Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Would the Dating of Ice Mummy be accurate?: A difference in decay rates before the Great Flood compared with afterward would not affect the accuracy of measuring the age of someone frozen ...
Line 474: Line 474:     
I'm all for the ice mummy confirming the Great Flood but I thought scientific dating methods were, for the most part, based on flawed assumptions.  Correct me if I'm wrong here, because now that I think of it, fluctuations in the rate of decay may have occurred during the flood and have remained stable since the time of this Ice mummy.
 
I'm all for the ice mummy confirming the Great Flood but I thought scientific dating methods were, for the most part, based on flawed assumptions.  Correct me if I'm wrong here, because now that I think of it, fluctuations in the rate of decay may have occurred during the flood and have remained stable since the time of this Ice mummy.
 +
 +
: I'm not aware of objections to short-term dating methodologies, such as 5300 years.  A difference in decay rates before the [[Great Flood]] compared with afterward would not affect the accuracy of measuring the age of someone frozen as part of the Great Flood.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:20, 31 December 2010 (EST)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,196

edits

Navigation menu