Doesn't it make anyone else upset that scientists are saying dinosaurslived millions of years ago? Lies?

Question

Where do they come up w/ these #'s, radiocarbon dating is inaccurate. You can't tell me, that you can chemically tell how old something is, by radiocarbon dating, or any other means. Why would you need to know that anyways?

Answer 1

Those so-called scientists need to be burned at the stake just like they used to do with witches in the old days. They're poisoning the minds of millions of stupid people with their lies and nonsense. I don't believe in this carbon dating crap either. Nothing, nothing pisses me off like when they say " 450 million years ago ....." I just change the damn channel right away if I'm watching tv. I've heard of stories about skeletons of whatever being found and estimated to be like "200 millions years old " but they turn out to be of an animal that died only a few years back. Those MFs make me sick with their stupid ridiculous lies. Some people won't believe in Holy books -whatever religion- because they say how could you believe or trust in something that was written 2000 years ago, and those same people believe those F**ing so-called scientist who claim to know when something was alive like 500 millions years ago, even though they were not there and they CAN NOT prove it. Like I always say, it never seizes to amaze me how stupid and dumb people can be. Well, I think it was Einstein who once said " only two things are infinite in life, space and human stupidity" or something like that.

Answer 2

You have been misinformed about how fossils are dated. This is common because creationists tend to lie about how scientists do things.

First, radiocarbon dating does have problems, mostly because the amount of C14 in the atmosphere varies over time and that affects the accuracy of the older dates unless there is a way to independently calibrate the C14 dates. This is often done with tree rings.

Second, radiocarbon dating is NEVER used to date dinosaurs! Why? Well, the half-life of C14 is 5700 years. Any date older than about 10 half lives will not have enough C14 in it to measure accurately and so the dates obtained will be inaccurate. Notice that 10 half-lives is about 57,000 years. Any radiocarbon date that you get older than that is suspect right off the bat,

Third, so how are dinosaur bones dated? Typically, we use a different radioactive series with a longer half-life. Good ones are uranium, potassium-argon, and rubidium-strontium dating. None of these has the difficulties that carbon dating has. If you use the potassium argon method, you have to makes sure that the rock isn't very porous or the argon can leak out and give a falsely YOUNG date for the rock. The good thing about Rubidium Strontium dating is that it can reveal contamination of the sample if done properly.

After the various layers are dated using one of these methods, the age of the fossils in the layer can be obtained. Yes, dinosaurs did live millions of years ago: from about 220 million years ago to about 65 million years ago. In comparison, 'modern' humans have only been around about 100,000 years.

Answer 3

Dinosaurs were real. Only creationists dispute that fact. Sure we cannot determine which year exactly a certain animal lived but since dinosaurs existed for nearly 200 million years you got a pretty big ballpark to make an estimate. I guess you believe earth is 6000 years old. How come the earliest proof of human civilization is 12500 years old?
It amuses me when some creationist try to explain away scientific fact. "Of course there are no dinosaurs. They all drowned in the flood". Then who drowned the marine reptiles that lived at the same time as the dinosaurs? Makes me laugh every time. Some moron actually suggested that god planted all the evidence that earth is older than 6000 years. That would make god a liar would it not? Who would want to worship a liar?

Intelligent sentient beings have an innate desire to learn and know things. Of course you don´t need to know anything. You are a believer. And believing is the opposite of thinking.

Answer 4

no, it does not upset me that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago.

It would upset me if they were alive today.

radiocarbon dating is not the only way of measuring the age of a dinosaur. You can also measure it by where the dinosaur was found.
If it was found embedded in a layer of stone halfway down a cliff, then you can be certain that it didn't just die a few hundred years ago and "float" up the cliff to be embedded in it (in which case, you need to explain how the body got there).

Of course, if you are asking for the sake of provoking an angry response, then there is no point trying to prove this, as you have already made up your mind that you know the "real" answer.

Answer 5

Some places are documented and dated in the bible,

These places exist today, but are also covered by weathered earth.

This depth can determine within years when the site was made. Many churches even take pride in the age and beauty of the architecture.

These layers can be called sedimentation layers in rivers.

These layers go deeper, and consistently expose more history as dug up.

If you get really deep you may start to find fossilized plants and animals.

Fossilized trees are like todays trees in some ways. You can count these tree rings to guess how old this tree was when it died.

Fossilized trees exist today, some thousands of year old trees are still partially alive and half fossilized.

Therefore, it is obviously a complete fabrication with no merit.

Answer 6

And you probably think those lights in the sky are just pinpricks in the curtain pulled across when night happens.
If you ever bothered to take or pay attention in your physics and/or chemistry class, you would know how to measure an element's half-life. If you ever bothered to pay attention in your biology class, you'd know everything, including the stuff inside humans, is made up of chemical elements. The amount of certain chemical elements that make up human bones can be measured while humans are alive and compared to amounts in found in fossilized bones. Based on certain chemical element's half-life, the fossil's age can be determined. Now, true, carbon dating may not give an exact time as in years, hours, minutes and seconds, it can get within years.

Answer 7

sigh they don't just use radio carbon, there are other elements that they can use to go more accurately back millions of years, plus there is the stratigraphy, different layers were laid down at different times, so if a dinosaur is found in one layer odds are it was alive at the time that layer was put down so you can know its approximate age.

and you can tell how old something is by various different means.

you need to know how old they are so that you can know what it was like when they existed, or do you think we shouldn't even be studying the dinosaurs at all? maybe we should just call them dragons and try to not think about them as much as possible.

if you did any research you would find that there are many ways to date a dinosaur skeleton.

Answer 8

You are confusing radiocarbon w/ radiometric. Radiocarbon (a type of radiometric dating) usually isn't used to date items more than 50,000 years old. Usually other isotopes are used to date dinosaurs (rhodium - strontium, argon, etc)

Answer 9

i comprehend what you advise. There are passages in Paul's writing that justify mendacity to transform, so i assume they sense justified. i don't think of they comprehend they are mendacity: to not offend, yet somebody who asks me the "why are there nevertheless monkeys" question for sure has no concept of what he's conversing approximately. they have no concept of ways many human beings thay are making improve disgusted of religion with this behaviour. on the magnificent area, the type of christian congregations that have faith in evolution is turning out to be so there is wish. i've got faith that what retains those lies up are a million) people who make the main of it in money 2) people who're afraid technology will take human beings remote from faith 3) organic lack of understanding David, regarding the transitional fossils component: a million) there are dozen transitional varieties. yet every time we detect a clean one, for a creationist this only potential we could desire to locate 2 new rings of the chain to make it in good shape. 2) concept has more suitable interior the final 2 hundred years. We now comprehend that many exchange take place incredibly immediately while a inhabitants is remoted from something of its species. 3) in case you had ever had to partecipate to an excavation you could comprehend how fairly uncommon nicely preserved fossils are. organic determination isn't random. Mutation is. it is an removing/replica technique, a similar we use with technologies: if something works we reproduce it in many exemplars. If it would not it gets out of the photograph. clever layout is, if possible, eve dumber than creationism. It presupposes a writer that desires to return now and then to nicely suited his mess. If there's a god i'm notably particular he's able to sending the fifting balls in with one shot. playstation : i'm thinking of strting an internet site for christians helping evolution. i think of christians could be extra probable to pay attention different christians than us eathens. i became thinking of a trilobite with Jesus on it because of the fact the simble, yet given the non secular value of hte fish i think of somebody could locate it offensive. I settle for recommendations.

Answer 10

No, it doesn't make me upset that scientists can use techniques that can be explained in detail and which I can do various experiments myself to demonstrate the effectiveness of to deduce that Earth is billions of years old and dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. What upsets me is the number of people who accept the written word of one book written centuries ago over everything that has taken place since.