Notices
The Basement Non-Honda/Acura discussion. Content should be tasteful and "primetime" safe.

425m-year-old penis found

Thread Tools
 
Old Dec 4, 2003 | 10:24 PM
  #11  
HawtPants's Avatar
HawtPants
the one and only
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 15,571
Likes: 0
From: Govenator Territory
Default Re: 425m-year-old penis found

Originally posted by RB26DETT

An ostracod is only 5mm long and its penis can be as much as a third of the size of its entire body.
just like me :eek3:........1/3 ratio not the 5mm part :fawk:
Reply
Old Dec 4, 2003 | 10:34 PM
  #12  
AcuraFanatic's Avatar
AcuraFanatic
Senior Member
 
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 37,274
Likes: 0
From: Southern NH
Default

Originally posted by Nightshade
How do we know if its accurate if the only way to tell is through carbon dating...I don't buy that crap at all.
Because we know the characteristics of the test and can relate them to what we find.

I hate to sound corny but it's pretty elementary.
Reply
Old Dec 4, 2003 | 10:40 PM
  #13  
Bl@ck's Avatar
Bl@ck
Sinner
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,599
Likes: 0
From: NoVA
Default

Originally posted by AcuraFanatic
Because we know the characteristics of the test and can relate them to what we find.

I hate to sound corny but it's pretty elementary.
exactly, if you know the half-life of the carbon 14 isotope, you can determine fairly accurately how old something is by the deteriation of said isotope
Reply
Old Dec 4, 2003 | 11:30 PM
  #14  
Nightshade's Avatar
Nightshade
un-Touch'd krew
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 51,774
Likes: 1
From: My own level of hell
Default

Originally posted by /^Blackmagik^\
exactly, if you know the half-life of the carbon 14 isotope, you can determine fairly accurately how old something is by the deteriation of said isotope
How are they sure that it is accurate though...I mean they are judging this based on items much more recent than what they are using it for...so what if it is only accurate to say 100 years than the degradation process is sped up?

Science has been wrong many times before so what if this "accepted and accurate" dating system is wrong too.

Way too many questions for it to convince me.
__________________
"I'll keep my money, guns and freedom. You can keep the "Change."
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2003 | 08:34 AM
  #15  
Bl@ck's Avatar
Bl@ck
Sinner
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,599
Likes: 0
From: NoVA
Default

Originally posted by Nightshade
How are they sure that it is accurate though...I mean they are judging this based on items much more recent than what they are using it for...so what if it is only accurate to say 100 years than the degradation process is sped up?

Science has been wrong many times before so what if this "accepted and accurate" dating system is wrong too.

Way too many questions for it to convince me.
eh.. there's always a skeptic in the bunch:chuckles:
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2003 | 08:49 AM
  #16  
g2tegls's Avatar
g2tegls
MR, ftw
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,757
Likes: 0
From: Broomfield, CO
Default

Originally posted by Nightshade
How are they sure that it is accurate though...I mean they are judging this based on items much more recent than what they are using it for...so what if it is only accurate to say 100 years than the degradation process is sped up?

Science has been wrong many times before so what if this "accepted and accurate" dating system is wrong too.

Way too many questions for it to convince me.
Have faith. Science is a religion too.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2003 | 08:51 AM
  #17  
Jessica's Avatar
Jessica
ch1x0r
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 18,629
Likes: 0
From: PA
Default

Originally posted by g2tegls

Have faith. Science is a religion too.

:werd:

but in this religion, its ok to question things, even ones that are considered fact. otherwise we wouldn't be where we are today.

Reply
Old Dec 5, 2003 | 11:19 AM
  #18  
Bl@ck's Avatar
Bl@ck
Sinner
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,599
Likes: 0
From: NoVA
Default

Originally posted by Nightshade
How are they sure that it is accurate though...I mean they are judging this based on items much more recent than what they are using it for...so what if it is only accurate to say 100 years than the degradation process is sped up?

Science has been wrong many times before so what if this "accepted and accurate" dating system is wrong too.

Way too many questions for it to convince me.
now that i've had a few minutes to research, i doubt that they used carbon dating to date this particular specimen, since carbon-14 has a halflife of 5700 years, carbon dating is only reliable up to 50,000 years. most likely they used potassium-40 dating which has a half life of 1.3 billion years.

here's a brief explanation fo how carbon dating works...

Cosmic rays enter the earth's atmosphere in large numbers every day. For example, every person is hit by about half a million cosmic rays every hour. It is not uncommon for a cosmic ray to collide with an atom in the atmosphere, creating a secondary cosmic ray in the form of an energetic neutron, and for these energetic neutrons to collide with nitrogen atoms. When the neutron collides, a nitrogen-14 (seven protons, seven neutrons) atom turns into a carbon-14 atom (six protons, eight neutrons) and a hydrogen atom (one proton, zero neutrons). Carbon-14 is radioactive, with a half-life of about 5,700 years.

The carbon-14 atoms that cosmic rays create combine with oxygen to form carbon dioxide, which plants absorb naturally and incorporate into plant fibers by photosynthesis. Animals and people eat plants and take in carbon-14 as well. The ratio of normal carbon (carbon-12) to carbon-14 in the air and in all living things at any given time is nearly constant. Maybe one in a trillion carbon atoms are carbon-14. The carbon-14 atoms are always decaying, but they are being replaced by new carbon-14 atoms at a constant rate. At this moment, your body has a certain percentage of carbon-14 atoms in it, and all living plants and animals have the same percentage.
(from www.howstuffworks.com)

potassium-40 is created in a similar way and is found naturally in all organisms. since it's halflife is so long, potassium-40 dating is used for dating fossils that are over 50,000 years old.
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2003 | 11:24 AM
  #19  
Nightshade's Avatar
Nightshade
un-Touch'd krew
 
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 51,774
Likes: 1
From: My own level of hell
Default

Originally posted by /^Blackmagik^\
now that i've had a few minutes to research, i doubt that they used carbon dating to date this particular specimen, since carbon-14 has a halflife of 5700 years, carbon dating is only reliable up to 50,000 years. most likely they used potassium-40 dating which has a half life of 1.3 billion years.

here's a brief explanation fo how carbon dating works...

(from www.howstuffworks.com)

potassium-40 is created in a similar way and is found naturally in all organisms. since it's halflife is so long, potassium-40 dating is used for dating fossils that are over 50,000 years old.
Thank you this is exactly the kind of thing I was getting at...skeptics can be right sometimes

So I am assuming that potassium-40 as of now is the accepted standard until proven otherwise.

I still think 425 million years old is a bit unbelievable.
__________________
"I'll keep my money, guns and freedom. You can keep the "Change."
Reply
Old Dec 5, 2003 | 11:44 AM
  #20  
Jessica's Avatar
Jessica
ch1x0r
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 18,629
Likes: 0
From: PA
Default

Originally posted by Nightshade
Thank you this is exactly the kind of thing I was getting at...skeptics can be right sometimes

So I am assuming that potassium-40 as of now is the accepted standard until proven otherwise.

I still think 425 million years old is a bit unbelievable.
he he, thats my fault, i said it was carbon dating.

its really not that unbelieveable though. well, to me at least. but like i said before, its always good to be skeptical, but make sure you're smart about it.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:17 AM.