Radiometric Dating Doesn't Work! (for stupid people)

[VvDOPAMEANvV]

Not bad, but I think a lot of people missed the point. I lol-ed, sort of.

[yodudespence]

your freeking weird. right but weird..

[Gravitas37]

Thank you for this video. Now I can respond to my stupid ass Born Again Christian Fundamentalist Idiot brother in law who tried to feed me this bull about  Mt. St. Helens.

[Devils1stBorn]

This kid is annoying...

[ironman197268]

If something of KNOWN age can't be dated cause it's not old enough, then the dating method just can't be trusted. So that means no scientist knows if that is precambrian layers or not.

[GaryBL]

I'm viewer number 777 :-)

[NotSoOldHippy]

Joyness.

[barebowarchery]

Ok, this video is old! SO WHAT! You sir are now on my list of wonderful humans! Bravo! LOL@ gooses or ducks

[lucasregan1986]

yes radio meteric dating does work-only when you need to decifer if a rock is between 1 day and 450 billion years old.

[bamslam6]

dude your to funny lol!!

[JoeyAP123]

lol this is why I just subscribed to your videos last night: you talk sense, but with a humor=-]

[spark300c]

so good information but why only creationist test the method. If method can not be used anyway less than 2 million year than it is worthless. how can we know it works if can test in real conditions. Also the cool rate ing play role how fast the daughter element can diffuse out. Cools to fast daughter elements retain and sample will appear older. Any should the method be able compensate for the crystals. It seem to me composition and micro structure is very important to figure out the date.

[vysehrad]

Good job.  =)

[ninnzbinnz]

yes they are consistent. consistently wrong chicken boy. also why dont they simply go back there and get sample that are homogenous and stop creationists in there tracks once and for all. maybe they are chikennnnnn. like you sort of

[ShwaNerd]

You're funny. I laughed. or clucked. I'm a chicken.

Find any bunnies in precambrian rock yet? Then stfu n00b

[blazereef]

@ShwaNerd the video was "removen by the user" halarious. also, a good vid to debunk would be "radiometric dating flaws (pottasium argon)"

[yetiwestin]

@ShwaNerd no but theres trees runnign through your so called precambrian rocks... that extend all the way up to the cenozoic era. How long does a dead tree stay standing in your neighborhood?

[gregrutz]

@yetiwestin NO, there are no trees in the precambrian rock, they hadn't evolved yet.

[Rockluver223]

haha i still remember that voice hey its lucky from bia? remember you member

[ShwaNerd]

Wow; it really is a small world. Yes I remember you... but do YOU remember ME? Who do you think I was back then? Is bia even still around lol.

[Rockluver223]

you're canadian! i found you through irishs video

and no i dont think so the website is down and stuff

[ShwaNerd]

Irish has videos too? Send me his channel!

[Rockluver223]

well the videos with him in them are on PolishLad

but his channel is IrishLad3989

[a01011399]

the initial conditions of a given sample are unknown, you don´t know how much of the parent and daughter elements where there when the rock was formed.

[ItachiKun]

SHWAFORMOSANERD.

why are you so amazing?

[ShwaNerd]

I don't know; why don't you tell me xD