accuracy of radiometric dating depends on several factors, including the type of radioactive isotope used, the presence of any inherited daughter isotopes, and the preservation of the sample. For rocks that have not been significantly altered or disturbed since their formation, radiometric dating can provide accurate age estimates. However, in some cases, geological processes such as metamorphism or recrystallization can reset the isotopic system, leading to inaccurate results. Additionally, contamination or loss of parent or daughter isotopes can also affect the accuracy of radiometric dating. Overall, when used appropriately and with careful consideration of potential sources of error, modern radiometric dating methods are valuable tools for determining the ages of geological materials.​
​
The page in question is:

www.quora.com

How accurate are modern radiometric dating methods?

Answer (1 of 16): Radiometric dating is a reliable means of dating rocks when used properly. Radiometric Dating Does Work! https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100915171534.htm Creationist attempts at discrediting radiometric dating are essential to creationist claims about the age of...
www.quora.com www.quora.com
 
Last edited:
Heyo

Heyo

Veteran Member
YoursTrue said:
Ok...does that mean the dates are right? obviously according to some they are right.
Click to expand...
The date for Tiktaalik is scientific consensus, the date for the first mammal is contested. If you read the article, you'll find that there are arguments for a range between 225 mya and 180 mya. So it is at least 150,000 millennia between Tiktaalik and mammals.
 
E

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Heyo said:
The date for Tiktaalik is scientific consensus, the date for the first mammal is contested. If you read the article, you'll find that there are arguments for a range between 225 mya and 180 mya. So it is at least 150,000 millennia between Tiktaalik and mammals.
Click to expand...
And what is that first mammal you are talking about? :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top