1. Joined
    28 Dec '11
    Moves
    16268
    28 May '12 14:071 edit
    see the video

    http://kgov.com/list-of-not-so-old-things
  2. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    28 May '12 14:40
    Originally posted by tim88
    see the video

    http://kgov.com/list-of-not-so-old-things
    yes, because we all desire nothing more than to click on a link to an unknown site, without you even summarizing it a little.
  3. Joined
    28 Dec '11
    Moves
    16268
    28 May '12 14:432 edits
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    yes, because we all desire nothing more than to click on a link to an unknown site, without you even summarizing it a little.
    Thanks! i know thats why i never said nothing - no seriously it's actually pretty cool! take a look is only two minutes long! and its proven by two scientists
  4. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52612
    28 May '12 15:01
    Originally posted by tim88
    Thanks! i know thats why i never said nothing 😉
    And also proving English is not your first language. Your first language is REDNECK.
  5. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    28 May '12 15:17
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    And also proving English is not your first language. Your first language is REDNECK.
    I must be a REDNECK too, because I also think it is pretty cool and I like REDNECK WOMEN.

    YouTube
  6. Joined
    10 Jun '11
    Moves
    3829
    28 May '12 16:22
    Originally posted by tim88
    see the video

    http://kgov.com/list-of-not-so-old-things
    what is your case that the age of the universe is wrong? present your arguments.
  7. Standard memberSwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    2014.05.01
    Joined
    11 Apr '07
    Moves
    92274
    28 May '12 16:25
    Originally posted by VoidSpirit
    what is your case that the age of the universe is wrong? present your arguments.
    The age of the universe can't be 'wrong'. 😵
  8. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    28 May '12 19:551 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    The age of the universe can't be 'wrong'. 😵
    Good point. So the thread title should really read "The currently accepted age of the universe that has been determined by science and all the evidence to date is wrong because two 'scientists' say so on a web page."
  9. Joined
    28 Dec '11
    Moves
    16268
    29 May '12 00:27
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Good point. So the thread title should really read "The currently accepted age of the universe that has been determined by science and all the evidence to date is wrong because two 'scientists' say so on a web page."
    3 science magazines! 60min! and they have their supporters - but you just keep believing all the propaganda
  10. Joined
    10 Jun '11
    Moves
    3829
    29 May '12 04:03
    Originally posted by tim88
    3 science magazines! 60min! and they have their supporters - but you just keep believing all the propaganda
    it looks like you're being led by the idiot leash there, rj. try linking to peer reviewed scientific journals of research done that have concluded the "age of the universe is wrong" because some soft tissue was found in fossils.
  11. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    29 May '12 04:31
    Originally posted by VoidSpirit
    it looks like you're being led by the idiot leash there, rj. try linking to peer reviewed scientific journals of research done that have concluded the "age of the universe is wrong" because some soft tissue was found in fossils.
    Carbon-14 dating is wrong, too.
  12. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52612
    29 May '12 15:07
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Carbon-14 dating is wrong, too.
    You have lost the ability called 'common sense'.
  13. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    29 May '12 19:251 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    You have lost the ability called 'common sense'.
    Well, it is "uncommon sense" to you.

    The Reality of Carbon Dating
    The myth is that radiocarbon dating can accurately establish exact dates of the death of organic remains almost as far back as 50,000 years. The reality is that one would have to know the 14C/12C ratio in the environment at the time of the death of the sample. The fact is that we can only infer that ratio for the past 5,000 years or so using historical records. The inference is that the ratio changes sufficiently so that calibration factors have to be used to convert radiocarbon years to actual calendar years. Since the ratio is known to have changed in historic times, it is irrational and unscientific to think that it was constant before historic times.


    http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v10i10f.htm
  14. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52612
    29 May '12 20:54
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Well, it is "uncommon sense" to you.

    The Reality of Carbon Dating
    The myth is that radiocarbon dating can accurately establish exact dates of the death of organic remains almost as far back as 50,000 years. The reality is that one would have to know the 14C/12C ratio in the environment at the time of the death of the sample. The fact is that we can only ...[text shortened]... t was constant before historic times.


    http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v10i10f.htm
    Wow, what a coincidence, 5000 years. Just a great date to confirm your estimate of the age of the universe. Amazing.
  15. Standard memberWulebgr
    Angler
    River City
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    16907
    29 May '12 22:27
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    yes, because we all desire nothing more than to click on a link to an unknown site, without you even summarizing it a little.
    +1
Back to Top