The Problem with Science as a Substitute

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

As Confucius said, "to travel is better than to arrive."

Most of these bozos just want to argue, dear sweet Saspotato. And this in spite of their own weak argument skills and feeble illogical minds.

I figure, if they are forced to search their chem books, or else be tortured by their own self doubt, then once they discover the answer in their chem books then they will at last appreciate the limitations of science as a substitute for religion.

Confucius also said never to argue with a bozo because other people listening might not be able to tell the difference. It's the same principle as getting into a dung fight with a monkey or mud wrestling with a pig. Either way, you get stinky and dirty, only the monkey or pig enjoyes it more.

If I come to Cairns I would be happy to have dinner with you at a pub, and answer all of your sincere questions, dear sweet Saspo.

But the rest of these, bozos, I want them to work at it, instead. I know that is not the answer you are looking for, though. C'est la vive.

I thought some of them might actually know science. That has sure proved to be wrong, however!

Well how about you PM me the problem you have with radiometric dating if you do not want to argue about it with the people here? I am genuinely interested about what issue you have with it as I no of no assumption myself that is flawed. And I have never been to Cairns so telling me there over dinner is not really going to work...

All of the others arguing with you about this issue have been honest about posting their thoughts on it, you are the only one that has not. Why is that? I just really don't understand. If you don't want to argue about it, then just be completely quiet about it, don't just go 'the assumptions are flawed' and then not go into it. That just reflects very badly on you you realise? It makes you look ignorant and like you have no idea what you are talking about. So prove the others wrong here and earn yourself a spot on the cover of New Scientist.
 
Either he's onto something that will revolutionize many fields of study, something that everybody else has missed, or he has no answer, he just enjoys playing the fool, or (my guess) his logical facility is incredibly simple, he's full of horse pucky.
 
We’re not having much luck here, are we?

Let’s make it easier still. Multiple choice.


Q2) 200 points.

The rate of decay for a radioactive isotope is described by:

Half life = ln (2)/decay constant

This is wrong because:

a) The decay constant is wrong
b) Logarithms are wrong
c) The transdimensional music of the spheres oscillates the luminiferous ether
d) It's correct. I have issues about how isotope ratios are measured in mineral grains.

Just type the correct letter
 
We’re not having much luck here, are we?

Let’s make it easier still. Multiple choice.


Q2) 200 points.

The rate of decay for a radioactive isotope is described by:

Half life = ln (2)/decay constant

This is wrong because:

a) The decay constant is wrong
b) Logarithms are wrong
c) The transdimensional music of the spheres oscillates the luminiferous ether
d) It's correct. I have issues about how isotope ratios are measured in mineral grains.

Just type the correct letter

:rofl3: You crack me up Tassie.

Here is a 'THANKS' for your post as there is no button in these forums. :)
 
It's all an abysmal waste of time. Stupid is as stupid does.
 
Thanks for the thanks Sas - if you think that was funny just wait until Nereas reveals The Answer we are patiently waiting for....
 
Still no bite - lets drop it down a level


Q3) 400 points. Hangman!

_ _ _
I I
I O
I I
I / \
I
_ _ _


Methinks radiometric decay be wrong because _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _


Nereas - can I please have an ‘A' for Answer ?
 
Yeah...Tassie deserves many thanks.

Add one in from me as well.

I am still laughing.
 
Sorry to rain on anybody's parade, but this thread should be closed.

Even in the pub, this thread would be a disaster.
 

Back
Top Bottom