195,000 Years To Invent The Shovel

[Yozavan]

Why did it take humans 195,000 years to Invent the shovel?

According to Wikipedia, shoulder blades from an ox were used as shovels 5-8 thousand years ago. Bronze shovels came much later. Biologists say humans have been doing their thing for 200,000 years

Possible considerations for debate:

1) Perhaps our racoonian ancesters were in shell shock after surviving the dinosaurian drama, thus PTSD was inherited by their future primate progeny.

2) We live in a simulation and such questions are futile.

3) Satan successfully thwarted every previous attempt to Invent a shovel.

4) Science only has two centuries under its belt, and shouldn't be taken seriously yet.

5) Shovels are exceedingly hard to invent.

[marke]

How do secularists go about disproving expert testing results from their own labs showing dinosaur ages of less than 50,000 years?

I agree with you that a crocodile that was born yesterday is not 50,000 years old and I also agree with you that dating methods work just fine when used correctly.
I love when we find common ground! However, I have to disagree with you that Allah beat up Jesus. It's possible, but such a thing has not been evidenced. Continue to believe it if you want though.

https://newgeology.us/presentation48.html

Carbon-14-dated dinosaur bones are less than 40,000 years old

Like I said, dating has to be used correctly. When it is improperly used, (like some creationists have purposely done) then you can expect incorrect dates.


The state labs would not have dated the bones if they had known the bones were from dinosaurs. Too bad. They dated the bones just like they have dated many bones of other creatures, such as mammoths, and the lab guaranteed the results were not skewed by contamination.

[Clownboat]

The state labs would not have dated the bones if they had known the bones were from dinosaurs. Too bad. They dated the bones just like they have dated many bones of other creatures, such as mammoths, and the lab guaranteed the results were not skewed by contamination.

Do you understand why you cannot use the same dating method for Mammoth as you could a T-Rex for example? The answer was provided to you not long ago. Do you remember why?

[marke]

The state labs would not have dated the bones if they had known the bones were from dinosaurs. Too bad. They dated the bones just like they have dated many bones of other creatures, such as mammoths, and the lab guaranteed the results were not skewed by contamination.

Do you understand why you cannot use the same dating method for Mammoth as you could a T-Rex for example? The answer was provided to you not long ago. Do you remember why?

You are wrong. The only reason secularists insist that C-14 dating cannot be used on specimen they claim is older than 100,000 years is because C-14 testing will show much younger ages than secularists are willing to accept. The flaw is not in the alleged weakness of the dating method but in the error of the evolutionist assumptions. The dating method has no such weakness as the dishonest evolutionists claim.

[Clownboat]

You are wrong.

Oh this should be good!

The only reason secularists insist that C-14 dating cannot be used on specimen they claim is older than 100,000 years is because C-14 testing will show much younger ages than secularists are willing to accept.

Nope, the real reason is because C-14 half-life is 5730 years. This short half-life restricts the use of Carbon-14 dating to relatively recent objects, typically within the last 50,000 years.

See how you made an empty claim and I provided evidence and reason as to why my claim is accurate? Did you notice that?

The flaw is not in the alleged weakness of the dating method but in the error of the evolutionist assumptions.

Just another baseless claim. Why can you do no better than empty claims? Where is your math so to speak? Do you take claims made by a Muslim seriously. If not, please look inward as you are no different.

[marke]

You are wrong.

Oh this should be good!

Marke: The only reason secularists insist that C-14 dating cannot be used on specimen they claim is older than 100,000 years is because C-14 testing will show much younger ages than secularists are willing to accept.

Clownboat: Nope, the real reason is because C-14 half-life is 5730 years. This short half-life restricts the use of Carbon-14 dating to relatively recent objects, typically within the last 50,000 years.

See how you made an empty claim and I provided evidence and reason as to why my claim is accurate? Did you notice that?

Marke: Why did the government lab in Georgia not know the tests would yield the wrong age results? Because they did not know the test specimen were from dinosaurs. They didn't 'know' the results were wrong until after they discovered the bones were from dinosaurs and only then did they claim they were tricked and the results they had previously claimed were accurate could no longer be accepted as accurate because "everyone knows" dinosaur bones must be older than 50,000 years.

Marke:The flaw is not in the alleged weakness of the dating method but in the error of the evolutionist assumptions.

Just another baseless claim. Why can you do no better than empty claims? Where is your math so to speak? Do you take claims made by a Muslim seriously. If not, please look inward as you are no different.

[Clownboat]

Marke: Why did the government lab in Georgia not know the tests would yield the wrong age results? Because they did not know the test specimen were from dinosaurs. They didn't 'know' the results were wrong until after they discovered the bones were from dinosaurs and only then did they claim they were tricked and the results they had previously claimed were accurate could no longer be accepted as accurate because "everyone knows" dinosaur bones must be older than 50,000 years.

Things that are older than 50,000 years cannot be dated using C-14 due to the half-life of carbon being so low. Other radiometric methods must be used for things of that age or older. Do you understand this? If not, please ask clarifying questions.

[marke]

Marke: Why did the government lab in Georgia not know the tests would yield the wrong age results? Because they did not know the test specimen were from dinosaurs. They didn't 'know' the results were wrong until after they discovered the bones were from dinosaurs and only then did they claim they were tricked and the results they had previously claimed were accurate could no longer be accepted as accurate because "everyone knows" dinosaur bones must be older than 50,000 years.

Things that are older than 50,000 years cannot be dated using C-14 due to the half-life of carbon being so low. Other radiometric methods must be used for things of that age or older. Do you understand this? If not, please ask clarifying questions.

You claim objects older than 50,000 years cannot be dated using C-14 and yet you do not prove your claim. Dinosaur bones were tested at younger than 50,000 years and nothing has as yet been found that cannot yield test results using C-14 because everything tested thus far can be tested and has been found to be younger than 50,000 years.

[Clownboat]

You claim objects older than 50,000 years cannot be dated using C-14 and yet you do not prove your claim. Dinosaur bones were tested at younger than 50,000 years and nothing has as yet been found that cannot yield test results using C-14 because everything tested thus far can be tested and has been found to be younger than 50,000 years.

I see that you did not ask clarifying questions. Too bad...
Your position on dating is so invalid, to debate it is to give it credit it doesn't deserve. You know, like debating a flat earth.
However, to show that I'm not making things up:

What is carbon-14 dating?
The invention of radiocarbon dating elegantly merged chemistry and physics to develop a scientific method that can accurately determine the age of organic materials as old as approximately 60,000 years.

It is based on the fact that living organisms—like trees, plants, people, and animals—absorb carbon-14 into their tissue. When they die, the carbon-14 starts to change into other atoms over time. Scientists can estimate how long the organism has been dead by counting the remaining carbon-14 atoms.
https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/wha ... 14%20atoms.

To date things beyond 50,000 - 60,000 years requires you to count remaining elements that are not carbon.

Be well.

[marke]

You claim objects older than 50,000 years cannot be dated using C-14 and yet you do not prove your claim. Dinosaur bones were tested at younger than 50,000 years and nothing has as yet been found that cannot yield test results using C-14 because everything tested thus far can be tested and has been found to be younger than 50,000 years.

I see that you did not ask clarifying questions. Too bad...
Your position on dating is so invalid, to debate it is to give it credit it doesn't deserve. You know, like debating a flat earth.
However, to show that I'm not making things up:

What is carbon-14 dating?
The invention of radiocarbon dating elegantly merged chemistry and physics to develop a scientific method that can accurately determine the age of organic materials as old as approximately 60,000 years.

It is based on the fact that living organisms—like trees, plants, people, and animals—absorb carbon-14 into their tissue. When they die, the carbon-14 starts to change into other atoms over time. Scientists can estimate how long the organism has been dead by counting the remaining carbon-14 atoms.
https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/wha ... 14%20atoms.

To date things beyond 50,000 - 60,000 years requires you to count remaining elements that are not carbon.

Be well.

Secularists do not date things they insist are older than 50,000 years but how do they know the samples are older than 50,000 years if they refuse to use common dating methods to test them? Furthermore, if C14 dating yields invalid results for samples secularists insist will corrupt the testing then how can they prove the results are not corrupted in all tests?

[Clownboat]

Secularists do not date things they insist are older than 50,000 years but how do they know the samples are older than 50,000 years if they refuse to use common dating methods to test them?

Scientists date things, not secularists, but to answer your question:

"Converging methods of radiometric dating" refers to using multiple different radiometric dating techniques on the same sample to cross-check and verify the age of a geological specimen, often by utilizing different radioactive decay chains with varying half-lives, like combining Uranium-Lead dating with Potassium-Argon dating to date a rock with greater accuracy; essentially, using multiple methods to arrive at the same age for a sample, enhancing the reliability of the result."

Furthermore, if C14 dating yields invalid results for samples secularists insist will corrupt the testing then how can they prove the results are not corrupted in all tests?

I see you have a need to war against a group that you call secularists. This is cult behavior. What cult are you a part of that is a war with secularists? Can you keep this cult behavior out of our debates and just debate what is being said and leave your boogiemen out of it? I promise, I won't let these secularists get you.