Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: tacticalogic

Yet you have no explanation for observed errors nor even what percent of these perceived errors are discarded.

Worst of all for critical thinking and the scientific method ~ zero explanation for the far easier to observe natural clocks that I’ve been pointing out throughout this thread.

Another couple of assumptions for radioisotope dating:

Initial ratio of father and daughter elements, and

Volcanic heat resets these radioisotope clocks.


100 posted on 05/15/2012 9:09:05 AM PDT by BrandtMichaels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]


To: BrandtMichaels
Yet you have no explanation for observed errors nor even what percent of these perceived errors are discarded.

And you have yet to provide any information on what percentage of the total measurements your observed errors are. One, or even a hundred bad levels do not constitute proof that levels don't work.

You submit that the existence of observed errors makes the entire methodology flawed. By that premise the existence of an unreliable level would dictate that none of them can be trusted and people should stop using them, regardless of how many times the were used without any observed error.

101 posted on 05/15/2012 9:20:45 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson