god is real prove me wrong (atheist beware)

Originally posted by sword4damocles
God is real to those who can 'see', not with worldly eyes, but heavenly eyes. These can see God in others, in actions and outcomes.

No one can 'prove you wrong'.

"Absence of proof is not proof of absence" - Einstein

"Before God we are all equally wise, and equally foolish" - Einstein

I can paraphrase that!

"God is real for those that want him to be"

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I can paraphrase that!

"God is real for those that want him to be"

"...the fool says in his heart, there is no God" - Psalms

http://www.chaim.org/atheist.htm

Originally posted by sword4damocles
"...the fool says in his heart, there is no God" - Psalms

http://www.chaim.org/atheist.htm

And why should I believe anything written in the bible? I certainly don't believe in god. You christians can sling insults at atheists all you like, it doesn't make you right.

Originally posted by sword4damocles
"...the fool says in his heart, there is no God" - Psalms

http://www.chaim.org/atheist.htm

So if even a fool knows there is no God then what does that make you?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
And why should I believe anything written in the bible? I certainly don't believe in god. You christians can sling insults at atheists all you like, it doesn't make you right.

And no one will know who's right until we die.

Originally posted by Derfel Cadarn
And no one will know who's right until we die.

And if I'm right, we still won't know.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
it's simple really, you take two samples from the same rock. One from a bit which is emitting radiation and a second, non-radioactive bit from the same rock. You use the non-radioactive bit to tell you the isotopic abundance of the two isotopes in the conditions when the rock was formed.

There is a way to check this, by looking at the isotope dec ...[text shortened]... opes although, not being a geologist specialising in radiodating, I don't fully understand it.

'it's simple really, you take two samples from the same rock. One from a bit which is emitting radiation and a second, non-radioactive bit from the same rock. You use the non-radioactive bit to tell you the isotopic abundance of the two isotopes in the conditions when the rock was formed.'

OK, so if I understand you correctly the parent isotope can be both radioactive and not radioactive?
Is there any reason why this isotope isn't radioactive in the other part of the rock?

Maybe because there is different conditions in the rock, or simply because the isotope just hasn't begun being radioactive, but will in sometime in the future?

I like details
🙂

Originally posted by Bad wolf
'it's simple really, you take two samples from the same rock. One from a bit which is emitting radiation and a second, non-radioactive bit from the same rock. You use the non-radioactive bit to tell you the isotopic abundance of the two isotopes in the conditions when the rock was formed.'

OK, so if I understand you correctly the parent isotope can be ...[text shortened]... hasn't begun being radioactive, but will in sometime in the future?

I like details
🙂

My understanding is that whether a rock is non-radioactive (i.e. none, or very few ofthe nucleii are decaying), radioactive (the nucleii are decaying with moderate speed), or in a state of run away decay (such as the okla natural reactor) is determined by both the isotope and it's concentration within the rock. At low concentrations, neutron collisions between nucleii is too infrequent for any sort of steady state radioactive decay to occur (these are the rocks that you can measure the daughter-parent isotope ratio in). At medium concentrations there is a reasonable chance that whenever a decay happens, the neutron emitted will strike another atom, causing it to decay. At high concentrations most neutrons will hit another nucleii, causing decay (this is exploited (but controlled) with nuclear reactors). The trick is to get rocks which are non-homogenous in their isotope distribution (i.e. concentrated enough to date in one section, and dilute enough to get the p-d ratio nearby).

Another trick is to date with two independent systems. You know the decay constants and the current ratio's. Extrapolate back, and where the two lines cross, that's your start point. This method is called an isochron.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
My understanding is that whether a rock is non-radioactive (i.e. none, or very few ofthe nucleii are decaying), radioactive (the nucleii are decaying with moderate speed), or in a state of run away decay (such as the okla natural reactor) is determined by both the isotope and it's concentration within the rock. At low concentrations, neutron collisions ...[text shortened]... here the two lines cross, that's your start point. This method is called an isochron.

I think I understand now, thanks.

Originally posted by Bad wolf
I think I understand now, thanks.

a pleasure. 😉