so your entire argument is pointless

@Reaper So that's what the whole fuss is about? Damn, boy, why'd you pick a fight over this? Where does the fucking wax candles come into play?

because science is not about being 100% accurate

@Victortze yea but can you agree once a margin becomes too big you are just guessing?

@Reaper as long as you know the margin its not

I don't know enough about carbon dating to say if it's accurate or not, but I certainly know that the scientific institution has many, many corrupted branches. But since I ain't the one making the science, I can't exactly disprove anything and won't pick a fight about it. Isn't that a fair position? @Reaper

@Victortze so if we were looking at something weighted 1-10 wit a 9 point margin of error you'd call that accuracy?

@shadowlessnexus <:GWqlabsKek:393085130219978752>

@Noctah I respect your position it is logical

@Reaper no, we call it science, I thought we already established science is not accurate?

@Reaper Then why don't you adopt something similar and spare the rest of us from your sperging?

@Reaper your effectively arguing on nothing now

E=mc^2 isn't accurate either, but it is pretty fucking close

Smh

@Baron Doom evidence

in fact your first look observation is what you just said

I guess one have you has seen time bend before

if your the one denying something you provide the evidence

Try to split some matter

@shadowlessnexusi did

@Reaper **ZA WARUDO**

you saying stuff isnt evidence

"well its a pile of rocket" have a high margin of error for sure

These guys say 1971 and 1984 do not exist

@shadowlessnexus I cited scientific journals

you are saying that 1 inaccuracy means the entire science is worthless

you know how many "inaccurate' science happens in the classroom alone ? lol

Hey, nice nickname.

it is not accurate, but a pretty good aproximation

@Reaper sure thing mr scinence sperg

also, by your own account

What about a freshly killed seal? Well, they dated one of those too, the results stated that the seal had died 1,300 years ago. (Antarctic Journal vol. 6 Sept-Oct 1971 pg. 211)

if the evil scientists are covering up the in accuracy

how did you find them in scientist journals again?

Shells from living snails were dated using the Carbon 14 method. The results stated that the snails had died 27,000 years ago. (Science vol. 224 1984 pg. 58-61)

but let's keep moving the goal post shall we?

I tried. Good luck @Victortze <:bye:480186137164382208>

Give evidence: gives evidence... reeeee

move the goal post, move the goal post, weeeee

Do you even know what moving the goal post is?

yeah