Philip0906's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Philip0906's Profile › Philip0906's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 (of 283 pages)
Commentor:Nonsense! I was waiting for you to provide emperical proof na. If I quote Bible for you to support the Genesis timeline, you'll write it off and ask for factual, logical, visible emperical proof (the hallmark of science) but you are completely bereft of ideas to do same in favor of carbon dating aside quoting formulas given to you by scientists. Even the method of carbon dating has been called into question by a research done by scientists from Cornell University who say the significant change in the atmosphere, can impact timeline dished out by anti creationists. This is just one of the of the numerous flaws and question marks on carbon dating issued by scientists. No sane person takes such as an absolute, except ofcourse people like you thinking they're woke. I repeat, provide PROOF that there was a 330 million years ago? Science cannot eat her cake and have it. |
dazzlingd:Ofcourse no scientist not even your uneducated azz, can provide FACTUAL proof aside chemistry theories and jargons posited as formula that NO ONE can and HAS validated. There's absolutely NO WAY any human can provide emperical proof that there was ever 330 million years agoScience is great and has done well but science does have clear limitations that even goes against the principles science has always advanced--Emperical, Factual,Validation,Visible etc Carbon dating does not FALL in any of that category which makes it questionable. |
Sirheny007:It's complete bullocks...Aside jargons written down on a piece of paper as theories, there is no logical, visible, factual and valid way to validate carbon dating used to get these numbers scientists reel out. |
Edo people...Tufia!! |
BackToLife:Rubbish!! Scientifically proven that my blood and a random woman's blood has mixed?? ![]() Even churning out a senseless formula about blood mixing marriage yada yada , only known to you and your fellow superstitious people... Common gerrarahere!! |
prettyliz:The Bible's definition of "one flesh" is Ofcourse literal and only used to define husband and wife relationship. There is absolutely no practical way me and a woman who's not my blood, can be one. My daughter is my offspring and blood (for life and in death) reason incest is considered vile and condemned/outlawed by society and religious books alike. I can never have an "ex" daughter. But my wife? she's not my blood and we're only one in theory, not practically. She can be mine today and be another's tomorrow reason society allows for divorce and the Bible allows for seperation of husband and wife on certain grounds. Reason I can have an "ex" wife. Even in death, I can choose to get married to another woman and that woman's chapter is completely closed in my life and would only matter to her loved ones parents, siblings, children(blood) |
kiekie1:My guy! Slow your roll. E no dey hard make dem run your business down for nairaland, from the Auto section to the Property section to the Business section, people wey get mouth pass you, dem don run them down....Them no even day here again For your own good, stop all these your grammar and strong head (you come across as a proud person though I might be wrong) for the sake of your business (except say you no wan chop through nairaland) reach out to all those who have grievances with you and at best, openly address their grievances that way, everybody go see am say, you dey plain and open. In all your posts on the allegations, you're yet to clearly address what was raised against you...even your apology was clearly half mouthed. |
dominique:Unfortunately, you didn't make a like for like comparison. My daughter is my blood and will be my daughter even in death (Nothing can change her from been my daughter)...My wife on the other hand can always seize to be my wife and so cannot be put on the same plate as my daughter. |
Wickedfacts:
|
MelesZenawi:He's actually right. You lots wailed all over the threads created then with all sorts of funny tales and lamentations...All of a sudden, the same supreme court you accused the senile old islamist of controlling, gives a verdict that goes PDP's way and y'all are dancing and salivating. Bottomline, the hypocrisy displayed by y'all (APC ans PDP), is nauseating |
Aidejay:I do not have any accurate date neither do I expect any sane person to believe a theory or method that CANNOT be proven in any tangible and verifiable way, aside pure jargons written down on a piece of paper. |
BlackAce31:This is your assumption. Carbon dating is a scientific method that is ONLY written on a piece of paper as a theory and has absolutely no visible or tangible way to prove. This method/theory/ has severally been called to question by scientists Science has proven a number of things that can and are applied in our every day life that cannot be questioned. How do you validate as proof something that happened years back, aside jargons? Why is ur generator having an average power rating and a maximum power rating. Does that mean generators shouldnt be taken seriously??This comparison does not make ANY sense as it's not like for like. I mean, I can see the generator and can see the effect of changing the power ratings as against tales written down in a book, that CANNOT be proven, aside jargons written in a book...which is exactly what scientists have against the bible. Can anyone prove that the shark head is 330 million years aside theories written down on a piece of paper? |
DropsMic:I have answered already that carbon dating is inaccurate and has been called to question severally by scientists...So I can not use that as a definite and absolute fact. |
kevoh:The stricken out makes no sense in the context of our discourse as it is comparing oranges with apples...it's not like for like. There are so many things science has PROVEN beyond reasonable doubt, that NO ONE argues against or questions. So many theories that have been proposed and proven to be true tens of years back, no one questions. BUT, once a theory is questioned by even the proponents i.e scientists with divergent views as to it's accuracy (been called into question), any one anywhere can disregard such theories since it's still up in the air in debate or still has grey areas. In this case, scientists have said a shark head is 330 million years old, a sane person can decide to disregard that. An example: A new research conducted by Cornell University could be about to throw the field of archaeology on its head with the claim that there could be a number of inaccuracies in commonly accepted carbon dating standards.Who knows how many more inconsistencies there is with this method. I have not mentioned the bible. Let's not go there. The bible can only be used to validate the bible! Too many inconsistencies and most importantly, there's no room for questioning obvious errors and illogicality. Please let's not even go there.It is not about the Bible...My point is, if there are still flaws with radiocarbon dating, there is absolutely no ground to disregard the other option, the Bible (I am not going into that arguement either, as I am limiting this to the scope of dating fossils and human life) |
BlackAce31:Buttom line, carbon dating is NOT accurate and should not be taken as the absolute answer . Simples!! |
kevoh:Firstly, there is NOTHING straight forward about the method, else it won't be prone to errors. Like I said, carbon dating several times, has had it's accuracy questioned by scientists. Secondly, my point is, it is ridiculous to lampoon Biblical timeline on the grounds that it's accuracy is questionable, when the scientific alternative, is as questionable as the one we accuse. |
kevoh:Good! The question then is, how and why should we take radiocarbon to be the absolute and finite answer when severally, radiocarbon dating accuracy, has been called to question? |
DropsMic:You still did not answer the question. How do they know that the fossil up there is 330 million years old? This is science, right? Science tells us to use PROOFs & FACTS to validate. What proof & FACT do we have available to definitely say, the fossil has been PROVEN (visible & tangible) to be 330 million years old? |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 (of 283 pages)