Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
not according to the article,, and those test are flawed anyway,,No, they used radioactive dating of the minerals. Talk about someone who isn't knowledgable and yet is trying to mansplain all this.....
You never heard of radioactive dating, have you?it lacks proof,,
and as stated in the article the just guessed,,
Fossils ARE rocks...minerals (over millions of years) have replaced the material of the bones, eggs, etc. And then they radioactive date it.the results say its flawed but they do use it for the rocks they use to determine fossil ages,,
Says who?some men have tits that arent really tits,,
yes I have,, and know that its flawed and also designed to give a predetermined date,,You never heard of radioactive dating, have you?
Who said those test [sic] are flawed?not according to the article,, and those test are flawed anyway,,
science,,Says who?
No it isn't flawed....it's not precise to a specific year or decade or century, but not flawed. Radioactive material degrades at a set pace...........period.yes I have,, and know that its flawed and also designed to give a predetermined date,,
the results say it,, test the same item twice and you get two different results,,Who said those test [sic] are flawed?
No, it is still speculation, as there is no proof other than said speculation. Which is why in 1993, there was speculation that dinosaurs were warm blooded not cold, but also speculated that they also had feathers.The recent discovery of a cache of Mosasaurus eggs in Pantagonia constitutes actual physical proof that dinosaurs lived in herds.
I wish I'd said it first but Jurassic Park was not a documentary!
You'd better check your dictionary and discover the difference between proof and supposition, dumb
fucker.
Your link isn't working.science,,
it degrades based on environment,, and no one can know what the environment was over those millions of yrs,,No it isn't flawed....it's not precise to a specific year or decade or century, but not flawed. Radioactive material degrades at a set pace...........period.
This is interesting.
I didn't know this was found in the 70s but it took years to actually investigate and study it.
What they have found thus far is very interesting.
It's an interesting article and wanted to share it with the board.
How far apart?the results say it,, test the same item twice and you get two different results,,
Radioactive materials degrade based on environment? Link that info for us......would be VERY useful in speeding up the degradation of radioactive waste if what you say is true.it degrades based on environment,, and no one can know what the environment was over those millions of yrs,,
that makes you brain dead cause I didnt post a link,,Your link isn't working.
are you saying they degrade the same regardless of environment??Radioactive materials degrade based on environment? Link that info for us......would be VERY useful in speeding up the degradation of radioactive waste if what you say is true.
What makes you imagine the date of those dinosaur eggs was made with a predetermined
age in mind? That's very goofy.
Is that the same science that says men with tits are women?The person you replied to didn't read the article and is trying to dispute science.
You can't reason with people like that.
I did read it and gave a quote that proved my point,,The person you replied to didn't read the article and is trying to dispute science.
You can't reason with people like that.
