Moontanman Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Slightly off topic but animals farming was mentioned. There are ant species that farm mycelium to eat. Others that build with it. The ants in my garden are into agriculture too. They carry aphids (I watch them do it and it's documented widely) to plants that aphids like and then return when the aphids have populated to harvest the aphids sugary wastes. This is clearly defined evidence of non human species taking to horticulture and agriculture. A Farming Ant and Its Fungus University of Kentucky Department of Entomology -- Mystery Bug Answers Ants are indeed fascinating and they mimic many of the complex behaviors humans have developed independently, but the difference is that ants evolved these behaviors over many tens of millions of years. Not only that but ants are not able to change their behaviors to meet the changing environments. No one species of ants can do all the things we associate with agriculture. No one ant has any idea of what is going on.This is not learned behavior, ants are also completely unaware of their actions, they simply respond to chemical signals. They are no more aware of what they do than the microorganisms that allow cows to digest cellulose are aware of their partnership with cows. Ants colonies can be thought of as a super organism, some mammals seem to evolving in this general direction but so far no where near as completely as ants, wasps, and bees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 The creationist approach, taking Genesis literally, does not correspond with the data using carbon dating.I know I have mentioned this several times, but many Creationists do not think the earth is only 6000 years old. Among academically trained Creationists, this is a pretty small minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted April 11, 2008 Report Share Posted April 11, 2008 If you are looking to challenge radionucleotide decay rates I would like to point out the decay rates are constant as well. actually after much thought i would like to challenge the decay rates.unless you have God like powers the only way to know the decay rates are constant is to watch the deteoration (if i spelled that right) for billions of years. other wise it would be like calling off the daytona 500 and declaring jeff gordon the winner because he was mathmatically proven to be unbeatable :confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 Actually, no... that's not the only way. If you want to learn more, I encourage you to read more like the below: Time-resolved atomic inner-shell spectroscopy : Article : Nature Whenever continuum states are involved in the atomic relaxation dynamics, several interfering relaxation pathways may connect the same initial and the same final state, resulting in a complex non-exponential temporal behaviour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 actually after much thought i would like to challenge the decay rates.unless you have God like powers the only way to know the decay rates are constant is to watch the deteoration (if i spelled that right) for billions of years. other wise it would be like calling off the daytona 500 and declaring jeff gordon the winner because he was mathmatically proven to be unbeatable :confused: I guess you don't expect the sun to come up in the morning until you see it? The speed of light cannot be a constant can it? Oh I know, gravity isn't a constant until you test it? Jump off a building and see if you fall at a constant rate. My money is on gravity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 Actually, no... that's not the only way. If you want to learn more, I encourage you to read more like the below: Time-resolved atomic inner-shell spectroscopy : Article : Nature doesn't prove anything, still must run the race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 I guess you don't expect the sun to come up in the morning until you see it? The speed of light cannot be a constant can it? Oh I know, gravity isn't a constant until you test it? Jump off a building and see if you fall at a constant rate. My money is on gravity. radioactive element time dating is possible i think, looks good on paper.still must run the race. testing to see if the sun comes up? that would take, what, 24 hours to test at the most? jumping off the building would indeed test gravity, good job. :phones: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 doesn't prove anything, still must run the race. Comparing radioactive decay to Jeff Gordon wining a race is not the correct way to look at it. Radioactive decay rates do not predict which atom is going to decay, only that in a vast group of atoms a certian number will decay over a certian amount of time. If you must compare it to racing then it would be like predicting someone will win the race, not who will win the race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted April 12, 2008 Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 Comparing radioactive decay to Jeff Gordon wining a race is not the correct way to look at it. Radioactive decay rates do not predict which atom is going to decay, only that in a vast group of atoms a certian number will decay over a certian amount of time. If you must compare it to racing then it would be like predicting someone will win the race, not who will win the race. interesting idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaromine Posted April 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2008 interesting idea It actually becomes less interesting once it's been realised and known for a long time. Ask any scientist or person knowledgeable of science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted April 13, 2008 Report Share Posted April 13, 2008 It actually becomes less interesting once it's been realised and known for a long time. Ask any scientist or person knowledgeable of science. thank you sir, may i have another! the interesting idea i was refurring to is that scientists are predicting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaromine Posted April 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2008 thank you sir, may i have another! the interesting idea i was refurring to is that scientists are predicting. And that is all any scientist, or human for that matter, can do. (You don't imply that scientists should be omniscient and 'just know things', without needing to predict and test ?) Once a result is gotten after a prediction, the prediction is either discarded or kept, if the result is in agreement or disagreement, and the prediction proved or disproved, respectively. And that's why carbon dating methods and their predictions, and results, acknowledged as true, are still around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted April 13, 2008 Report Share Posted April 13, 2008 the weather men make predictions all the time and are wrong the majority of time. some things just can't be predicted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaromine Posted April 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2008 the weather men make predictions all the time and are wrong the majority of time. some things just can't be predicted And the weather's ever changing. Most things of the universe are constant, per se. Or better put, they just don't change minutely like weather. Want to get the degree(s) where the sun will be at precisely 15:35:12 local time tomorrow ? Not hard for whomever knows how to do it. Want to see how long some thing's existed by using some isotope-measurement ? Not hard for whomever knows how to do it. "Gravity on Earth will be about 33% below normal tomorrow – get your steel boots out !" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goku Posted April 19, 2008 Report Share Posted April 19, 2008 And the weather's ever changing. Most things of the universe are constant, per se. Or better put, they just don't change minutely like weather. radioactive elements don't change minute from minute? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted April 19, 2008 Report Share Posted April 19, 2008 radioactive elements don't change minute from minute? No, not their rate of decay. the rate of decay is constant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaromine Posted April 19, 2008 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2008 Just what I was going to say ; How much some thing's decayed over time obviosly changes. But not the rate at which the thing's decayed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.