Talk:Potassium-argon dating

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This paragraph needs editing: The mathematical formula that is used to figure the age of the rock depends on the half-life of carbon-40 (the time it takes for half the potassium-40 in a given sample to decay). The half-live of potassium-40 is approximately 1.26 billion years (that is, 1.26x109 year On the second line it says "carbon-40". It should say potassium-40". At the end of the second line it says "half-live". It should say "half-life". I am new to conservapedia, and so I don't know what to do or where to do it, so I'll say my piece here: 1) There is very much more to say in criticism of the accuracy of potassium-argon dating. You can find great material in the book "Adam When?" by Harold Camping. It is available for free by calling 510 568 6200, Pacific time. See page 180. This book also criticizes carbon dating, and so if your pages on carbon dating need improvement, you might improve them through this book. Should I be doing this? Well, that's one of the things I don't understand yet. Do you have others that will if I don't? Do you have paid staff? Do you have volunteers who just can't wait to get involved editing?

2) You may have the following, but I couldn't find it: You need much much more than the story/timeline of creation. Those who read your pages will consider that they now have two sets of possible facts or two sides of the story, and they won't have any basis for deciding which is right, creationism or alleged science. So you need to totally discredit the alleged science that shows the earth is billions of years old and man is hundreds of millions years old and evolution is whatever. And you need to make it very obvious how to find these pages. Some subjects could be: The inaccuracy of carbon dating. The inaccuracy of potassium-argon dating. Many examples of scientists' errors. Like when stratus of fossils are found where the older species are found above the younger ones. Like Nebraska man, where a whole village was created by the "scientists" from one tooth--and then the tooth was found to be a pig's. Etc. etc. A big section with subsections on the impossibility of evolution. So so much from the book mentioned above. I suppose you already have a little of this, but like I said, I'm new to conservapedia. But again, it is exceedingly important that you point the reader to these points, like you didn't point me, so that he may believe. PS: Would you like a recent article entitled "Earth's Resources will Last Indefinitely"? It covers the top ten natural resources. Exactly how would I submit it to you? Do you want great anti-abortion material? Get it from my web site www.lri2.org In God's service, Lynn K. Murphy akjunk.astound.net

Someone cut this. Here it is, faithfully reproduced on the talk page. It seems a novitiate didn't know how to work wiki; but that's no blanking reason. Wikinterpreter