Science Forum
Australia
- Joined
- 20 Jan '09
- Moves
- 386225
Originally posted by RJHinds
http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/39158
That's the second time you've posted that quote. It isn't any more relevant than it was the first time.
slatington, pa, usa
- Joined
- 28 Dec '04
- Moves
- 53223
Originally posted by RJHinds
http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/39158
So radiometric dating is wrong because the entire world is subject to ultrasonic vibrations? Wow, wut a revalation.
I would think you would be embarrassed posting that drivel on a science forum.
of Doom!
- Joined
- 20 Aug '06
- Moves
- 20099
Originally posted by sonhouse
So radiometric dating is wrong because the entire world is subject to ultrasonic vibrations? Wow, wut a revalation.
I would think you would be embarrassed posting that drivel on a science forum.
I think he is too limited intellectually to be embarrassed.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree