https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background

Scientists lie don’t they? Just like they lie about how carbon dating is legit

https://youtu.be/TqEeXDPXiyk

Here

Also

Radiometric dating valid

stop making claims, read things over and **then** make a proper claim

^

Carbon dating is an excellent well proven method to determine age of organic matter

I prefer potassium argon but whatever

Uranium works too

those sources explain things better than we do

@NickC64 that’s what I did, then I made a claim that carbon dating is not legit

Potassium argon because you know all the daughter elements are from the potassium

Since argon has low reactivity

alright, then, lay out your arguments

i've been talking for too long

Why trust a dating method to date thousands of year in the past when we can’t date something of today

@A$AP Chloee can you continue the debate for me

😢

sure

I know it doesn't matter much whether this is continued but at least it can convince some people

@PhumoZTYPE we can date things today

What’s your issue with radiometric dating

?

It’s not accurate, I read an article from 1975 of a freshly killed seal and it was dated to have lived about 2000 years in the past

1975?

It’s not accurate

Pick something a little more recent

Yeah

Yes

so you base your opinion on one single article?

Any source to this article?

What makes you think it’s precisely accurate in 2019 when we still can’t go back to the moon after 50 years

What has the moon landings with this subject to do?

My point is the tech of today cannot date things accurately

Radiometric dating gets more and more accurate as we get better at it

Yes it can

It’s dated rocks to 1% margin of error

There will always be error bars

But the point is is it’s extremely precise