Celtic Heroes

The problem with C-14 dating is that changes in its environment can change the rate of C-14 decay. For instance, ingenious rocks can appear to be millions of years old even if they just formed because of the heat of the volcano. So C-14 dating is not very accurate especially for long term dating.

Changes in environment do not affect the rate of decay. If u had evidence of this - real evidence - I suggest you submit to a peer reviewed journal like Nature. Because you are about to be famous.

The problem with C-14 dating is that changes in its environment can change the rate of C-14 decay. For instance, ingenious rocks can appear to be millions of years old even if they just formed because of the heat of the volcano. So C-14 dating is not very accurate especially for long term dating.

I don't see the relevance. Any biological matter would be destroyed by volcanic activity anyway. Do you know what anomalous results are?

This was told shown to me by someone much smarter than me or you and has studied creation and evolution. If changes in the environment does not affect C-14 and it is accurate then why has it dated a live mollusk at being a couple thousand years old?

True story=My uncle once asked a professor who taught evolution if he really believed that stuff. The professor told him that evolution was not possible. The only reason the professor believed evolution is that he could not bear to believe the alternative.

You know what this reminds me of? Once when Louis Pasteur was telling everyone that germs floated in the air, a very smart man told him that he did not believe it because he could not bear the thought of germs floating in the air.

I challenge you to decide for yourself whether evolution is true or creation is true. Forget what your teachers have told you. Go to a site that shows that neutrally, without assuming that either is true, shows the facts and try to see which one fits the facts better. Then come and tell me your findings.

I challenge you to decide for yourself whether evolution is true or creation is true. Forget what your teachers have told you. Go to a site that shows that neutrally, without assuming that either is true, shows the facts and try to see which one fits the facts better. Then come and tell me your findings.

i totally agree with this. but there is still a ton of evidence against evolution that would be censored, even if the site was not biased. but Plus3 is not open to facts, he is hopelessly bolted onto his belief, not fact.

The problem with C-14 dating is that changes in its environment can change the rate of C-14 decay. For instance, ingenious rocks can appear to be millions of years old even if they just formed because of the heat of the volcano. So C-14 dating is not very accurate especially for long term dating.

Changes in environment do not affect the rate of decay. If u had evidence of this - real evidence - I suggest you submit to a peer reviewed journal like Nature. Because you are about to be famous.

The problem with C-14 dating is that changes in its environment can change the rate of C-14 decay. For instance, ingenious rocks can appear to be millions of years old even if they just formed because of the heat of the volcano. So C-14 dating is not very accurate especially for long term dating.

I don't see the relevance. Any biological matter would be destroyed by volcanic activity anyway. Do you know what anomalous results are?

This was told shown to me by someone much smarter than me or you and has studied creation and evolution. If changes in the environment does not affect C-14 and it is accurate then why has it dated a live mollusk at being a couple thousand years old?

True story=My uncle once asked a professor who taught evolution if he really believed that stuff. The professor told him that evolution was not possible. The only reason the professor believed evolution is that he could not bear to believe the alternative.

You know what this reminds me of? Once when Louis Pasteur was telling everyone that germs floated in the air, a very smart man told him that he did not believe it because he could not bear the thought of germs floating in the air.

I challenge you to decide for yourself whether evolution is true or creation is true. Forget what your teachers have told you. Go to a site that shows that neutrally, without assuming that either is true, shows the facts and try to see which one fits the facts better. Then come and tell me your findings.

What some crackpot teacher says or even the 'smartest' person says is 100% irrelevant. Contrary to religion science does not come from authority. It comes from facts.

There is no controversy. I have a masters degree from a top university in engineering. I use science to repair my tv, fix problems with my house, repair my car. It works so unbelievably well there is no doubt because there is no contrary evidence and so much that backs it up. If you can't understand it is only bad for you and those around you.

There is no rate of change of decay of isotopes in the natural environment involved on earth. There are thousands of peer reviewed papers on it - use google scholar not some bible bs site.

If there was a discrepancy in a sample it's not the rate of decay it's the percentage of relevant isotopes at formation. No idea what your even referring to without any reference.

[

Science is not a buffet. If you don't have a problem with cars or computers being real you may want to do some critical thinking.

It is about as possible to prove science wrong as proving cars and computers don't exist or work. One of the biggest misunderstandings is that science is ever proven wrong. It virtually never is. Only the areas where data is not taken or science hasn't explored are added on - never a foundation change - not ever. It's only ever yes we were 99.999999999% right on the money but oh yea that too.

And yes god murders babies. Impossible to deny if u believe the bible. Noahs flood killed all the babies in the world and god murdered all the babies in the villages as part of his holy hollocaust to regain the chosen land. Why he would create it and let heathens populate it only to murder them is odd to me.

He did not let heathens populate it. They just started thinking that they could get away with more than they could. Every thought of all men was evil. This is why God purged the world. If He had not the earth those babies would have grown up to do evil things as well. Also, many times the sin of the parent will bring evil on the child. God never meant for Adam to have sinned in the first place. God never meant for them to be heathen, but they chose wrong over right because they thought that wrong would bring them more pleasure. But God will punish sin.

God is all powerful. He could simply remove everyone over the age of 4 and care for the young if he was benevolent.

But yes I can see you are on board with baby murder and condemning family for the crimes of one person. I learned much in the way of what's moral from the bible. I never knew the proper way to beat my slaves. And religious people claim moral high ground lol.

Where did you even get the "proper way to beat my slaves" thing? Just curious. Cause until I know that I can't debate you on that point. What you obviously do not understand is that it was not just one person who did wrong in each family. Evil was the only thing in the mind of every single family member(don't know about babies). I am not "on board" with baby murder now. I don't know what the situation was back then. All I know is what the Bible says and what real science says. Are you debating the Bible or are you debating creationism and evolution? You see they are different. Creationism just says that there was an intelligent design. You can be a creationist without believing the Bible.

I challenge you to decide for yourself whether evolution is true or creation is true. Forget what your teachers have told you. Go to a site that shows that neutrally, without assuming that either is true, shows the facts and try to see which one fits the facts better. Then come and tell me your findings.

i totally agree with this. but there is still a ton of evidence against evolution that would be censored, even if the site was not biased. but Plus3 is not open to beliefs, he is hopelessly bolted onto facts, not others beliefs.

There fixed your typo again.

If you deny the evidence in front of your face you need to overcome your irrational fear of reality first before I can help you.

Btw Plus3 you only replied to the first part of my post. I don't care what your teachers may have taught you. Go to a neutral site and compare the facts. You just said that it does not matter what the smartest person on earth says. That is exactly what I am saying. Decide for yourself. I have looked into a book that compared the facts without real bias. I have decided for myself. Have you done the same? Or are you just going by what your teachers told you? I mean think about it. It is hard to see both sides of the story when the people who teach creationism are fired or are not allowed to teach what they believe is true. You are looking at it from a one sided angle. No offense meant.

Btw Plus3 you only replied to the first part of my post. I don't care what your teachers may have taught you. Go to a neutral site and compare the facts. You just said that it does not matter what the smartest person on earth says. That is exactly what I am saying. Decide for yourself. I have looked into a book that compared the facts without real bias. I have decided for myself. Have you done the same? Or are you just going by what your teachers told you? I mean think about it. It is hard to see both sides of the story when the people who teach creationism are fired or are not allowed to teach what they believe is true. You are looking at it from a one sided angle. No offense meant.

I had decided this by the time I was 11. I wanted to believe in god to fit in with others around me. The pressure was pretty high. But I was simply too rational. I looked at the evidence and it is undeniable for anyone who is truly intellectually honest.

Can you show me actual evidence that I can debate instead of insulting my intelligence?

Btw Plus3 you only replied to the first part of my post. I don't care what your teachers may have taught you. Go to a neutral site and compare the facts. You just said that it does not matter what the smartest person on earth says. That is exactly what I am saying. Decide for yourself. I have looked into a book that compared the facts without real bias. I have decided for myself. Have you done the same? Or are you just going by what your teachers told you? I mean think about it. It is hard to see both sides of the story when the people who teach creationism are fired or are not allowed to teach what they believe is true. You are looking at it from a one sided angle. No offense meant.

There is no evidence of god. Science relies on facts, religion relies on belief..

Please show evidence of god, and lack of evidence of science doesn't prove there is a god. You're believing the writing of men for 2,000 years ago, humanity has come so far in the mean time. What did these men do to earn your unwavering loyalty and worship?

Where did you even get the "proper way to beat my slaves" thing? Just curious. Cause until I know that I can't debate you on that point. What you obviously do not understand is that it was not just one person who did wrong in each family. Evil was the only thing in the mind of every single family member(don't know about babies). I am not "on board" with baby murder now. I don't know what the situation was back then. All I know is what the Bible says and what real science says. Are you debating the Bible or are you debating creationism and evolution? You see they are different. Creationism just says that there was an intelligent design. You can be a creationist without believing the Bible.

http://www.openbible.info/topics/slavery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_slavery

From answering-Christianity.com
Now let us look at Exodus 21:20-21 "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."   Notice how the Bible doesn't recognize the slave male or female as a normal human being.  If the master beats his servant to death, then the master will not get the death punishment or penalty.  He will only be punished, but not to death.  This punishment mighty be even a light one such as a single light whip since the punishment was not determined.

Which may not be correct from other sources I have "if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished" which many have Interpreted as if dying past the first day is ok.

I am trying to push facts. Also i am showing that the bible is full of horrible stone age brutality.

There is lots of slave beating advice and morality in the bible. If I beat my slave and he dies in a few days well OK! But if he should die right away = bad. I never knew that.