Modern humans have existed for 300,000 years but Abrahamic religions are only 3500 years old

[Maximus Rex]

what about orthodox christians? they had no part of the catholic crusades or the atrocities in the new world

or the Assyrian Church of the East...or Nestorians...Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo etc etc

why lump all christians in

They believe in that bullshyt, anything else?

 

[Maximus Rex]

show me a peer reviewed paper that establishes a real context for why its usable up to 300000 years

you havent shown you can even look up a paper let alone find one that supports your claim. I have already linked just a handful of things that throws that claim into question. reasonable doubt

So nothing

 

[MMS]

Hahaha.

Ain't nobody scared of you breh.

Answer the question: what is your goal here? Why are you telling board members to stop quoting you? Why are you attempting to stifle conversation in a thread that you, yourself are participating in?

Look who "scared" to answer simple questions

i told you specifically to stop quoting me because you act like a little kid and just because you say you are doing something doesnt mean you actually are. In fact youve proven my point several times now.

 

[MMS]

So nothing

thats what I thought, you want to spread lies using a shaky article to throw shade at religions that you have stated you dont believe in. If that were fully true you wouldnt have used the thread topic in the way you did

 

[Th3Birdman]

show me a peer reviewed paper that establishes a real context for why its usable up to 300000 years

you havent shown you can even look up a paper let alone find one that supports your claim

Been there, done that:

I'm about to post evidence of radiometric dating, and he will ignore it, juelz, or just say "that's not proof" without any evidence or an attempt at a viable debunk.




1) Argon-40/Argon-39 is a radiometric dating method that takes a crushed rock or mineral sample and irradiating it, which produces an isotope of Argon, Argon-39. When you heat this sample with a laser in a spectrometer, the crystals melt, and release gases. The more Argon-40 it releases, the older the sample was. This method is viable over a billion years

2) During the Cretaceous Period (the last non-avian dinosaur era, ~66 million years ago), the Earth was impacted by a meteor that scientific consensus states caused the K-T extinction event that saw the last non-avian dinosaurs go extinct. At the impact crater, crystals in granite were melted. We've used Argon-Argon dating (using the methods I described in 1) to date this material to roughly 66 million years old.

Impacts like these produce what is know as "shocked quartz", or quartz that is structurally different to regular quartz, due to immense pressure. This is extremely important because we can find shocked quartz at many different impact craters from meteors hitting the Earth AND at locations where there has been underground nuclear tests:

From this shocked quartz, we are able to determine the age of the impact, through usage of Argon-Argon dating, the evidence for which can be found here:

https://eps.harvard.edu/files/eps/files/renne.kt_.science.2013.pdf
^^That is an inarguable, peer-reviewed study performed by Harvard scientists and researchers on the material from a crater, which used Argon-Argon dating.

When I did exactly what you're asking for, you did exactly what I said you would do-- ignore the evidence, juelz, and shyt talk.

You're not serious. You're trolling.

 

[Maximus Rex]

thats what I thought, you want to spread lies using a shaky article to throw shade at religions that you have stated you dont believe in. If that were fully true you wouldnt have used the thread topic in the way you did

Deflecting

 

[Th3Birdman]

i told you specifically to stop quoting me because you act like a little kid and just because you say you are doing something doesnt mean you actually are. In fact youve proven my point several times now.

Nikka, HOW?
You're the one acting like a kid. You literally ignore reasonable posts to shyt talk me and compare me to your dog

Your entire steez is gradeschool.

 

[MMS]

Been there, done that:




When I did exactly what you're asking for, you did exactly what I said you would do-- ignore the evidence, juelz, and shyt talk.

You're not serious. You're trolling.

Nikka, HOW?
You're the one acting like a kid. You literally ignore reasonable posts to shyt talk me and compare me to your dog

Your entire steez is gradeschool.

that is how you're acting though atleast my dog is silent when i feed it

also posting a wikipedia article of a whole other dating method isnt a peer reviewed paper proving the use of the dating methods IN the thread article

which isnt that at all

This enabled the researchers to use thermoluminescence dating to ascertain when the burning occurred, and by proxy, the age of the fossil bones that were found in the same deposit layer.

In 2017, the burnt tools were dated to approximately 315,000 years ago, indicating that the fossils are of approximately the same age.

 

[Th3Birdman]

Do y'all see the grift?


Ignores all the evidence from accredited universities (and the one I posted is fukking HARVARD UNIVERSITY!!!!) to post a creationist youtube video that is 50 seconds long.

This nikka is a clown

 

[MMS]

Do y'all see the grift?


Ignores all the evidence from accredited universities (and the one I posted is fukking HARVARD UNIVERSITY!!!!) to post a creationist youtube video that is 50 seconds long.

This nikka is a clown

50 seconds was all it took to dismantle it

the samples dont agree even slightly.

once again i have attacked the dating methods accuracy not the use of them entirely.

 

[Th3Birdman]

50 seconds was all it took to dismantle it

Here's a 2 hour video debunking that bullshyt you just posted:


You won't be watching that though because it doesn't confirm your biases

 

[MMS]

Here's a 2 hour video debunking that bullshyt you just posted:


You won't be watching that though because it doesn't confirm your biases

youre right and i definitely am not watching 2 hours of your bussy superiors complain

you either gonna give me cliffs or timestamps or begone

 

[YaThreadFloppedB!]

yea. I mean…@MMS took on a tough opponent in the reigning Rookie of the Year.

Birdman coming off a huge victory against Luken so he was already charged up.

Fuck, man. Birdman landed more in the later rounds and the quoted was the body shot that sat ‘em down.

The Rook got Luken and a mod in his résumé

 

[Th3Birdman]

youre right and i definitely am not watching 2 hours of your bussy superiors complain

you either gonna give me cliffs or timestamps or begone

Lmaoooooooooooooo

-- "Give me cliffs, Birdman"

-- (Birdman posts literally anything from scientists)

-- "that's not been confirmed by scientists, here's a post from a young earth creationist youtuber"




Yeah, please. We've done this song and dance nikka.

I gave you what you asked for. You can't even read this paper, that's why you keep ignoring it:

https://eps.harvard.edu/files/eps/files/renne.kt_.science.2013.pdf

Harvard University

 

[MMS]

Lmaoooooooooooooo

-- "Give me cliffs, Birdman"

-- (Birdman posts literally anything from scientists)

-- "that's not been confirmed by scientists, here's a post from a young earth creationist youtuber"




Yeah, please. We've done this song and dance nikka.

I gave you what you asked for. You can't even read this paper, that's why you keep ignoring it:

https://eps.harvard.edu/files/eps/files/renne.kt_.science.2013.pdf

Harvard University

people like you rely so heavily on appeals to authority that you dont realize it makes you look and sound like a slave

now an article using the tools in use to make claims about the past does not prove the efficacy of the tool they used to estimate what they are reading in the past

here is a paper here

Radiocarbon dating uncertainty and the reliability of the PEWMA method of time-series analysis for research on long-term human-environment interaction

Statistical time-series analysis has the potential to improve our understanding of human-environment interaction in deep time. However, radiocarbon dating—the most common chronometric technique in archaeological and palaeoenvironmental research—creates ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Statistical time-series analysis has the potential to improve our understanding of human-environment interaction in deep time. However, radiocarbon dating—the most common chronometric technique in archaeological and palaeoenvironmental research—creates challenges for established statistical methods. The methods assume that observations in a time-series are precisely dated, but this assumption is often violated when calibrated radiocarbon dates are used because they usually have highly irregular uncertainties. As a result, it is unclear whether the methods can be reliably used on radiocarbon-dated time-series. With this in mind, we conducted a large simulation study to investigate the impact of chronological uncertainty on a potentially useful time-series method. The method is a type of regression involving a prediction algorithm called the Poisson Exponentially Weighted Moving Average (PEMWA). It is designed for use with count time-series data, which makes it applicable to a wide range of questions about human-environment interaction in deep time. Our simulations suggest that the PEWMA method can often correctly identify relationships between time-series despite chronological uncertainty. When two time-series are correlated with a coefficient of 0.25, the method is able to identify that relationship correctly 20–30% of the time, providing the time-series contain low noise levels. With correlations of around 0.5, it is capable of correctly identifying correlations despite chronological uncertainty more than 90% of the time. While further testing is desirable, these findings indicate that the method can be used to test hypotheses about long-term human-environment interaction with a reasonable degree of confidence.

begone swine