Why Dating Methods Can Date Nothing

[prschuster]

Do you really think that geochronologists are so stupid that they don't know how to account for contamination? Do you understand isochrons? Do you know what xenoliths are and why they can throw off a date if not accounted for? Do you realize that dating is done with several isotopes at the same site to make sure they give congruent dates?

[NephilimFree]

@prschuster Si I assume you're saying, in rebuttle to this video, that we can know how much uranium or lead has been added to or removed from a rock by water during it's lifetime, which I assume also that you assume is millions of years old? And you're saying we can know how much naturally occuring lead can be in any place in the earth, so we can know that all of what we find was produced by the decay of uranium? You do know, don't you, that lead is naturally occuring throughout the lithosphere?

[guitardivababe]

Thanks Alot that helps because my bio teacher wanted my class to watch this and we didn't get it at all .

[guitardivababe]

Since I couldn't really stay focused on this for long im only 13 could you tell me what is he debating

[NephilimFree]

@guitardivababe The dating methods scientists use to claim the earth is millions or billions or years old are flawed systems and cannot provide a date for anything. Science proves the flood of Noah is truth.

[bonerman345]

I find no google scholar citations for Edward Boudreau and find no chemist Edward Boudreau at this unnamed "university of New Orleans, Louisiana". It would be interesting to read some of these claims in peer-reviewed research journals.

[NephilimFree]

@bonerman345 The university of New Orleans is not "un-named", not is he.

[ThatOtherHeretic]

Neph, do you happen to know where this video segment came from, from what documentary or program?

[NephilimFree]

@ThatOtherHeretic Drama in the Rocks

[ketsan]

Nice. So on a timescale of 6000 years the magenetic poles must be switching what? Every 50 years or so?

[NephilimFree]

@ketsan They have necer reversed. But there were 6 strong fluctuations during the Noachian Flood because the earth split open.

[atheistcommonsense]

youre joking right? You do not honestly believe the earth is 6000 yrs old?

[NephilimFree]

@atheistcommonsense Seriously, you believe the earth is billions of yrs old? How could that be when the decay rate of the earth's magnetic field has a half-life of 1,400 yrs and would have been equal to that of a magnetic star just 20,000 yrs ago?

HAHAHAHAHA!

[WildwoodClaire1]

@NephilimFree There is no evidence that the magnetic field of the Earth has a half-life of 1400 years. Indeed, application of the term "half-life" to the Earth's magnetic field is feeble-minded in the extreme.

[NephilimFree]

@WildwoodClaire1 Analysis of earth's magnetic field from 1835 to 1965, Essa Tech. Rept. IER 46IES 1 U.S. Gov. Printing Office, Wash. D.C. 1967, p. 1.

[Fantasticlist]

Great video! Dating is only real for evoheads because they need it to sustain their belief.

[davemakesawave]

my friends chemistry lecturer dated the shell on a a living tortoise to a few hundred thousand years (it was a long tie ago and I forget the exact figure). Even most scientists don't consider dating techniques reliable. The bible tells us that God is the Ancient of Days, the Eternal One from outside time. The "material" he made the universe out of is also outside of time so it is not surprising that dating techniques show the universe to be billions of years old even though it isn't.

[Lombrette1657]

That settles it, I am convinced.

[NephilimFree]

@Lombrette1657 Ofcourse you are. But you still strive to silence the truth in your head, which will never go away. I cannot imagine living in the continual groanings of my subconcience that atheists do. I live life with light and joy because of the truth. Atheists live in torment.

[UrielOmega]

Great vid, I hope more are on the way.

[luuksteitner]

Great vid!

[mygodlesslife]

I can't find a single reference to this 'professor' that attests to his professional credentials.

Lots of theistic links to this video, but nothing else.

Perhaps you could enlighten us all to his professional work?

[NephilimFree]

@mygodlesslife

You either didn't try or you're lousy at using the net. Did you think he claims to be a physical chemist but actually isn't? 0.o

creationwiki . o r g / Edward_Boudreaux

creation . c o m / edward-a-boudreaux-theoretical­-chemistry-in-six-days

christiananswers . n e t / creation / people / boudreaux-e . h t m l

[abrider107]

@NephilimFree Sorry but Edward Boudreaux is not a Professor Emeritus of Chemistry at either Univ of New Orleans nor Tulane as the creationwiki etc claim. Further Edward Boudreaux cannot be found on the web except from these same creation-centric sites. Thus Edward Boudreaux has absolutely no credibility.

This whole video is a complete fai

[NephilimFree]

@abrider107 It does not claim he is currently a professor at either university, but tat he has formerly been. Are you so stupid that you cannot understand what you read when you read a profile? Whining about creationists only verifies you are a denialist. Good job sporty.

[mebe84]

@abrider107 it seems his credentials ae accurate. just do a search for edward boudreaux uno,find the link to uno's website for a list of faculty alumni,he's on there.

[NephilimFree]

@complexadaptive He's actually a chicken catcher, not a PhD chemist. Shhhhhhh. Don't tell anyone.

[complexadaptive]

@NephilimFree His name is misspelled in the subtitles to the video, without the x, I stand corrected..

[fellowservant34]

These dating methods are well known to be highly unreliable, but evolutionist's need millions of years to perpetuate the evolution myth so they remain dogmatic.

[hellavadeal]

Many use the Big Bang to support creation. The big bang is neutral in this. The problem is in the age of the universe. New evidence however shows that the universe is not so old. But the big bang has not been proven . Sense no one observed it. Many atheists believe (not all) that the universe is infinite,(no beginning). The Big Bang deputes this.

[NephilimFree]

@hellavadeal The BB theory is not neutral because it cannot have come into existance by an infinite string of material causes. Thus, the First Cause must be supernatural by definition -- outside of the materal world. Investigate and learn more. However, I do not believe there was a BB, but instead a big creation which did not begin as a point in space because science refutes that idea.

[VividRecall]

@NephilimFree Cause and effect only happens with the current material laws. In a state where all things, including time and matter are compressed into a super dense singularity cause and effect, as well as time, would be irrelevant.

[gr8vibes2]

assumption is the faith of the religion of evolutionism

[InventorGorilla]

Can we determine a close estimation of the amount of c14 from living specimens. Then use that to determine the age or an approximate age for fossils? And how can I verify that the big band theory was created to support evolution?

[InventorGorilla]

nice!