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.

[The Barbarian]

Someone's lied to you. You see, one can't test fossilized bones with radioisotope methods. You have to test rock above and/or below the fossils to get a date, or sometimes by dating specific minerals within the fossils. Sedimentary rock can't be directly dated by radioisotope methods. Do you understand why?

Marke: How can researchers verify the accuracy of their testing methods? Easy. Have qualified labs do blind tests on bones to see if the results prove consistent. Take bones of mammoths and bones of dinosaurs and have the lab test them without telling the lab which are which.

First, physicists have to test isotopes to learn how fast they decay. That's easily measured, and the rates are remarkably constant. Second, they need to use rocks wherein the daughter isotopes don't exit. This allows isochron lines to show actual ages. Third, they can use different isotopes from the same sample, to compare several different cases. So far, that always works. And of course, we can use the method for events of known age...

Precise dating of the destruction of Pompeii proves argon-argon method can reliably date rocks as young as 2,000 years
https://newsarchive.berkeley.edu/news/m ... mpeii.html

Lake varves of absolutely certain date can check C-14 dating. In fact, due to slight fluctuations in cosmic ray intensity, the amount of atmospheric C-14 varies a little. Varves from a Japanese lake allowed more precise calibration of that method:

Japanese lake sediment unlocks 150,000 years of history
https://www.socsci.ox.ac.uk/japanese-la ... of-history

There's more. Would you like to see more?

[marke]

Marke: How can researchers verify the accuracy of their testing methods? Easy. Have qualified labs do blind tests on bones to see if the results prove consistent. Take bones of mammoths and bones of dinosaurs and have the lab test them without telling the lab which are which.

First, physicists have to test isotopes to learn how fast they decay.

Marke: And then they must assume those decay rates have never changed over periods of time that lack any scientific measurements to verify the rates have not changed.

That's easily measured, and the rates are remarkably constant. Second, they need to use rocks wherein the daughter isotopes don't exit.

Marke:
AI Overview
Learn more
No, isochron dating, a method of radiometric dating, cannot date rocks that have no daughter elements or where the initial concentration of the daughter element is unknown. Isochron dating relies on analyzing the ratios of parent and daughter isotopes within a group of samples to determine the age, and if there's no daughter element present, or if its initial concentration is unknown, the method cannot be applied.


This allows isochron lines to show actual ages. Third, they can use different isotopes from the same sample, to compare several different cases. So far, that always works. And of course, we can use the method for events of known age...

Marke:

AI Overview
Learn more
While isochron dating is a valuable tool for determining the ages of rocks and minerals, it's important to understand that it's not irrefutable and can be subject to certain limitations and potential errors, meaning it doesn't always provide a definitive "old age".


How Isochron Dating Works:
Isochron dating, or more specifically, radiometric dating using isochron diagrams, relies on the predictable decay of radioactive isotopes within a rock or mineral. By analyzing the ratios of parent and daughter isotopes, scientists can estimate the time elapsed since the rock or mineral formed.

Assumptions and Potential Problems:

Closed System: Isochron dating assumes that the system (rock or mineral) has remained closed, meaning that no parent or daughter isotopes have been added or removed since formation.
Cogenetic Samples: The samples used for analysis must be cogenetic, meaning they share the same initial isotopic composition and formed from the same parent material.

Mixing: If a rock or mineral sample is a mixture of different materials with different isotopic compositions, the isochron method can produce a "false" or "fictitious" age.
Non-Uniform Mixing: Even if a rock or mineral sample is a mixture, the mixing event could have taken place a billion years ago or yesterday, so it doesn't necessarily prove a recent formation.

Counteracting Problems:
Multiple Samples: Taking more mineral samples and performing mixture analyses on more than one element can help to identify and correct for potential mixing problems.
Independent Checks: Checking dates by independent means, such as looking at different parent/daughter pairs, can provide further validation of the isochron age.

Limitations:
Not Infallible: Isochron dating is not an infallible method, and there are cases where it can produce inaccurate ages.
Not a Proof of Old Ages: Even if an isochron method produces an age, it does not prove that the rock or mineral is "old" in a way that is irrefutable.

[marke]

Lake varves of absolutely certain date can check C-14 dating. In fact, due to slight fluctuations in cosmic ray intensity, the amount of atmospheric C-14 varies a little. Varves from a Japanese lake allowed more precise calibration of that method:

Japanese lake sediment unlocks 150,000 years of history
https://www.socsci.ox.ac.uk/japanese-la ... of-history

There's more. Would you like to see more?

Marke: Fossilized birds and fish in lake varves cast shadows over evolutionist assumptions.

AI Overview
Learn more
Fossilized, upright birds found within lake varves, which are often interpreted as annual layers, can pose a challenge to the assumption of long-term, gradual geological processes because they suggest rapid burial and preservation, potentially contradicting the concept of slow, incremental deposition.
Here's a more detailed explanation:

[The Barbarian]

Lake varves of absolutely certain date can check C-14 dating. In fact, due to slight fluctuations in cosmic ray intensity, the amount of atmospheric C-14 varies a little. Varves from a Japanese lake allowed more precise calibration of that method:

Japanese lake sediment unlocks 150,000 years of history
https://www.socsci.ox.ac.uk/japanese-la ... of-history

There's more. Would you like to see more?

Marke: Fossilized birds and fish in lake varves cast shadows over evolutionist assumptions.

AI Overview
Learn more
Fossilized, upright birds found within lake varves, which are often interpreted as annual layers, can pose a challenge to the assumption of long-term, gradual geological processes because they suggest rapid burial and preservation, potentially contradicting the concept of slow, incremental deposition.
Here's a more detailed explanation:

We know that they form annually, because each year, we observe them laying down one light layer, and one dark layer, depending of the pollen content. It comes as no surprise to anyone that dead animals end up in those layers, often disturbing them at the point of contact. Since the bottoms of such lakes are anoxic, there's no surprise that the animals are preserved well. C'mon.

The fact that C-14 analysis of such varves nicely matches the observed rate of deposition makes for an even stronger conclusion.

[marke]

Lake varves of absolutely certain date can check C-14 dating. In fact, due to slight fluctuations in cosmic ray intensity, the amount of atmospheric C-14 varies a little. Varves from a Japanese lake allowed more precise calibration of that method:

Japanese lake sediment unlocks 150,000 years of history
https://www.socsci.ox.ac.uk/japanese-la ... of-history

There's more. Would you like to see more?

Marke: Fossilized birds and fish in lake varves cast shadows over evolutionist assumptions.

AI Overview
Learn more
Fossilized, upright birds found within lake varves, which are often interpreted as annual layers, can pose a challenge to the assumption of long-term, gradual geological processes because they suggest rapid burial and preservation, potentially contradicting the concept of slow, incremental deposition.
Here's a more detailed explanation:

We know that they form annually, because each year, we observe them laying down one light layer, and one dark layer, depending of the pollen content. It comes as no surprise to anyone that dead animals end up in those layers, often disturbing them at the point of contact. Since the bottoms of such lakes are anoxic, there's no surprise that the animals are preserved well. C'mon.

The fact that C-14 analysis of such varves nicely matches the observed rate of deposition makes for an even stronger conclusion.

Marke: The lake varves in the Green River formation have produced many remarkably preserved fish and bird fossils. How can birds become preserved as fossils before decaying? Rapid sedimentation is the only way we are aware of.
AI Overview
Learn more
Bird remains can survive decomposition and become fossils through rapid burial in sediment, often in aquatic environments, which prevents scavengers and weathering, and through the preservation of hard parts like bones, teeth, and shells through processes like permineralization.

[The Barbarian]

Not Infallible: Isochron dating is not an infallible method, and there are cases where it can produce inaccurate ages.
Not a Proof of Old Ages: Even if an isochron method produces an age, it does not prove that the rock or mineral is "old" in a way that is irrefutable.

There are entire books written on the way to assure that sampling for radioisotope dating must be done to be valid. Only when these conditions are met, is isochron dating done. Once again, AI fails.

[The Barbarian]

Marke: Fossilized birds and fish in lake varves cast shadows over evolutionist assumptions.

AI Overview
Learn more
Fossilized, upright birds found within lake varves, which are often interpreted as annual layers, can pose a challenge to the assumption of long-term, gradual geological processes because they suggest rapid burial and preservation, potentially contradicting the concept of slow, incremental deposition.
Here's a more detailed explanation:

We know that they form annually, because each year, we observe them laying down one light layer, and one dark layer, depending of the pollen content. It comes as no surprise to anyone that dead animals end up in those layers, often disturbing them at the point of contact. Since the bottoms of such lakes are anoxic, there's no surprise that the animals are preserved well. C'mon.

The fact that C-14 analysis of such varves nicely matches the observed rate of deposition makes for an even stronger conclusion.

Marke: The lake varves in the Green River formation have produced many remarkably preserved fish and bird fossils. How can birds become preserved as fossils before decaying? Rapid sedimentation is the only way we are aware of.
AI Overview
Learn more
Bird remains can survive decomposition and become fossils through rapid burial in sediment, often in aquatic environments, which prevents scavengers and weathering, and through the preservation of hard parts like bones, teeth, and shells through processes like permineralization.

You've confused the Green River Laminates with lake varves:

Green River laminites: Does the playa-lake model really invalidate the stratified-lake model?
Bruce W. Boyer
Author and Article Information
Geology (1982) 10 (6): 321–324.

Abstract
Proponents of the playa-lake model have proposed deposition of most of the Green River Formation microlaminated carbonates (including oil shales) in lakes that were not perennially stratified (meromictic). However, there is a variety of evidence favoring a meromictic depositional environment: (1) close similarity of much of the lamination to varves in modern meromictic lakes, (2) evidence that hydrologic events favoring development of meromixis (chemical stratification) occurred prior to deposition of major accumulations of oil shale, (3) mutually exclusive distribution of fossil nekton (especially fish) and normal lacustrine benthos (including mollusks), and (4) analogy with a Quaternary playa that became a meromictic lake following increased inflow.
Bruce W. Boyer; Green River laminites: Does the playa-lake model really invalidate the stratified-lake model?. Geology 1982;; 10 (6): 321–324. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1982) ... P>2.0.CO;2

Depending on AI to cover for a lack of understanding leads one into this kind of confusion.

[The Barbarian]

And of course, we have always had examples of animals dying and falling into anoxic water, being preserved and then slowly covered by sediment. The first species of Archaeopteryx were found in such burials.

[Clownboat]

What you claim is demonstrably wrong because there is no agreed to Biblical record. You words are therefore nonsensical, sorry.

Marke: It does not matter how many different opinions humans have about the Biblical record no human datimg method has ever been proven irrefutably accurate when yielding age of earth estimates in the billions of years.

It matters not that you reject modern dating methods. You will die off and we will have educated the next generation.
Your claim about a Biblical record is what I addressed, because you refer to one as if there is one when their isn't. That is why your words were nonsense, not because you don't accept modern dating methods.

When someone critiques the Bible, why do you ignore these critiques to instead complain about dating methods, evolution or a big bang? In your world, does that make the critiques go away or perhaps you think you are distracting us away from the made critiques and we will forget about them?

[Clownboat]

Marke: Your suggestion about the need for those believing lies, myths, and false ideas to die off may have some validity

It does, because it is history. Learn it, or repeat it.

in explaining why by God purged the wicked nations who promoted lies and wickedness as a result of their incurable delusions.

Holy fallen off the deep end!
Please show that you speak the truth and that a god purged the wicked nations (meaning all nations are now not wicked? ) and that these nations were promoting lies and wickedness and had incurable delusions. I await your justifications and will consider it evil to not justify such a condemning stance you level at your fellow humans, because 'Jesus'.