Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » Life on Earth began 4.5 Billion years ago
  1. Results 61 to 80 of 80
  2. Page 3 of 3
  3. First
  5. 1
  6. 2
  7. 3

Thread: Life on Earth began 4.5 Billion years ago

post 1641296063 06-20-2021, 07:21 PM
-
#61
  1. numberguy12
  2. Registered User
  1. numberguy12
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2017
  4. Posts: 6,938
  5. Rep Power: 51915
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
You act like I havent studied for years and years all the theories you believe in.
Then why did you think dating the earth involved looking at lines in a rock? What exactly did you mean by that?
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑

♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮

Nullius in verba
post 1641296083 06-20-2021, 07:22 PM
-
#62
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
You haven't. Are you willing to take an elementary biochemistry quiz?



You do realize rocket science is a fairly trivial discipline, right? Aerospace engineering has more complexity, but the science of how a rocket works itself is a really simple thing that can be explained by simply considering a projectile with changing mass (as most of its mass is fuel) and conservation of momentum. Every physics major learns rocket science. It's a single part of a single chapter in classical mechanics books.
I'm simply comparing the two fields of science, one field that require precise and exact data and measurements against a field that uses a margin of error of +/- billions of years, it's funny I'm sorry if you didn't get the irony.
As
post 1641296363 06-20-2021, 07:27 PM
-
#63
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By numberguy12⏩
Then why did you think dating the earth involved looking at lines in a rock? What exactly did you mean by that?
To be fair, the earliest evidence of life on Earth is literally just carbon imprints on rock. But those imprints don't just appear magically. We have good reason to believe they were generated due to biological processes. We see remnants of Carbon 12 and Carbon 13, and the ratios of these offer insights into the processes involved. When we go back that far, the evidence is very indirect. But as we get nearer, we have actual fossilized records.
post 1641296413 06-20-2021, 07:28 PM
-
#64
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
I'm simply comparing the two fields of science, one field that require precise and exact data and measurements against a field that uses a margin of error of +/- billions of years, it's funny I'm sorry if you didn't get the irony.
When you're asking the question of when life on Earth began, it certainly has a large margin of error. When you're asking about specific lifeforms, we have a lot more detail for some. For example, we have strong evidence cyanobacteria has been here for at least 3.3 billion years (plus or minus 200 million).

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11539686/
post 1641297013 06-20-2021, 07:39 PM
-
#65
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
When you're asking the question of when life on Earth began, it certainly has a large margin of error. When you're asking about specific lifeforms, we have a lot more detail for some. For example, we have strong evidence cyanobacteria has been here for at least 3.3 billion years (plus or minus 200 million).

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11539686/
The thing is I don't trust the calibration methods of the tools used to take these measurements.
As
post 1641297193 06-20-2021, 07:42 PM
-
#66
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
For the record I really dont care how old the earth is, it doesn't effect me, but I do enjoy the discussion.

I do think its ignorant to disregard the way humans understood and study thousands of years ago, especially since theres stuff they could do then, that we cant do now.
As
post 1641297333 06-20-2021, 07:45 PM
-
#67
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
The thing is I don't trust the calibration methods of the tools used to take these measurements.
ok

why?

Please read this.

https://www.its.caltech.edu/~bi1/Bi1...0of%20Life.pdf

And look at how they estimate the ages. Then read more about how nuclear decay works. It's all very tightly constrained. There's not much room for bs. When you are looking at uranium and lead in zircon, and you check the ratios, you can very clearly estimate how old something is. This isn't handwaved. It's constrained by physics, which we know very well.
post 1641297493 06-20-2021, 07:47 PM
-
#68
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
ok

why?
Because I worked in a calibration lab on a nuclear powered aircraft carrier.
As
post 1641297663 06-20-2021, 07:50 PM
-
#69
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
Because I worked in a calibration lab on a nuclear powered aircraft carrier.
And this causes you to disregard theories of nuclear physics that allow us to understand uranium decay times because ...?
post 1641298233 06-20-2021, 07:59 PM
-
#70
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
And this causes you to disregard theories of nuclear physics that allow us to understand uranium decay times because ...?
Yea the stuff we calibrated were pretty precise measurements, nothing like +/- million of year
As
post 1641298373 06-20-2021, 08:01 PM
-
#71
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
Yea the stuff we calibrated were pretty precise measurements, nothing like +/- million of year
plus or minus a few hundred million years on billions is pretty excellent, guy
post 1641298563 06-20-2021, 08:03 PM
-
#72
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
plus or minus a few hundred million years on billions is pretty excellent, guy
I'm sorry I disagree.
As
post 1641298613 06-20-2021, 08:05 PM
-
#73
  1. navid93
  2. Registered User
  1. navid93
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2010
  4. Age: 32
  5. Posts: 11,474
  6. Rep Power: 25768
Originally Posted By goingcia⏩
“Sun ignites” jfl

After corona, I dont think scientists know as much as they say they do
Yes the sun ignited.

You people are an embarrassment to the human race. Srs
post 1641298683 06-20-2021, 08:06 PM
-
#74
  1. eatmycrackers
  2. lol @ nocoincels; 118 IQ
  1. eatmycrackers
  2. lol @ nocoincels; 118 IQ
  3. Join Date: Aug 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 8,772
  6. Rep Power: 37689
Originally Posted By navid93⏩
This means all miscers are family. So beautiful ❤️
Posts are for fun, not to be taken seriously or as truth.

Angie Varona Appreciation Club Founder
post 1641298853 06-20-2021, 08:08 PM
-
#75
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
I'm sorry I disagree.
lmao

what about BOFA? do you disagree with BOFA?
post 1641299013 06-20-2021, 08:11 PM
-
#76
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
lmao

what about BOFA? do you disagree with BOFA?
Definitely.
As
post 1641299243 06-20-2021, 08:16 PM
-
#77
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
Definitely.
U know about BOFA?

Spoiler!
BOFA DEEZ NUtz *******
post 1641299433 06-20-2021, 08:19 PM
-
#78
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  1. BlackJack619
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2012
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 17,066
  6. Rep Power: 143443
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
U know about BOFA?

Spoiler!
BOFA DEEZ NUtz *******
I'll let you get back to your circle jerk, enjoy the rest of your evening.
As
post 1641299553 06-20-2021, 08:21 PM
-
#79
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  1. wincel
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Location: Chad
  5. Posts: 64,937
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By BlackJack619⏩
I'll let you get back to your circle jerk, enjoy the rest of your evening.
you too pal
post 1641300963 06-20-2021, 08:46 PM
-
#80
  1. numberguy12
  2. Registered User
  1. numberguy12
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jan 2017
  4. Posts: 6,938
  5. Rep Power: 51915
Originally Posted By wincel⏩
To be fair, the earliest evidence of life on Earth is literally just carbon imprints on rock. But those imprints don't just appear magically. We have good reason to believe they were generated due to biological processes. We see remnants of Carbon 12 and Carbon 13, and the ratios of these offer insights into the processes involved. When we go back that far, the evidence is very indirect. But as we get nearer, we have actual fossilized records.
He said looking at lines in rock to date the earth. As in the earth’s age, not the age of earliest life. Even those biosignatures in rock would have to be dated radiometrically somehow, as in the zircon would have to be dated, and those rocks ~4 billion years old are not dated by fission track analysis. (I imagine Blackjack- incorrectly- is referring to fission track dating, as that has been a (false) creationist talking point). But we don’t date the earth by fission track analysis. He has not clarified what he meant by “looking at lines in rock”, which is not surprising. Clearly he hasn’t studied much of any of this.
∫∫ Mathematics crew ∑∑

♫1:2:3:4 Pythagoras crew ♫ ♫ 🧮

Nullius in verba
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts