Originally Posted by LiL stumppy
I mean it condridicts it's self. I had a professor go off about carbon dating and evolution and what not for a while. Then I had s basic philosophy class teach us that who really knows if 1 plus 1 is two. So who really knows if carbon dating is correct. It's basic phiolshy, yet in its simplest forum really condridicts any scientifical "fact". Hard to convey what I am trying to say by text.
You misunderstood my point, which I didn't go into much detail so I understand why. You are looking for little pieces of my post to try and build a "case" against my beliefs. Fit, as in whatever they believe and believe is the truth. Don't look into a single word so much.
Actually, we do know that carbon dating is correct. It's good to be skeptical of work done by others, but at the same time, you can't simply discount proven repeatable methods that are accepted as fact by the entire scientific community. And no amount of college philosophical discussion can take the truth away from that. I see now where you got your "How do we know that 1+1=2?" comment, but you're applying that philosophical ponderance to something of which it is unable and unsuited to explain. That's just not how it works.
I'm not trying to build a case against your beliefs. I'm trying to encourage you and others to equally apply the same amount of skepticism to both evolution and religion. Challenge both equally and see which provides more evidence in return.
Carbon Dating: http://science.howstuffworks.com/env.../carbon-14.htm