Kent Hovind on Carbon Dating Part 2

Kent Hovind takes evolutionists to school over carbon dating.

Even tho Christianity is a religion, So is evolution by that same standard.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Kent
• Hovind
• Evolution
• Carbon
• Dating

[jesusrazzledazzle]

was reccomended this video... will no longer take reccomendations. Who is this Jesus you speak of?

[uraharagreenhat]

I believe you guys are losing the point here.

Ok, there are 999 other methods besides the one that used Carbon.

His objective is not telling us that scientitst are 100% wrong.

By what I have watched on other videos from this guy, he is trying to show that many scientific themes are based on assumptions and theories - which means many things may be wrong. He is saying that it is not science because it is based on assumptions.

That is what I believe to be his point on many of these videos.

[gregrutz]

@6:15 '' This is a dinosaur bone, it has been replaced by minerals'' !!

THAT IS WHAT MAKES IT A FOSSIL

AND THAT MEANS THERE IS NO CARBON IN IT, DUMMY.

[gregrutz]

Other Radiometric dating methods include: argon-argon (Ar-Ar) iodine-xenon (I-Xe) lanthanum-barium (La-Ba) lead-lead (Pb-Pb) lutetium-hafnium (Lu-Hf) neon-neon (Ne-Ne) rhenium-osmium (Re-Os) uranium-lead-helium (U-Pb-He) uranium-uranium (U-U) Keep going Kent, you have more methods to prove wrong.

[gregrutz]

@theP3rSonhuRocks You don't seem to know the difference between the different RADIOMETRIC Dating methods. Only one of 25 uses C14 isotope.

.

Silicon Dioxide does not have Carbon in it

Calcium Carbonate does not have Carbon in it.

Granite does not have Carbon in it.

[theP3rSonhuRocks]

@gregrutz Carbon is in everything EVEN FOSSILS. Have you not been listening? I gave you a realistic illustration on the leaching of Carbon, why carbon is not a constant, and why you are running in circles. If Carbon dating doesn't work on rock "So it does not work on fossils (rock) or really old things...."

, THEN WHY ARE SCIENTISTS USING CARBON DATING ON ROCK!!!

[gregrutz]

Modern dating methods Hovind also needs to prove wrong: 1 Uranium-lead dating method 2 Samarium-neodymium dating method 3 Potassium-argon dating method 4 Rubidium-strontium dating method 5 Uranium-thorium dating method 6 Radiocarbon dating method 7 Fission track dating method 8 Chlorine-36 dating method 9 Luminescence dating methods

[gregrutz]

@theP3rSonhuRocks What part of ''THEY DON'T USE CARBON 14 TO DATE FOSSILS" don't you understand?

[gregrutz]

@theP3rSonhuRocks NO, they know how much C14 is in all living materal and when it dies the C14 decays and they measure the abount that is left. The half-life is 5,730 years so it is all gone in 60,000 years. So it does not work on fossils (rock) or really old things.

You might was to do some research so you know what you are talking about.

[theP3rSonhuRocks]

@gregrutz Scientists within the community know Carbon dating is false, and most defiantly not a constant. If it were a constant the C14 answers would be the same. However more than 50% of carbon-14 dates are thrown out. Hmmm.... I thought there would be actual evidence to back your theories this time. Do bring some next time, you got my hopes up.