This is how not to do science. Don't START OUT with conclusions based on a book written thousands of years ago, and then desperately try to prove them using any combination of bad maths and faulty logic. Instead, use the evidence of your own senses and TEST hypotheses about the world.
You know, instead of letting him prattle on about Carbon-14 dating inaccuracies, it would have been really great to have you jump in there and do a little rebuttal. The snail thing, for instance, you seem to know about in particular. Instead of saying "Ah yes...snails", you could let the viewer in on the punchline. I want to laugh at the man in the white coat, too.
i hate listening to that poser doctor person, i only saw the first two parts and i can tell that he's a completely idiot who knows nothing of chemistry, biology, science in general and the bible. he says science is a belief, no, science is not a belief. its a subject or sector of education of investigations, mathematics, physics, evidences, research, testing, observation and etc. it where you must have basic knowledge and more in order to have smarts and see life logically and rationally.
Haha, sorry dude...but really, it is more of constructive criticism...I don't think anybody that listens to this will ever say that you have a voice for auditory media.
question. why didnt u make a comment about the C14 being unreliable? i mean u made a remark about a snail yeah i know ha ha and all but is that true? if so lol wtf. seriously someone respond xD
A chemist is of course a scientist, but he's talking about fields of science that he is not trained in. A chemist talking about geology, archeology, and evolution is a lot like having a carpenter giving a lecture on brain surgery. He is just not knowledgeable of these subjects to a sufficient degree to be giving such a lecture claiming he can disprove them all.
Young Earth Creationists are the best... COMEDIANS that is. The shit that comes out of their mouths is very entertaining.
They may as well hand you a shotgun and say "Shoot Me!"
I like the way he talks in a demeaning tone assuming his audience knows NOTHING about Science... well they WOULDN'T would they? Hard to tell if he's addressing Creationists or Scientists, the former I suppose.
Carbon dating gives the right answers when used for appropriate objects... EVERY TIME!
This smacks of the "freshly killed snails dated 30,000 years old" claim potholer54 dissected in his "Carbon dating doesn't work -- debunked" video. /watch?v=QbvMB57evy4&fmt=18
What he fails to address is there are a large variety of much more accurate methods of radiometric dating such as uranium-lead dating among many other verified ones.
But as it is with these individuals, he probably politely looks the other way when such matters are being discussed.
He seems to forget the fact that in Africa the baobab trees are, in fact, older than his supposed Earth. And the carbon-dated petrified trees in Arizona are millions of years old. And, to answer his question "why is nothing on this planet alive," it's a little thing called "death." It's not pleasant, people don't like it, but it exists and it's not always brought about by floods.
One of the main problems about him talking about carbon dating, is the fact that he is using the first estamated dates by scientists. The scientists later found the correct year on the items using the scientific method. Thats how science works. Keep researching and studying until we find the exact date. The correct dates he uses were found by the same type of scientists, correcting their own work after studying. Science changes over time, religion doesn't.
potassium argon is for dating stuff that is over 600 million years old i think...
c 14 is accurate to a week in the first 6 years... those figues were either pulled out of his ass or maby careless undergrads who forgot to isolate the sample. lol what a retard, the new kent TT
do you also notice how adam+eve's sons cant reproduce unless they screw eve or god makes another 2 girls out of some spare ribs lawl. or were they gay 0_o
The Bible actually makes mention of the lady one of them, the non-dead one, marries. I can't remember anything more about it, and its too early in the morning to look up. Its a bit odd though - "God made these, and only these, people... and then there's this random other tribe he apparently didn't make, which we're going to pretty much ignore."
has no one else understood that 8 people makeing 6 billion people would cause us to be inbred to within an inch of our evolving lives. 8 people of the same desent DO NOT make 6 billion with as many differances as there are grains of sand on a beach.
These creationists love to point out "failures" in radiometric dating, but what they almost universally ignore is that errors tend to be corrected or tossed out through comparative testing or simple acknowledgment of contaminated samples. In the case of the dead seals, it is an established fact that many sea-dwelling creatures test older than they are, because old carbon in the water saturates them and their food over the course of their lives. The chemist looks like a fool yet again.
Whats with his fascination with 150 years? And why does he think it would take 150 years to have four children? And why does he think that primordial man would even live that long?
I love this clown. His calculations of population growth ignore death. I like the way he uses KAr dating to date a recent event (historic lava flow) and C14 to date an ancient geological event (his coal example). The methods don't work like the that with a short half life the material is completely gone and with a long half life measurable decay hasn't begun. We need to call University of Wisconsin so they can get their BS back.
That's what I was thinking when I first heard him say that, I was suprised we have anything that old at all. Then I looked it up and found we have even older stuff.
So, shouldn't we all be mutants or something with all the in-breeding we are doing?
PrivateLJenkins 4 months ago
Could someone give this guy a promotion so he can be qualified as stupid?
ES350ES350 5 months ago
Why is he wearing a lab coat? HAHAHAHAHA
bmwm3cs 7 months ago
WARNING!!!! THIS VIDEO CONTAINS CREATIONIST MATHS! INTELLIGENT GUIDANCE RECOMMENDED.
MrReasonFTW 8 months ago
I can't watch this anymore
cardinalkesky 11 months ago
This is how not to do science. Don't START OUT with conclusions based on a book written thousands of years ago, and then desperately try to prove them using any combination of bad maths and faulty logic. Instead, use the evidence of your own senses and TEST hypotheses about the world.
blackmichael75 1 year ago
I love his math and common sense
"you start with 2 people, give it 150 years, and you have 4 people total"
lol?
It took my dad and mom 25 years to make me and my brother.
pythor2 1 year ago
Cosmic Rays? This is bullshit. This guy is no chemist. He doesn't even understand basic chemistry.
thesideshowman212 1 year ago
The fact that someone has to actually refute these shitty young earth arguments just comes to show how retarded the general human population is.
Alexandurs 1 year ago
You know, instead of letting him prattle on about Carbon-14 dating inaccuracies, it would have been really great to have you jump in there and do a little rebuttal. The snail thing, for instance, you seem to know about in particular. Instead of saying "Ah yes...snails", you could let the viewer in on the punchline. I want to laugh at the man in the white coat, too.
totallyunderpowered 1 year ago
Yay, i have a lab coat . Now i can play sientaist.
baldurus1 1 year ago
god damn, i want to beat the shit out of this guy! where did he get 150 years from ?
chinh101 1 year ago
this dude's great >.>
kerihobo 1 year ago
"IT INDICATES A YOUNG EARTH! JUST LIKE THE BIBLE SAYS!" - Man in lab coat.
goal2004 1 year ago
Did he really just say that Carbon 14 decays into Nitrogen 14? 6:44
And this guy is a chemist?
Keeban3 2 years ago
Comment removed
864208642 1 year ago
just becouse you wear a white coat, does not make you a scientist. he cant even do basic math
compG4mer 2 years ago 2
i hate listening to that poser doctor person, i only saw the first two parts and i can tell that he's a completely idiot who knows nothing of chemistry, biology, science in general and the bible. he says science is a belief, no, science is not a belief. its a subject or sector of education of investigations, mathematics, physics, evidences, research, testing, observation and etc. it where you must have basic knowledge and more in order to have smarts and see life logically and rationally.
NOVAGIRL666 2 years ago
I like that he says that the dating methods are really unreliable but uses them in the argument with the metusalem tree.
Juel92 2 years ago
I hope the narrator finds someone else to do his voice-overs next time. Sounds like Rocko from Rocko's Modern Life.
magickjac 2 years ago
Fuck you.
dechha1981 2 years ago 5
Haha, sorry dude...but really, it is more of constructive criticism...I don't think anybody that listens to this will ever say that you have a voice for auditory media.
Cheers!
magickjac 2 years ago
I don't mind you voice. But the volume is a bit low.
Juel92 2 years ago 2
@dechha1981
Oh c'mon, your speech impediment is extremely uncommon and it makes you sound awesome! :)
goal2004 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dechha1981 you do sound like like Rocko from Rocko's Modern Life omg you do
gothicsoul100 1 year ago
i like how hes wearing a doctors coat...like that gives him more credibility or something...
EnhancementSmoker 2 years ago
question. why didnt u make a comment about the C14 being unreliable? i mean u made a remark about a snail yeah i know ha ha and all but is that true? if so lol wtf. seriously someone respond xD
roninbonin1 2 years ago 2
Notice he says we when he talks about scientists dating fossils, wasn't this guy a chemist?
Ryuwyvern 2 years ago
Last time i checked a chemist was a scientist....but hey i might be wrong?
mequaz 2 years ago
ya um a chemist is a scientist
BENJAMIN5431 2 years ago
A chemist is of course a scientist, but he's talking about fields of science that he is not trained in. A chemist talking about geology, archeology, and evolution is a lot like having a carpenter giving a lecture on brain surgery. He is just not knowledgeable of these subjects to a sufficient degree to be giving such a lecture claiming he can disprove them all.
LogicIsDying 2 years ago
Young Earth Creationists are the best... COMEDIANS that is. The shit that comes out of their mouths is very entertaining.
They may as well hand you a shotgun and say "Shoot Me!"
I like the way he talks in a demeaning tone assuming his audience knows NOTHING about Science... well they WOULDN'T would they? Hard to tell if he's addressing Creationists or Scientists, the former I suppose.
Carbon dating gives the right answers when used for appropriate objects... EVERY TIME!
warren52nz 3 years ago
i carbon dated a hamburger patty at this museum place, and it said it was 3000 years old?? but ur right, C14 is ALWAYS ACCURATE haha
BENJAMIN5431 2 years ago
If you use the appropriate dating technique for the task to hand you will get the correct dat.
Keep your head in the sand God Boy.
warren52nz 2 years ago
This smacks of the "freshly killed snails dated 30,000 years old" claim potholer54 dissected in his "Carbon dating doesn't work -- debunked" video. /watch?v=QbvMB57evy4&fmt=18
furbearingbrick 2 years ago
I carbon dated your brain and found you need to read some science books
the other conclusion that could be made from this was that you should not speak before doing above mentioned because you are showing your ignorance
Toudiyama 2 years ago
What he fails to address is there are a large variety of much more accurate methods of radiometric dating such as uranium-lead dating among many other verified ones.
But as it is with these individuals, he probably politely looks the other way when such matters are being discussed.
Fennlt 1 year ago
@BENJAMIN5431 why would someone date a cooked piece of meat...OBVIOUSLY its gonna be wayyyyy off
ValiumAlleyoop 1 year ago
I don't believe he's a real chemist, he probably has a child-chemistry set that he plays with on his spare time though. ;D
KamratSvenneryd 3 years ago
He seems to forget the fact that in Africa the baobab trees are, in fact, older than his supposed Earth. And the carbon-dated petrified trees in Arizona are millions of years old. And, to answer his question "why is nothing on this planet alive," it's a little thing called "death." It's not pleasant, people don't like it, but it exists and it's not always brought about by floods.
teniguafez 3 years ago
8 people survived? he may believe that because he himself is a product of inbreeding.
he also never heard of dendrochonology.
frogsquirr3l 3 years ago
cosmic ray?
COSMIC FUCKING RAY!?!?!?
C0ct0pus 3 years ago
One of the main problems about him talking about carbon dating, is the fact that he is using the first estamated dates by scientists. The scientists later found the correct year on the items using the scientific method. Thats how science works. Keep researching and studying until we find the exact date. The correct dates he uses were found by the same type of scientists, correcting their own work after studying. Science changes over time, religion doesn't.
windyshrimp 3 years ago
'You said you'd trust him as a chemist. Really? I wouldn't trust him to make a stool. '
i wouldnt trust him to dilute my juice drinks:P nevermind dangerous chemicalsxD
Erech01 3 years ago
I bet he could make stool.
carloz1 3 years ago
Hey! He's wearing a lab coat, and that makes him...SCIENTIFIC! So if he says the bible is true, his lab coat gives him all the credentials he needs!
CHAS1422 3 years ago 8
where thr fuck did you find this guy? sheesh he is as stupid as Hovind....which is just fucking amazing
ec2like 3 years ago
He should be given credit then. It takes talent to be as stupid as Hovind!!
X-D
Scrapheap71 3 years ago
WTF is with "the first couple 92,000 years ago"??
This is a problem creationists have, there always has to be a first couple of some living thing, individuals don't evolve, POPULATIONS do.
ThetaOmega 3 years ago
I guess chemists don't believe in death according to this guy.
ZombieGuy1 3 years ago
good good video
anzuki 3 years ago
5.5 people? whaaaaaaaaat so there was half a person? whaaaat
hassiand 3 years ago
So many lies...
TheStephenation 3 years ago
potassium argon is for dating stuff that is over 600 million years old i think...
c 14 is accurate to a week in the first 6 years... those figues were either pulled out of his ass or maby careless undergrads who forgot to isolate the sample. lol what a retard, the new kent TT
547212436 3 years ago 2
Does he think that wearing a lab coat makes him seem credible?
RedXIIIx 3 years ago
apparently, yes
547212436 3 years ago
Just what i was about to comment. I think its so he looks credible to the brainwashed children watching this guff
Avagar 3 years ago
probably yes
goldenirish 3 years ago
How can you stand to keep refuting this crap? They all say the same bullshit over and over again.
Rorshak1313 3 years ago
It's a superpower
dechha1981 3 years ago 3
no kidding
547212436 3 years ago
Activate the anti-dumbass-shield!
Johannes9126 3 years ago
Lucky. My superpower is turning into a platypus when I drink hot orange juice.
Rorshak1313 3 years ago
150 years to go from 2 people to 4...wow. I just pissed myself laughing.(just a little)
pakratmak 3 years ago
do you also notice how adam+eve's sons cant reproduce unless they screw eve or god makes another 2 girls out of some spare ribs lawl. or were they gay 0_o
547212436 3 years ago
The Bible actually makes mention of the lady one of them, the non-dead one, marries. I can't remember anything more about it, and its too early in the morning to look up. Its a bit odd though - "God made these, and only these, people... and then there's this random other tribe he apparently didn't make, which we're going to pretty much ignore."
paulbottomley42 3 years ago
Nah, another woman just poofed out of nothing for whichever one of them lived, doesn't mention God making her.
ThetaOmega 3 years ago
With the way people slept with family in those days, you'd think there'd be a Book of Mutants in the canon.
No book to speak of.
Just some really interesting family albums.
pakratmak 3 years ago
has no one else understood that 8 people makeing 6 billion people would cause us to be inbred to within an inch of our evolving lives. 8 people of the same desent DO NOT make 6 billion with as many differances as there are grains of sand on a beach.
Aahz321 3 years ago 2
no use trying to explain that to a creationist
goldenirish 3 years ago
"ok so some trees and a clock. . .6 BILLION PEOPLE and ummmm a few bugs. . . .Indicates that I'm a complete FUCKHAT!!"
at least that statement would have held some truth and may have been some what less "WTF did he just say" then
"Indicates a Young Earth"
loving the vids Big D keep it up
Aahz321 3 years ago
These creationists love to point out "failures" in radiometric dating, but what they almost universally ignore is that errors tend to be corrected or tossed out through comparative testing or simple acknowledgment of contaminated samples. In the case of the dead seals, it is an established fact that many sea-dwelling creatures test older than they are, because old carbon in the water saturates them and their food over the course of their lives. The chemist looks like a fool yet again.
LibertyIsNotGiven 3 years ago 2
Whats with his fascination with 150 years? And why does he think it would take 150 years to have four children? And why does he think that primordial man would even live that long?
Is this guy a hoax?
snownet 3 years ago
My Grandma was a teenager dirin WWII, and now she's a great grandmotrher. That's no less than three generations in under 100 years.
dechha1981 3 years ago
@dechha1981 the average length of a generation was about 30 years 10 years ago :P i think its about 23 or 25 now :D
Emplon 10 months ago
I love this clown. His calculations of population growth ignore death. I like the way he uses KAr dating to date a recent event (historic lava flow) and C14 to date an ancient geological event (his coal example). The methods don't work like the that with a short half life the material is completely gone and with a long half life measurable decay hasn't begun. We need to call University of Wisconsin so they can get their BS back.
happyjesus123 3 years ago
I love how he says "interesting, how come we don't have anything living older then ~4,000 years"
Aside from that being incorrect, why would we expect anything to live that long? Even plants lasting that long are the exception not the rule.
And he looks like he's about to fall asleep to me O_o
snownet 3 years ago 2
That's what I was thinking when I first heard him say that, I was suprised we have anything that old at all. Then I looked it up and found we have even older stuff.
dechha1981 3 years ago
Several trees dating more than 8,000 years old are known to still be living.
Desertphile 3 years ago 6