/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14257790

160KiB, 2500x1250, vc.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

how evolutionfags answer this?

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 05:11:42 2022 No.14257790 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14257794 >>14257812

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DwvdjWF5t8

specifically the argument of the brown jew who helped the old rabbi, which he didn't explain well but from what I got is this
>if all the atoms were created from the start of the universe on the big bang, how can scientists measure the age of rocks whose atoms are exactly the same which were compressed in the year 0 of the universe using chemicals whose atoms were also there in the age 0?

but his about you /sci/? would you be able to walk to any person and keep debating to death about evolution, or would you be btfo like the canadi*n atheist interviewer was?

also
>the virgin "I believe in evolution"
>the chad "I never looked into it but it sounds made up"

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 2022 05:14:45 No.14257794 Report

Quoted By: >>14257818

>>14257790
God made evolution as he evolved his followers. God created Big Bang and atomic decay too. It’s that simple.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 2022 05:30:20 No.14257812 Report

Quoted By: >>14257840 >>14257882

>>14257790
Secular jew here.
Scientists measure the age of things using isotopes with known different half lives. The one you normally hear about is carbon-14 dating. (Normal carbon atoms are carbon-12).

I apologize on behalf of my less intellectually gifted companions portrayed on the video.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 2022 05:31:36 No.14257818 Report

Quoted By: >>14257829

>>14257794
evolution can work with a God (otherwise it stops at chemical evolution https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4sP1E1Jd_Y ), but then again anything works with a God

there is no evidence for macroevolution even with intelligent minds trying to replicate it in a controlled environment, which you would think would be much easier to achieve any result than in the random uncontrolled environment of a supposed prebiotic earth (a subject for another time since scientists didn't even knew about the water inside the planet, or where water comes from for that matter)

I'm not arguing for or against religions here, I'm just trying to get what are the current answers evolutionfags give for my questions, and what they rely on to give those answers because the brown jew turned out to be very correct in the "you just trust what the scientists say" (see the entire covid mess), in that science has some serious methodological because the scientific method is not scalable.

it is very cute to say how the scientific method works for an individual scientist (now that I mention it, the scientific method is basically just the biblical method for gathering "wisdom"), but science doesn't rely on individual scientists, but on organizations (journals, universities, etc.), on hundreds of papers, all of which "peer-review" clearly isn't enough to check the authenticy of the content being evaluated (see lancet scandals, quantum physics journals scandals, etc.), and worst yet it creates falses notions for the general population who use it as an almost religious argument to ignore perfectly valid and backed arguments, as peer-review, according to what I heard from men who worked as peer-reviewers, not only varies a lot by the journal, it usually has to do not with trying to replicate the results or seeing if the conclusion matches the data in paper, but checking for typos, misplaced graphs, missing page numbers, etc.

science ironically needs to learn with the religious organizations

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 2022 05:40:07 No.14257829 Report

Quoted By: >>14257848

>>14257818
Whenever you see a christian retard claim "there is no evidence for..." whatever, you know for sure there is evidence, and they just didn't teach them that in sunday church school.
You need to be extremely cynical to look at genetics, fossils, comparative anatomy and everything from Darwin until now and claim "there is no evidence".
The evidence for macroevolution is stronger than any evidence any single event in the bible happened.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 2022 05:45:12 No.14257840 Report

Quoted By:

>>14257812
>Secular jew here
Can you explain what a secular jew means? I'm confused wheter that means a zionist jew or an atheist jew. This is the video that got me confused
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-oceLgFB48

I also thought almost every single one of you jews were ugly as fuck, but turns not all of you look like golems and orcs

>Scientists measure the age of things using isotopes with known different half lives.
This is all well and good in theory, but the more I look into how those half lives were actually found, the more I doubt them (mathematical model on top of mathematical model, nothing is obtained by measurement e.g. energy barrier height and width, on which decay relies on)

>I apologize on behalf of my less intellectually gifted companions portrayed on the video
I think the religious jews were much more intelligent. You cannot forget science is conditioned to logic, so every scientific truth must be before that a logical truth, so that means not all truths are necessarily scientific, which also implies you can be right about scientific questions without doing any science at all or presenting any scientific evidence, because you arrived at the right answer by logical reasoning and I guess luck (not that logic is needed, you can think of a true statement about reality randomly on luck alone and recognize it as true using your intutiton or whatever it is in the human brain that gives you the feeling something is right)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 2022 05:54:45 No.14257848 Report

Quoted By:

>>14257829
>You need to be extremely cynical to look at genetics, fossils, comparative anatomy and everything from Darwin until now and claim "there is no evidence".
ignoring all the fraudulent "evidence" in evolution history and that all the evidence in the world does not give you a theory or interpretation since objects can't talk (biased and emotional beings called humans can https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club )

the best "evidence" is evidence for microevolution since that was actually replicated in a lab, that does not automatically mean the evidence for microevolution transfers to macroevolution too

let me illustrate the problem with macroevolution (just the biology part), essentially the problem is trying to apply inductive reasoning as if it were necessarily a rule for biological systems. Microevolution is like putting a brick on top of another brick, whereas macroevolution is the claim you can build a stable tower out of this if you keep adding bricks for billions of years.

That may or may not be true, but so far it's only a speculation that gained the reputation of a scientific law due to social engineering, not intellectually honest skepctisim and debate (which would require to examinate entire fields of all areas of science anyway since no one knows where are all the cracks in the building https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/are-the-last-half-centurys-worth-of-results-from-widely-used-spectroscopy-tool-wrong/4011157.article )

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 23 Feb 2022 06:21:09 No.14257882 Report

Quoted By:

>>14257812
>Scientists measure the age of things using isotopes with known different half lives. The one you normally hear about is carbon-14 dating
sorry but i just read this isn't the case

>Finally, here is a brief word about carbon 14. If anyone ever tries to tell you that carbon 14 has been used to prove that rocks are millions of years old, he is terribly misinformed. Carbon 14 decays so rapidly that it is all gone in 30,000 to 50,000 years. There would not be any carbon 14 in a rock millions of years old, so it could not be used to date it.

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v8i8f.htm

also it seems the problem with "lava rock dating" is even bigger than expected
https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/dating2.html

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches