2006-08-13 17:22:55 · 9 answers · asked by Jake D 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Earth Sciences & Geology
No. Young-Earthers sometimes accuse scientists of circular reasoning when they are actually merely noting agreement of two or more methods of estimating age.
Geological dating is a variable science. In some cases, you can have multiple independent corroborations of age, but in other cases, age must be estimated based on a chain of inferences. While some measurements are less precise than others, the total body of evidence in geological dating has a very high assurance of correctness.
2006-08-13 21:56:43 · answer #1 · answered by injanier 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Circular 'reasoning' is used by creationists - not scientists.
Circular 'reasoning' people start with the presumption that what they want to believe is absolutely true, then distort every interpretation of observed facts so as to keep their own beliefs intact - even when the proof against them is undeniable. They don't need to do experiments and reject the findings of those who do anyway - unless it supports their agenda. If they believe in something, then that's good enough for them, case closed!
That's why people who indulge in circular 'reasoning' never produce any tangible results or scientific discoveries remotely supportive of their beliefs and why deceitful dishonesty and deliberate ignorance is the historical cornerstone of their movements.
Circular 'reasoning' does NOT allow for even the remotest possibility that a belief just may in fact be wrong. The belief must be maintained at all costs, no matter where the evidence leads.
Scientists, by definition, MUST allow for this possibility and yield to it whenever they are proven wrong.
Circular 'reasoning' refuses to acknowledge any evidence to the contrary.
If any scientific theories were based on circular 'reasoning', they would quickly be proven quite wrong.
Circular 'reasoning' is a classic methodology used exclusively to deny the truth of something. It has no other application and no worth scientifically.
It is absolutely impossible to prove anything at all using circular 'reasoning'. That's why it is scientifically null and void as a tool of science.
If fact, a better way to express it would be to say that circular 'reasoning' can be used to prove anything at all - regardless of evidence, since evidence is not a necessary requirement to achieve any conclusions one might wish to draw.
Carbon dating only applies to certain biological fossil remains - not rocks. It doesn't span millions of years. Other methods are used for extremely ancient things and no single test is considered definitive.
There are several ways to date some things. What does circular 'reasoning' do when differing, or even the same methods yield consistent results all around the world in competing labs?
2006-08-13 17:59:26 · answer #2 · answered by Jay T 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
LOL
Creationists use circular reasoning, and scientists use logic? Then they claim carbon dating for rocks that DON'T CONTAIN CARBON! That's funny!
In truth, scientists have no way of dating rocks other than by looking at where they are placed, and extrapolating. Their data? Sorry. Can't help you there. But they must have something, because they can tell the difference between the age of earth rocks and moon rocks. MIght be interesting to look up.
2006-08-13 18:11:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, more like carbon dating. Circular reasoning works for trees
2006-08-13 17:28:58 · answer #4 · answered by kal_10124 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, if it isn't circular reasoning, how the hell do they come up with the dates?
2006-08-13 17:25:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The evidence isn't the recognize scientists, it is their analyze. analyze that has been many times examined, criticized and scrutinized by technique of qualified friends and shown to be suited. in case you won't be able to understand their comments, that's no longer because they're attempting to snow every person; it is because their artwork is complicated. study more effective. study more effective. examine more effective. search for more effective. faith is the position you'll discover human beings "accepting the be conscious" no longer technological information.
2016-11-24 23:55:18 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
prolly more of a circular saw
2006-08-13 17:28:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
What could you possibly mean?
2006-08-13 17:26:15 · answer #8 · answered by October 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, but I believe "Creationists" do.
2006-08-13 17:28:58 · answer #9 · answered by DEATH 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋