Posted: Dec 24, 2012 4:19 pm
by Kazaman
Atheistoclast wrote:
Kazaman wrote:It's one thing to be iconoclastic, it's quite another to pedal pseudointellectual and pseudoscientific dribble.

EDIT: Not to say the studies you posted are invalid, but that they don't support the position you think they do.

I haven't yet discussed my criticism of the other 2 assumptions used in the dating methods. :nono:

You haven't yet even discussed the first one. You've named it, exalted yourself as a skeptic a few times and posted a series of studies which vaguely have something to do with what your point is, but you haven't discussed it.