JonF
Posts: 634
Joined: Feb. 2005
|
| Quote (Daniel Smith @ Feb. 29 2008,11:59) | | Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Feb. 29 2008,07:29) | | Quote (Daniel Smith @ Feb. 28 2008,11:10) | | Quote (IanBrown_101 @ Feb. 27 2008,19:20) | | Quote (Daniel Smith @ Feb. 28 2008,00:05) | | Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Feb. 26 2008,01:13) | | Sure, your saltational theory does not require a millions of years old earth but the fossils we're talking about do! |
How do you know that oldman? How long does fossilization take? What's the timespan needed to produce "the fossils we're talking about"? How did you arrive at that figure? Have you even thought about it? Or are you just parotting what you've heard someone else say? |
Hi Mr Smith, come in, I'd like to introduce you to Mr Radiometric Dating. |
How much do you actually know about radiometric dating? |
It seems Daniel is bluffing:
| Quote | Sorry Dr. Davison.
Speaking of your PEH, I've been reading "Questions of Paleontology" by Otto Schindewolf, and it occured to me:
If evolution was saltational, doesn't that eliminate the need for long time frames?
I'm new to the concept of dating and determining ages, and I haven't got far enough in the book to see if Schindewolf covers this, but I'm getting the impression that the entire dating framework is based on the long periods of time thought necessary for gradual evolution to take place. Since all evidence points to sudden, directed evolution, aren't the methods of dating and their calibrations subject to reassessment? |
My bolding.
Link |
I'm not "bluffing". I'm still asking the same question. Do you know the answer? |
I also am an expert. Are you preparing to regurgitate the same tired "based on three assumptions" crap that creationists typically copy from some ill-informed web site in a vain attempt to exhibit some knowledge? Or do you really have something to say or ask?
If you wish to criticize the methodology of radiometric dating, be sure to discuss Ar-Ar, isochron, and U-Pb methods. After all, they make up the vast majority of geological radiometric dating results; comparatively few studies use the K-Ar method (although it does have its place)
You can leave Pb-Pb isochrons, U-Th disequilibrium dating, and a few other topics for later; they require more knowledge. But if the discussion develops they may come up.
Oh, and don't bother with accelerated radioactive decay unless you have a way to get rid of the heaat and radiation.
|
