View Poll Results: How did life come about?

Voters
109. You may not vote on this poll
  • Evolution

    66 60.55%
  • Creation

    28 25.69%
  • Intelligent Design

    15 13.76%
+ Reply to Thread
Page 49 of 63
FirstFirst ... 39 47 48 49 50 51 59 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 490 of 621

Thread: Evolution vs. Creation vs. Intelligent Design

  1. #481
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    "land of the free"
    Posts
    1,454
    Quote Originally Posted by drugfeind View Post
    i agree with a certain degree of your points if not all but i dislike the typical belittleing of people with different views than you. i find that makes you look like the asshole.
    Religious beliefs are one thing, but I don't find logic to be a religion. If someone does not live logically, I feel perfectly alright about belittling them, no matter what their reasons are. Their beliefs, to be quite honest, are not my concern.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xon
    Do any of you realize that carbon dating has been proved false?
    I'm sorry Xon, but it hasn't.
    Feel free to link whatever unique example of chemical change has warranted your statement, but be prepared.

  2. #482
    Quote Originally Posted by drugfeind View Post
    Every day the people I interect with, they all have different beleifes than my own. I don't shame them for

    You would make a fucking horrible american.

  3. #483
    Quote Originally Posted by Xon View Post
    Do any of you realize that carbon dating has been proved false?
    Carbon dating hasnt been proved false.. I dont know where your getting your infomation from Xon but source?

  4. #484
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    in the center, of michigan.
    Age
    17
    Posts
    2,531
    Quote Originally Posted by TotalAnarchyUK;30***9
    Carbon dating hasnt been proved false.. I dont know where your getting your infomation from Xon but source?
    They're are other factors that contribute to the "false". Contamination was one.

  5. #485
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    it would be a heat score if i filled this out
    Posts
    582
    lol im canadian, and btw american politics can suck my left nut till it'ss blue.

    flame me all you want but i wont play no "follow the leader" you in-comprehendable fiends.

    oh no! im sad you should all come scurrying like a bunch of hungry pigeons and eat my sadness, it will fill you with dispair not happyness, why did you like my negative experience, you flourished. You were gunna be fat if you ate any more, now your all full. Stomaches that should be torn apart in a tornado of misery, they are full of the evil seeds, the seeds that have caused such corruption in our poor towns, cities. Those very seeds of sadness, if they are planted willl grow into giant dark trees of despair( government building).

    im not like them, like you. Instead i eat the little dropping of happyness that come around here and there. YES, i AM starving, but it's ok theres only one of me who needs food, unlike the whole stye of you who feed on negativity, now grow the fuck up and let ya balls drop.
    Last edited by drugfeind; November 6th, 2009 at 07:11 AM.

  6. #486
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    In the blackness of my mind
    Posts
    6,967
    619 is blocked... Funny...

    As for the carbon dating... I guarantee that almost all of you could figure out why its false.

    If you are too simple minded to find the answer, then I will explain it.

    But you must ask nicely.

  7. #487
    Quote Originally Posted by Xon View Post
    619 is blocked... Funny...

    As for the carbon dating... I guarantee that almost all of you could figure out why its false.

    If you are too simple minded to find the answer, then I will explain it.

    But you must ask nicely.
    Then do tell Xon, please explain why a method that is used across the planet in labratories and scientists is false, or doesnt work, whatever you want to call it.

    What the fuck puts you in a position to question their methods, what scientific qualifications do you have?

    And you better explain it, this wouldnt be the first time that you said you would elaborate on something, and then well.. not.

  8. #488
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    "land of the free"
    Posts
    1,454
    Quote Originally Posted by drugfeind View Post
    lol im canadian, and btw american politics can suck my left nut till it'ss blue.

    flame me all you want but i wont play no "follow the leader" you in-comprehendable fiends.

    oh no! im sad you should all come scurrying like a bunch of hungry pigeons and eat my sadness, it will fill you with dispair not happyness, why did you like my negative experience, you flourished. You were gunna be fat if you ate any more, now your all full. Stomaches that should be torn apart in a tornado of misery, they are full of the evil seeds, the seeds that have caused such corruption in our poor towns, cities. Those very seeds of sadness, if they are planted willl grow into giant dark trees of despair( government building).

    im not like them, like you. Instead i eat the little dropping of happyness that come around here and there. YES, i AM starving, but it's ok theres only one of me who needs food, unlike the whole stye of you who feed on negativity, now grow the fuck up and let ya balls drop.
    I think my head's about to explode.

    I'm kinda sure I agree with you, I understand the individual words, but when I try to put them together it's like a baseball bat to the brain.



    Quote Originally Posted by Xon
    619 is blocked... Funny...

    As for the carbon dating... I guarantee that almost all of you could figure out why its false.

    If you are too simple minded to find the answer, then I will explain it.

    But you must ask nicely.
    619 is part of TA's phone number.

    As for the carbon dating... if you want to make an argument, it's you that has to justify your evidence. We don't have to find it if it's your argument, no matter how self-evident it may seem.

    Furthermore, I think you know just how simple-minded we are.

  9. #489
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    anywhere and everywhere
    Posts
    2,269
    I think my head's about to explode.

    I'm kinda sure I agree with you, I understand the individual words, but when I try to put them together it's like a baseball bat to the brain.
    wow, your head hurts cuase of THAT? try decrypting messages from my clan, without a key just memory

  10. #490
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    In the blackness of my mind
    Posts
    6,967
    Okay...

    One, carbon dating is based on the principle that plants take in part of carbon 14 as they take in CO2. Then, creatures, animals, or whatever you want to call them eat the plants and injest the carbon 14 are part of the plant. That carbon gets stored in our bodies. Then, when we die, or whatever dies, that carbon 14 is still in the body and becomes part of it as it decays and so forth. Then, the half life is taken based on scientists thoughts on how much carbon 14 there was when the animal died.

    Okay, if you didn't get the bold part. I will explain. Scientists do not know the exact amount of carbon 14 was in the air past.... say 1950 (when carbon dating came around) They just assume that it has decreased at a certain rate for a certain time and therefore that if the earth is supposed to be a certain age, and so there would be this certain amount of carbon 14 in the air at that time, then the bone or whatever was being tested at that time would have that amount and then get the age from it there. If you can't see the falicy in this, then i will show you with mathematics.

    age of the specimen is based on amount of carbon in earth then divided by amount of carbon in specimen multiplied by halflife factor
    as=cet*cs*hl

    So we have two of the three variables that are needed to make this work. But what we don't have is the exact amount of carbon in the earth at the time of death. So scientist use this equation to get it.
    carbon in earth then equals age of earth multiplied by halflife factor by carbon in earth now
    cet = ae * hl * cen

    And as we all know, scientists prove the earths age by using the age of specimens

    ae>=as

    and now we are back at the starting point.

    So you see, this is circular logic. If you can't see that, then you have no use being on this thread.

    I did not take into account that there are things that effect radiation. Mircrowaves, Light, in fact any wave that is on the same spectrum as x-rays affect radiation making carbon dating more worthless.

    So there it is.
    Last edited by Xon; November 6th, 2009 at 02:11 PM.

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts