View Single Post
Old 11-20-2012, 07:01   #288
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
Peace Warrior's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 30,254
Blog Entries: 1
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
Are you suggesting that such "contamination" can not be readily identified in a sample and that researchers can not then correct for such error or eliminate the sample from the sample group altogether as biased due to external processes?
Precisely going to be my point. If a rock or fossil is found, say in a Jurassic Era stratum, who knows if the entire layer of rock, or just the fossil within it, had ever been exposed to ground water or running water sometime in its "multi-million year old" past history. So understanding, the damage has already been done prior to excavation or retrieval.

ETA: I have no doubt that most scientists are rigorous in their keeping the testing material as close to original as possible. I'm sure most of them go to great lengths to prevent contamination after retrieval, but what they don't know is what happened to the sample before they collected it.

Moreover, a repeated paradigm from evos is on this wise. Namely, lets say the testing results do not harmonize with the timeline stated for a Jurassic Era rocks or fossil sample. If this occurs, the testing results would be claimed to be in error and probably more samples would be tested. This can go on until either a test FINALLY scores a hit on or near enough to the PREDETERMINED date for the layer/fossil being tested, or, all the testing results will be thrown out in favor of the geologic column's presupposed record of timelines and era.

The relatively 'modern skull' find of richard leaky, under the previously dated KBS tuft, is a great example of how radiometric dating methods are simply HUGE piles of bull"manure" as far as being empirically derived from good scientific methodology.

When I brought this up with an evo friend of mine, he countered with a possible reason for such a "mix up," but before anyone here chases that same cold trail, let me say first off that after studies were completed by the researches at the site, they found conclusive proof that the skull was not and could not have been introduced lower down into the strata by way of ancient burial or some other previous excavation.

In all fairness, if they want to know how that skull got there, they only need read Genesis, starting with chapter 6 and continuing until reaching verse 17 in chapter 9 (IIRC).
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs

"LOVE 'EM ALL!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible

Last edited by Peace Warrior; 11-20-2012 at 07:09..
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote