554
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] howrar@lemmy.ca 1 points 14 hours ago

The error rate is also based on that assumption. If the carbon suddenly popped into existence 6000 years ago, then that violates the assumption.

[-] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 0 points 13 hours ago

The error rate is based on correlation with results from other methods of dating that don't have the same assumption.

[-] howrar@lemmy.ca 0 points 12 hours ago

What dating method doesn't rely on the same assumption of sameness across time?

[-] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 1 points 12 hours ago

Tree ring dating doesn't include that assumption. But also Potassium-argon or uranium lead dating require a different assumption of sameness across time, it would be highly unlikely for significantly different isotopes to experience similar issues of the same time periods.

[-] howrar@lemmy.ca 0 points 12 hours ago

If trees haven't always started from 0 and grown a new ring each year (barring weird weather phenomena), then how can we use it for dating? The only way that it works is if we assume they do.

A different assumption of sameness is still an assumption of sameness. And the "highly unlikely" claim you're making is also based on the same assumption, but applied to the universe as a whole. Why would you say that it's unlikely unless you've observed that the laws of physics have always been consistent during your lifetime and extrapolated that into the past?

[-] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 1 points 11 hours ago

I mean we can literally see into the past and observe the laws of physics being consistent, not sure what your point is?

[-] howrar@lemmy.ca 2 points 8 hours ago

The point is to hopefully get people to put some more thought into the position they hold and what they argue against so they can make stronger arguments. Contrary to popular belief, religious folks do listen to logic (at least, in my experience). But those who argue with them don't argue from a place of logic either, so obviously they're not going to be receptive.

this post was submitted on 27 May 2026
554 points (98.9% liked)

Science Memes

20319 readers
773 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS