1282
Eat lead (mander.xyz)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 6 points 4 days ago

I'm not siding with the 4000 year old earth argument, but that is a weak counterargument.

Lead was created by dying stars that long predate the Earth.

[-] nialv7@lemmy.world 100 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

this argument isn't going to work on someone who believes god created said lead... and also, pretty sure not all lead was created from nuclear decay.

i get dunk on people feels satisfying, but this is just bad science communication through and through

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 16 points 6 days ago

I had a conversation with a woman who strongly believed God put the dinosaur bones there to test our faith.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rockerface@lemm.ee 14 points 6 days ago

Some lead might have been created from supernova fusion, probably. I'm not actually sure if it's the right isotope or if lead even has radioactive isotopes that we know of

[-] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 14 points 6 days ago

Anything can be radioactive if you add enough neutrons

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 11 points 6 days ago

Also, the half life is when half of it decays. Some of it is constantly decaying. We don't need to wait for the half life to see any of it. The ratios would be totally off if there was enough of it to get the amount of lead we have right now, but some would exist. When the math is that complex, it's not going to change anyone's mind who believes what a magic book (written by regular humans) says. Nothing will, be if you want a chance it has to be something simple and obvious.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] yarr@feddit.nl 46 points 6 days ago

Here's the bad faith argument:

At the moment of creation, God placed some partially decayed metals on the planet to fool the non-believers.

This is basically why the existence of dinosaur bones doesn't bother them either -- they just hand-wave it away.

[-] matt1126@feddit.uk 14 points 6 days ago

Hehe bad faith

[-] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago

Counter handwave, any god that would do that is a jerk who doesn't deserve worship. (Actually like 99% of the shit most faiths deities do falls into that category.)

[-] yarr@feddit.nl 10 points 5 days ago

Bad faith argument:

In the holy book, inspired by this god, he tells you he DOES deserve worship. Furthermore, were you to ignore his advice, he will punish you eternally.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] T156@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago

The problem with that argument is that it falls into the Last Thursdayist problem.

It could just as well be argued that the lead was created instantly in that state, or mid-decay.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sweetpotato@lemmy.ml 56 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I genuinely don't understand how uranium can exist a priori in this argument but lead not? I might be missing something.

[-] Pazuzu@midwest.social 42 points 6 days ago

The original post only gave half the explanation. It's not that lead exists in general, it's that lead exists within zircon crystals.

Under normal circumstances that would be impossible, zircon crystals strongly reject lead atoms as they form. There's no way to stuff lead into the crystal lattice in the quantity we find them there. But uranium and zircon go together just fine, we just have to wait for it to decay into lead. The trouble is it takes ~4.5 billion years for just half of those uranium atoms to turn into lead. So any zircon crystal we find with half as much lead as uranium must be roughly that old

[-] Jyek@sh.itjust.works 11 points 6 days ago

But that still doesn't change the belief that a creator could have created the universe in whatever state it currently exists in. That's why these arguments never go anywhere with hard core young earth creationists. It's also not worth the energy arguing with them because they often believe that anyone trying to convince them otherwise is an antichrist trying to lead them astray.

[-] KeepFlying@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

If God created it in that state then they should be curious to understand that creation. They look at rainbows as the beauty of creation but not the fact that lead exists in these crystals. It's all equally beautifully complex. So why not try to understand it.

If God made the world look like it was created billions of years ago there must be something worth learning from that, even if you believe it was snapped into existence 6000 years ago.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] sandbox@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

Yeah, it’s not at all a compelling argument.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ClassifiedPancake@discuss.tchncs.de 47 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

You can throw as much science at them as you want. God could have just created everything in whatever state he wanted to. Same thing with the virgin mary discussion. Who cares if it makes sense scientifically, god can just make a fertilized egg appear. How lame would god be if he could not do that? This is the basis christians start from, so why even bother trying to debate that?

[-] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 12 points 6 days ago

But could he heat up a burrito so hot that even he could not eat it?

If not, that's pretty weak. But if so, also pretty weak.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Alwaysnownevernotme@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago

Ah the "Last Tuesday Hypothesis".

[-] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 87 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Technically this could all be true even if the universe were created 4000 years ago. As somebody says in Robert Heinlein's novel Job: A Comedy of Justice, "Yes, the universe is billions of years old, but it was created 4000 years ago. It was created old." (approximate quote from memory)

I absolutely agree with science, but strictly speaking we can't know for sure the universe isn't the creation of some superbeing operating outside of it - or it could even be a simulation.

[-] nickhammes@lemmy.world 73 points 6 days ago

We can't prove that the world we live in wasn't created last Thursday, with our memories, the growth rings in trees, and so on created by a (near) omnipotent trickster to deceive us. But science and rationality give us tools for determining what's worth taking seriously, and sorting out the reasonable, but unconfirmed, claims from the unverifiable hogwash.

[-] can@sh.itjust.works 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago

We can't know anything with 100% certainty. We can always imagine some razzle-dazzle, imagined scenario to counter the rational explanation if we like.

The point of the scientific method and logical reasoning is to pick the explanation with the most evidence.

load more comments (18 replies)
[-] pyre@lemmy.world 50 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

the answer completely disregards the fact that people who even remotely understand how these things work wouldn't believe stupid shit in the first place. there are so many ways for this guy to just dismiss this.

how would you even know, you can't have studied these for billions of years

who says lead only can exist in this manner

what if this is true but god also made lead along with the earth

etc etc... this is very weak if the goal is really try to convince this guy to look into some things rather than smell your own farts.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] affiliate@lemmy.world 61 points 6 days ago

unfortunately i don’t believe in uranium or numbers higher than 200, so this argument doesn’t work on me

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 5 days ago

Where is the proof about these magic numbers? Checkmate atheist. /s

[-] unrelatedkeg@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 5 days ago

All math is a lib lie! Just look at those blasphemous arabic numerals!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Mercuri@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I typically use the fact that there are trees older than 4000 years old based on tree ring data. Or that there are stars in the sky further than 4000 light years away that we can see in the sky.

That usually makes them say something like how their God created an world that was already aged. So I usually counter with the fact that would make their God a lier and deceiver.

Some hold firm and say God did it to test faith. Others back pedal and try to blame it on Satan. That Satan scattered all this false evidence just to make us question the notion that Earth is 4000 years old to make people lose faith in God. And then I have to laugh at how stupid their argument is and how weak their God is. Naturally no amount of evidence or logic will make them change their belief.

The important thing is, you're compelling people to examine their pre-existing beliefs. They won't change their beliefs during your conversation, because deprogramming takes time. But the more seeds of doubt you plant, the better the chances are that some will germinate.

I find that the most effective way to encourage people to question themselves is to discuss things calmly and in good faith, through in-person conversations. Challenging people to "convert me" has been surprisingly fruitful - after all, I honestly would love to believe that a benevolent deity is looking out for us all. (As well, tons of believers would equally love to be the one who "shows [you or me] the light.") I want them to provide compelling evidence that can change my mind.

Approaching the conversation in this fashion not only challenges the "missionary" types to think harder, but it also shifts the onus onto them to convince you. If they've never thought critically about their message, this kind of conversation may introduce questions that stick with them long after it's over.

[-] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 58 points 6 days ago

When I was being raised as a young earth creationist, the earth was supposedly 12,000-20,000 years old. Then it was 10,000 years old. Then only 6,000. After I outgrew that nonsense, I joked that in a few decades YECs would say that their god created the earth in 1980, and anyone older than 40 are agents of the devil sent to test your faith.

[-] gnutrino@programming.dev 25 points 6 days ago

Of course, the universe was actually created in 1970 and anyone claiming to be older than 54 is an agent of Microsoft sent to test your faith in Unix.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] m3t00@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago

round numbers are always made up. change my mind

[-] Linsensuppe@feddit.org 27 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Can someone explain to me why lead HAS to come from another element? Why cant it just… exist?

[-] LouSlash@szmer.info 15 points 6 days ago

Because it needs a...

... leader

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 33 points 6 days ago

I assume someone saying this is a creationist and can just say god created Earth already with the lead in it. Therefore it is a pointless discussion.

[-] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago

Which raises the question of why he would create a planet with the illusion of age and send you to hell for falling for his own trick.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 23 points 6 days ago

All young Earth creationist should be exiled to a remote desert island to die

[-] mineralfellow@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago

I was a YEC before going to university. I studied geology. After two years, I accepted that evolution happened. After four years, I was an atheist. I went on to get a doctorate, and I have published quite a few papers about rocks that are >2 billion years old.

As a kid, there were literally 0 authority figures in my life that accepted that evolution happened. It was taken as a given that it was ridiculous. My biology teacher skipped the chapter on evolution, saying, “this is controversial.”

Patience, love, and making critical information available gives kids like I was a chance.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 10 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Two islands, divide them by sex. If you don't, they will eventually overpopulate and start colonizing places like they've been in the last 1000 years.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Bobmighty@lemmy.world 24 points 6 days ago

Engagement bait.

[-] Object@sh.itjust.works 15 points 6 days ago

Is this even a real tweet? If it is, why even bother trying to recreate it in paint?

[-] frezik@midwest.social 18 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I'm not even sure how you get to 4000 years old from biblical literalisim.

Edit: going strictly by the biblical account, Adam lived to 930 years, and Noah 950. IIRC, their lives did not overlap. Jesus lived 2000 years ago. A whole bunch of stuff happens in between Noah and Jesus. So even if you're working strictly from the bible, how the hell do you get 4000 years?

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] gandalf_der_12te 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

We obviously live in a matrix/simulated world, and it can't be older than 50 years, because before that, computers didn't exist. Checkmate christians.

/jk

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
1282 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

10818 readers
2555 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS