Darwinist
Out of context: Reply #358
- Started
- Last post
- 592 Responses
- ********0
JazX - so what I've read is that a) Carbon dating does have some inaccuracies in it b) that these problems have been accounted for and adjusted in new calculations, but dating from the 50's and 60's are still held suspect in the scientific community currently c) CArbon dating is useless for most biological work and for things older than 50,000 years...
So, if this is true, than the whole Carbon dating thing used by Creatio..oops I mean Intelligent Designer Proponents is a huge Straw Man, much like all the other half assed scientific "facts" they set up and blow over..
You know the other thing these ID people aren't fair about is the self-correction involved in the scientific process. They seem to make like it's this big point that scientisits are some kind of morons or ignorant to keep putting out inaccurate Carbon dating, yet all the stuff I have now just researched has scientists themselves seeking to correct and modify the technique, and admiting prior mistakes...further more, even if carbon dating can be unusable on things older than 50,000 years we do have other evidence of living organisms existing prior to that date in the geological record, correct JazX?