How North America was made.

[at1010]

I rarely engage in these types of debates but I’ll just make mention look up “radiometric decay”.

the mere fact that certain isotopes exist and we know their half life and rate of decay proves the amount of time that’s passed.

 

[at1010]

“The breakdown of the lead isotope formed through uranium decay can be described using the uranium-lead dating method. This method is commonly used to determine the age of rocks and minerals.

Uranium-lead dating involves the decay of uranium isotopes (specifically uranium-238 and uranium-235) into lead isotopes (specifically lead-206 and lead-207). The decay occurs at a known rate, which is expressed in terms of the half-life of the uranium isotopes.

The half-life of uranium-238 is approximately 4.5 billion years, while the half-life of uranium-235 is about 704 million years. These values represent the time it takes for half of the parent uranium isotope to decay into the daughter lead isotope.

Through successive decay steps, uranium-238 ultimately decays into lead-206, and uranium-235 decays into lead-207. By measuring the ratio of lead isotopes to their respective uranium isotopes in a rock or mineral sample, scientists can estimate the age of the sample.”

above is a simple explanation - the existence of lead itself disproves any alternate theories.

 

[giles]

Wut happened in here today?

In other news, Dustin is going fishing.

 

[Hedgelj]

In other news, Dustin is going fishing.

Fish! Fish! Fish! Fish! Fish!

Half Baked (1998) clip with quote Fish! Fish! Fish! Fish! Fish! Yarn is the best search for video clips by quote. Find the exact moment in a TV show, movie, or music video you want to share. Easily move forward or backward to get to the perfect clip.

yarn.co

 

[OhioWhiteTails]

Wut happened in here today?

In other news, Dustin is going fishing.

Anyone check on hell for ice?

 

[Jamie]

I have not seen any ice today. Day ain’t over yet, though.

 

[Hedgelj]

Anyone check on hell for ice?

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC? The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term:"Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)? Support your answer with a proof."Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law (gas cools off when it expands and heats up when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following: First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So, we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added. This gives two possibilities.1) If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.2) Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.So which is it ? If we accept the postulate given to me by Ms. Therese Banyan during my Freshman year that "It will be a cold night in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then (2) cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic. The student got the only A.

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC?

www.albany.edu

 

["J"]

This thread is giving me a fuggin headache! My pea brain is overwhelmed….

 

[OhioWhiteTails]

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC? The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term:"Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)? Support your answer with a proof."Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law (gas cools off when it expands and heats up when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following: First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So, we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added. This gives two possibilities.1) If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.2) Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.So which is it ? If we accept the postulate given to me by Ms. Therese Banyan during my Freshman year that "It will be a cold night in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then (2) cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic. The student got the only A.

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC?

www.albany.edu

 

[finelyshedded]

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC? The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term:"Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)? Support your answer with a proof."Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law (gas cools off when it expands and heats up when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following: First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So, we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added. This gives two possibilities.1) If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.2) Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.So which is it ? If we accept the postulate given to me by Ms. Therese Banyan during my Freshman year that "It will be a cold night in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then (2) cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic. The student got the only A.

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC?

www.albany.edu

 

[5Cent]

Exothermic 1000%, but has nothing to do with that poor college fella not getting any.

 

[at1010]

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC? The following is an actual question given on a University of Washington chemistry mid-term:"Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)? Support your answer with a proof."Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle’s Law (gas cools off when it expands and heats up when it is compressed) or some variant. One student, however, wrote the following: First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So, we need to know the rate that souls are moving into Hell and the rate they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let’s look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially. Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle’s Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand as souls are added. This gives two possibilities.1) If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.2) Of course, if Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.So which is it ? If we accept the postulate given to me by Ms. Therese Banyan during my Freshman year that "It will be a cold night in Hell before I sleep with you," and take into account the fact that I still have not succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then (2) cannot be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic. The student got the only A.

IS HELL EXOTHERMIC OR ENDOTHERMIC?

www.albany.edu

people are so smart and clever!! This was great!!

 

[bowhunter1023]

Is it time for the agnostic to weigh in?!?

 

["J"]

Is it time for the agnostic to weigh in?!?

I wish one would!

 

[Quantum673]

Anyone check on hell for ice?

Whoa whoa whoa! No one said Dustin was going to catch a fish.

 

[OhioWhiteTails]

Whoa whoa whoa! No one said Dustin was going to catch a fish.

He's actually going, waters getting cold.

 

[Hedgelj]

Is it time for the agnostic to weigh in?!?

What's your handle or thought on the watchmaker argument?

 

["J"]

What's your handle or thought on the watchmaker argument?

Timex has always been underrated…..

 

[bowhunter1023]

What's your handle or thought on the watchmaker argument?

So I'm neither a believer, nor a denier of a God, or multiple gods. I don't subscribe to any religion and do not trust the Bible as a "controlling document". For me, the watchmaker argument lends itself to believing in an intentionally created world and it's that "orchestrated" creation that I simply don't believe in. I don't profess to know how the world originated, but I definitely don't buy the whole 7 days theory, or Adam and Eve. I believe more in random chance and evolution, but I also believe you get out of this world what you put in, which is the Hippie in me that believes in "energy", which lends itself to a higher power of some degree.

So I'm somewhere in the middle, which is why I'm comfortable being agnostic. I have no strong belief or faith in any one version of origin, creation, and so on. I don't deny the existence of an intelligent designer, and perhaps that's the entity that created the simulation we might be living in, but you won't hear me say I believe the world was a carefully orchestrated creation by one omnipotent spirit.

 

[Hedgelj]

So I'm neither a believer, nor a denier of a God, or multiple gods. I don't subscribe to any religion and do not trust the Bible as a "controlling document". For me, the watchmaker argument lends itself to believing in an intentionally created world and it's that "orchestrated" creation that I simply don't believe in. I don't profess to know how the world originated, but I definitely don't buy the whole 7 days theory, or Adam and Eve. I believe more in random chance and evolution, but I also believe you get out of this world what you put in, which is the Hippie in me that believes in "energy", which lends itself to a higher power of some degree.

So I'm somewhere in the middle, which is why I'm comfortable being agnostic. I have no strong belief or faith in any one version of origin, creation, and so on. I don't deny the existence of an intelligent designer, and perhaps that's the entity that created the simulation we might be living in, but you won't hear me say I believe the world was a carefully orchestrated creation by one omnipotent spirit.

Well stated, I can see where you're coming from but i feel differently about the conclusions.