World's oldest rock found in W. Australia; 4.374 billion years

ugksam

The White King TuT
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
7,586
Reputation
-488
Daps
7,508
So you dont know if they're accurate right? Just to get you on record as saying this. You do not know if they're accurate but have faith that they are because they are scientists that follow the scientific method right?



Im not hurt at this finding. I was just wondering how people automatically assume they're correct when (allegedly) they do not believe anything unless it has proof. I would think proof would consist more than a title (scientist) but I guess not :manny:
you dont understand how much more intelligent these guys are then the average person thats one of your main issues in this. these scientists are intelligent on a level you cant even comprehend. i trust that their finding are as accurate as they can get at this point in history.

"so you have faith that _____?" shut the fukk up, faith is a religious thing, this is a science thing. youre still stuck on that religion is science and science is religion bullshyt argument.
 

ill

Superstar
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
10,234
Reputation
432
Daps
17,295
Reppin
Mother Russia & Greater Israel
Im simply showing that because someone is "smarter" (which is subjective) doesnt mean they're correct. And I provided an example where this is true.


In correct. Just because they "study scripture" does not mean they're studying correctly. Which is why they're are protestants vs catholics that have priests, bishops etc... that study the same scripture but come to different conclusions. In short, they're being taught a certain way to look at scripture and thats how they view it during their study.



I didnt say they werent more knowledgeable on the subject. :what:



And yet you do not know how these mathematics automatically lead one to know that what they find is accurate... My point all along friend. Just because something is taught does not make it correct. Just because they apply to a "mathematical formula" that "leads" us to the age of the object, does not mean that the mathematical formula is correct. It does not mean that the answer to the mathematical formula is correct. If it did, you would have answered my question directly.


You're a jew. There are ways to verify if the God of your people exists or not. But it takes faith. And not everyone wants to have faith. :manny: Their loss...

Being a Jew to me is a heritage and cultural thing. I don't believe in the Jewish God. That would be a fairy tale.

Also, just because smart people aren't always correct, doesn't give you the right to say they are never correct. Smart people aren't smart for no reason. Probability. Read up on it. Its the likelihood that something will occur. Such as, the probability of a scientist that has spent his entire life in classrooms studying math and science and niche subjects like carbon dating will probably be correct in his analysis. You on the other hand, will probably be wrong and arguing in futility.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,370
Reputation
-34,322
Daps
617,902
Reppin
The Deep State
When you start talking about going from lizards to human beings and things of that nature, you're talking on pseudoscience and it shouldnt be taught since its not observable.

Because:

1. we don't solely look at physiology to determine evolution. Minimal changes can be observed in genetics alone.

2. Animals that have shorter lifespans and faster generations like insects, smaller mammals, and even fish demonstrate evolution...even bacteria and viruses.

3. we've ONLY been looking at evolution for the last 150 years. We've seriously only been into it for like 100. The evidence is overwhelming.

If you want to reject human evolution, fine. But i'd love to see what you have to saw about it in all other species.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,370
Reputation
-34,322
Daps
617,902
Reppin
The Deep State
Thanks for the explanation. Now can you explain how you know the steps they take, are ACCURATE? Or do you just believe they're accurate because they're "smarter" than you like someone else sadly replied? :mjpls:

What the fukk is wrong with you dude?

Do you understand what nuclear chemistry is?

Do you know radioactivity is?
 

Mr. Somebody

Friend Of A Friend
Joined
May 10, 2012
Messages
28,262
Reputation
2,041
Daps
43,603
Reppin
Los Angeles
Because:

1. we don't solely look at physiology to determine evolution. Minimal changes can be observed in genetics alone.

2. Animals that have shorter lifespans and faster generations like insects, smaller mammals, and even fish demonstrate evolution...even bacteria and viruses.

3. we've ONLY been looking at evolution for the last 150 years. We've seriously only been into it for like 100. The evidence is overwhelming.

If you want to reject human evolution, fine. But i'd love to see what you have to saw about it in all other species.
By that logic we shouldnt be teaching transitional forms in schools. Throw that rubbish away or add in God theories.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
307,370
Reputation
-34,322
Daps
617,902
Reppin
The Deep State
By that logic we shouldnt be teaching transitional forms in schools. Throw that rubbish away or add in God theories.

You're trolling.

Explain this btw:

dd507c0f60.png
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,142
Reputation
-2,408
Daps
16,880
you dont understand how much more intelligent these guys are then the average person thats one of your main issues in this. these scientists are intelligent on a level you cant even comprehend. i trust that their finding are as accurate as they can get at this point in history.

Nobody is questioning their intelligence though. :what:

Im just waiting for the clear answer that you dont know if they're accurate or not but have faith or believe them to be. You're skating around the question which is why I keep repeating it.

"so you have faith that _____?" shut the fukk up, faith is a religious thing, this is a science thing. youre still stuck on that religion is science and science is religion bullshyt argument.

Faith definition:
complete trust or confidence in someone or something.

I think you've displayed here that you have complete trust in scientists friend.[/quote]
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,142
Reputation
-2,408
Daps
16,880
Because I understand nuclear chemistry...

I've worked in labs with radio-labeled substrates like tritium, carbon 14, and phosphorous-32 and traced them in the human body.

What the fukk have YOU done? :usure:

Anybody can hop on the net and pretend to be one thing or another. So keep your titles to yourself my brethren. They have no bearing on the discussion.

Now if you can explain how the findings in the lab are accurate and how the measurements you make are accurate and what you base it off of drop it on us. Otherwise you're just talking like those before you :scusthov:
 

Everythingg

King-Over-Kingz
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
9,142
Reputation
-2,408
Daps
16,880
Being a Jew to me is a heritage and cultural thing.

Yes and part of that heritage is worshiping the God of Abraham. That is, if the people that hypothesize that your people stole the heritage from another group are not correct in their hypothesis.
I don't believe in the Jewish God. That would be a fairy tale.

I dont either and yea jewish god is a fairy tale I would assume. Now the God of Abraham, thats real friend :shaq:
Also, just because smart people aren't always correct, doesn't give you the right to say they are never correct.

Good thing we have the internet where we can find if I said that science or scientists are never correct. Can you find it friend?

Smart people aren't smart for no reason. Probability. Read up on it.

:mjlol:

Its the likelihood that something will occur. Such as, the probability of a scientist that has spent his entire life in classrooms studying math and science and niche subjects like carbon dating will probably be correct in his analysis. You on the other hand, will probably be wrong and arguing in futility.
But you would still have to explain how the science and math are completely indicative of age and why it is accurate. You couldnt do so. You would say (if you were in their shoes) that "this is how we were taught to do it". Which doesnt make it accurate. Otherwise, you would be following what your ancestors followed in the God of Abraham.
 
Top