Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    09 Jul '13 15:35
    http://www.livescience.com/37977-underwater-cypress-forest-discovered.html

    They dated the trees (preserved for 50,000 years by the low oxygen water) by carbon dating.
  2. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    09 Jul '13 19:48
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.livescience.com/37977-underwater-cypress-forest-discovered.html

    They dated the trees (preserved for 50,000 years by the low oxygen water) by carbon dating.
    Evidence of the worldwide flood of Noah's time.

    The Instructor
  3. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    10 Jul '13 00:39
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Evidence of the worldwide flood of Noah's time.

    The Instructor
    So Noah's so-called flood happened 50,000 years ago. Interesting.
  4. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    10 Jul '13 08:20
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    So Noah's so-called flood happened 50,000 years ago. Interesting.
    I believe their timeline is wrong.

    The Instructor
  5. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    10 Jul '13 09:23
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I believe their timeline is wrong.

    The Instructor
    You can believe whatever you want, it doesn't change reality. When you self lobotomize your brain you can't accept change in views, but only hold on desperately to your outmoded delusions.
  6. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    10 Jul '13 19:19
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    You can believe whatever you want, it doesn't change reality. When you self lobotomize your brain you can't accept change in views, but only hold on desperately to your outmoded delusions.
    I know my belief does not change the beliefs of others. Beliefs do not change the truth either. The truth is that the age of these flooded forrests are not known and the 50,000 years is just a guess to make the discovery seem more dramatic and important.

    The Instructor
  7. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    10 Jul '13 21:27
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I know my belief does not change the beliefs of others. Beliefs do not change the truth either. The truth is that the age of these flooded forrests are not known and the 50,000 years is just a guess to make the discovery seem more dramatic and important.

    The Instructor
    I feel sorry for your brain, unable to process real data. Why don't you just cut the thing out entirely so all you have left is your own religious agenda. No, wait, you already did that, sorry.
  8. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    11 Jul '13 08:26
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    I feel sorry for your brain, unable to process real data. Why don't you just cut the thing out entirely so all you have left is your own religious agenda. No, wait, you already did that, sorry.
    Like I have said before, you seem to have serious personality or mental problems and should seek professional help soon.

    The Instructor
  9. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    11 Jul '13 11:09
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Like I have said before, you seem to have serious personality or mental problems and should seek professional help soon.

    The Instructor
    I'm not the one who cannot accept scientific evidence. I am not the one who always shouts 'holy holy holy'. You are seriously deluded.
  10. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    11 Jul '13 14:34
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    I'm not the one who cannot accept scientific evidence. I am not the one who always shouts 'holy holy holy'. You are seriously deluded.
    I guess we have both given our share of insults and I guess we will have to agree to disagree and go on about our business. You are not willing to consider my information and I am well aware of all the information you have presented and see no credibility in it.

    The Instructor
  11. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    12 Jul '13 11:47
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I guess we have both given our share of insults and I guess we will have to agree to disagree and go on about our business. You are not willing to consider my information and I am well aware of all the information you have presented and see no credibility in it.

    The Instructor
    What you have is not information, what you have is dogma. There is no science in dogma, just blind faith. I don't do blind faith. I listen to the evidence. If you did, you might finding yourself casting off your self lobotomy.
  12. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    12 Jul '13 23:31 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    What you have is not information, what you have is dogma. There is no science in dogma, just blind faith. I don't do blind faith. I listen to the evidence. If you did, you might finding yourself casting off your self lobotomy.
    How about the scientific evidence of the Shroud of Turin? That is not blind faith. That is pure science. Ha, ha. Got you on that one.

    The Instructor
  13. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    13 Jul '13 19:24
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    How about the scientific evidence of the Shroud of Turin? That is not blind faith. That is pure science. Ha, ha. Got you on that one.

    The Instructor
    Yes, there is evidence it IS a shroud.
  14. 15 Jul '13 08:05
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    How about the scientific evidence of the Shroud of Turin? That is not blind faith. That is pure science. Ha, ha. Got you on that one.

    The Instructor
    how accurate is carbon dating rj?
  15. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    15 Jul '13 09:14
    Originally posted by stellspalfie
    how accurate is carbon dating rj?
    Apparently carbon dating is not very accurate, if the wrong assumptions are being made.

    The Instructor