346
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 204:
Line 204: + + + + + + + + + +
→Comments on the above
:'''Comment''' Did you read all the [http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/origin98/pdf/program.pdf talk abstracts]? Most were supportive of the GIT and the first invited speakers on timing intial statement was that it is well established the Earth is 6.57 billion years old but dating the moon is harder yada yada... You have been selective with your choice of references and again showning yourself wrong in your claim scientist are censoring opposing views in that the disenters were invited to the conference in order to present the papers you cite. [[User:DanielB|DanielB]] 22:17, 3 May 2008 (EDT)
:'''Comment''' Did you read all the [http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/origin98/pdf/program.pdf talk abstracts]? Most were supportive of the GIT and the first invited speakers on timing intial statement was that it is well established the Earth is 6.57 billion years old but dating the moon is harder yada yada... You have been selective with your choice of references and again showning yourself wrong in your claim scientist are censoring opposing views in that the disenters were invited to the conference in order to present the papers you cite. [[User:DanielB|DanielB]] 22:17, 3 May 2008 (EDT)
==Circular Logic?==
''Circular reasoning "proves" something. (For example, assuming an element had a half-life of 700 million years in order to "prove" that the universe is older than 700 million years).''
This strickly speaking isn't circular, it is fallacious to assume something true when it is not readibly obvious in order to prove something, but this isn't circular.
Circular would be "This object is 700 million years old I know this because I have this test which shows it is. This test works because it found this 700 million years old to be 700 million years old."
The half-life of isotopes are well established and intimatly link to the strong-nuclear force. It is a little detailed to go into here and you would need to take a course in quantum-field theory. There are some isotope who have a half-life in excess of the age of the universe and no one is claiming the universe is that old as a result. The practice of radiological dating has problems but at no point has someone "assumed an element had a half-life of 700 million years" test by physicist have found it to be that long indepedent from its use in geology. [[User:DanielB|DanielB]] 18:57, 4 May 2008 (EDT)