This group clearly addresses the unique nature of nuclear dating. They explained that ancient artifacts have radioactive isotopes in them that are trying to become stable. If we know the half life of these isotopes, we can determine the age of the artifact. The defense in this video stated that nuclear dating is good to explain to us the past of planet earth. To study the past and history is the only goal within dating. The prosecution stated that nuclear dating is too much work and it goes against many religions. Church members have begun to place their beliefs in science, and science is all assumptions. I agree with the defense simply because I believe that religion and science should not be intertwined, and if people want to go against their religion that is their choice. It is important that we know our past, and nuclear dating helps an immense amount with that.
The group talked about nuclear dating in the face of religion- a controversial topic. I think they did well discussing the point of nuclear dating as well as what radioactive isotopes do.
The group addressed nuclear dating so that I understood the topic but it was not as clear as it could have been. Radioisotopes allow for nuclear dating; we can determine the age of an artifact on earth using nuclear dating. The prosecution was against nuclear dating because it conflicted with religion but in the end they concluded that religion and nuclear dating(science) must coexist. But the argument of this pointed out the reliability of nuclear dating, and one point used was "how do we know that Lincoln was the 16th president if we were not there?". It is a person's choice of religion or science; it is up to what they believe but if some believe in nuclear dating's usage in the world then it should be used. It is extremely useful and allows for us to study the past and history.
This group does address the unique characteristics of nuclear isotopes that allow them to be used to date material radioactively. I found this video to be overall very informative and well done. I will have to side with the defense in this particular video however and here’s why: The prosecution was based entirely on religion. Though religion may at times be a useful tool to compare other belief systems to, in science we have to draw distinctions based on what is backed by empirical evidence. Simply saying that nuclear dating conflicts with religion doesn’t really offer a solid argument against the process or its overall benefits. If it came down to proving one group right within a degree of reasonable doubt the defense would win simply because an argument based in religion is in fact an argument based in the theoretical and relies on faith and not verifiable material. The defense, by presenting examples in which radioactive dating could be useful and providing practical applications for it not only provided the framework for a sustainable argument but delicately sidestepped the moral perplexity of contradicting religion. Good job in addressing a controversial issue head on! (For the prosecution: your job was the hardest. Good job in making a theoretical argument and defending it without completely derailing from the assignment.)
This group discussed the unique nature of radioactive dating. Radioactive isotopes have unstable nuclei, so they continue to decay in hopes of becoming more stable. If we know the half lives of certain isotopes, we will be able to find out how old they are. The defense said that with radioactive dating, we can understand more about the world we live in and the ages of certain artifacts. This helps us to put items and events in chronological order. The prosecution argued that radioactive dating lessens the divine faith of people. "Only God can know the true ages of things." I agree with the defense because I don't see how radioactive dating has anything to do with religion. Religion and science are two separate things, and they shouldn't be mixed. I feel that it is extremely important for us to be able to understand our surroundings better, which radioactive dating helps us to do. 369297
This group does a good job in addressing the unique nature of a radioisotope that allows nuclear dating to exist. They mentioned that we can find the age of artifacts and older objects by knowing tha half life of the artifact. The prosecution said that nuclear dating was too hard and it goes against many peoples beliefs. The defense simply said that nucear dating is a good way to find out what occured on the earth many years ago and exactly how long ago it occured. I agree with the defense. People dont have to agree with nuclear dating but should allow the people who do to do their job and find out what occured on earth long ago.
This group talks about radioactive dating and if it has to do with religion or not. The group explained that isotopes have naturally unstable nuclei they try to become more stable by decay. I couldn't hear what they said about how these isotopes were used in dating. Cons of this method are that it may not be reliable. One example was in New Zealend when Argon gas was brought up from deep within the earth and while we knew the true age of the rock, when radioactive dating was used, the age was not the same. The question is How can we trust this method? Many church members do not believe in radioactive dating. They say we should trust the creator because he was alive when earth was created so therefore he should know. The argument for radioactive dating says there is more succcess than failure in this method. The person who had a job in radioactive dating said that there are 4 methods to this and they all agree with each other. Some things that may affect accuracy though are lave flow and ice. They say their only goal is to study the past and improve the future. They also say this dating process is widely accepted. I think that radioactive dating is not that advanced yet that we can know for sure that this process works. From this video it sounds like there are many problems with this method such as it only works some of the time. I don't agree with the church people though. Science and Religion are two seperate matters that can't e delt with together
This group did an efficient job addressing nuclear dating, explaining both pros and cons. Though nuclear dating is causing controversy with church members, since nuclear dating is baded on assumptions, the group explains how religion and dating are not relatable, and are able to co-exist. Nuclear dating, caused by radioisotopes, is based on past and present evidence such as written documents. Though I believed religion and science should not be intertwined, I don't think that nuclear dating is a religious topic. I agree that nuclear dating is a much needed process, so we will be able to understand the history of our planet's past.
9 comments:
The group did a good job presenting both pro and con of trusting nuclear dating.
This group clearly addresses the unique nature of nuclear dating. They explained that ancient artifacts have radioactive isotopes in them that are trying to become stable. If we know the half life of these isotopes, we can determine the age of the artifact. The defense in this video stated that nuclear dating is good to explain to us the past of planet earth. To study the past and history is the only goal within dating. The prosecution stated that nuclear dating is too much work and it goes against many religions. Church members have begun to place their beliefs in science, and science is all assumptions. I agree with the defense simply because I believe that religion and science should not be intertwined, and if people want to go against their religion that is their choice. It is important that we know our past, and nuclear dating helps an immense amount with that.
The group talked about nuclear dating in the face of religion- a controversial topic. I think they did well discussing the point of nuclear dating as well as what radioactive isotopes do.
The group addressed nuclear dating so that I understood the topic but it was not as clear as it could have been. Radioisotopes allow for nuclear dating; we can determine the age of an artifact on earth using nuclear dating. The prosecution was against nuclear dating because it conflicted with religion but in the end they concluded that religion and nuclear dating(science) must coexist. But the argument of this pointed out the reliability of nuclear dating, and one point used was "how do we know that Lincoln was the 16th president if we were not there?". It is a person's choice of religion or science; it is up to what they believe but if some believe in nuclear dating's usage in the world then it should be used. It is extremely useful and allows for us to study the past and history.
This group does address the unique characteristics of nuclear isotopes that allow them to be used to date material radioactively. I found this video to be overall very informative and well done. I will have to side with the defense in this particular video however and here’s why:
The prosecution was based entirely on religion. Though religion may at times be a useful tool to compare other belief systems to, in science we have to draw distinctions based on what is backed by empirical evidence. Simply saying that nuclear dating conflicts with religion doesn’t really offer a solid argument against the process or its overall benefits. If it came down to proving one group right within a degree of reasonable doubt the defense would win simply because an argument based in religion is in fact an argument based in the theoretical and relies on faith and not verifiable material.
The defense, by presenting examples in which radioactive dating could be useful and providing practical applications for it not only provided the framework for a sustainable argument but delicately sidestepped the moral perplexity of contradicting religion.
Good job in addressing a controversial issue head on!
(For the prosecution: your job was the hardest. Good job in making a theoretical argument and defending it without completely derailing from the assignment.)
This group discussed the unique nature of radioactive dating. Radioactive isotopes have unstable nuclei, so they continue to decay in hopes of becoming more stable. If we know the half lives of certain isotopes, we will be able to find out how old they are. The defense said that with radioactive dating, we can understand more about the world we live in and the ages of certain artifacts. This helps us to put items and events in chronological order. The prosecution argued that radioactive dating lessens the divine faith of people. "Only God can know the true ages of things." I agree with the defense because I don't see how radioactive dating has anything to do with religion. Religion and science are two separate things, and they shouldn't be mixed. I feel that it is extremely important for us to be able to understand our surroundings better, which radioactive dating helps us to do.
369297
This group does a good job in addressing the unique nature of a radioisotope that allows nuclear dating to exist. They mentioned that we can find the age of artifacts and older objects by knowing tha half life of the artifact. The prosecution said that nuclear dating was too hard and it goes against many peoples beliefs. The defense simply said that nucear dating is a good way to find out what occured on the earth many years ago and exactly how long ago it occured. I agree with the defense. People dont have to agree with nuclear dating but should allow the people who do to do their job and find out what occured on earth long ago.
804130
This group talks about radioactive dating and if it has to do with religion or not. The group explained that isotopes have naturally unstable nuclei they try to become more stable by decay. I couldn't hear what they said about how these isotopes were used in dating. Cons of this method are that it may not be reliable. One example was in New Zealend when Argon gas was brought up from deep within the earth and while we knew the true age of the rock, when radioactive dating was used, the age was not the same. The question is How can we trust this method? Many church members do not believe in radioactive dating. They say we should trust the creator because he was alive when earth was created so therefore he should know. The argument for radioactive dating says there is more succcess than failure in this method. The person who had a job in radioactive dating said that there are 4 methods to this and they all agree with each other. Some things that may affect accuracy though are lave flow and ice. They say their only goal is to study the past and improve the future. They also say this dating process is widely accepted. I think that radioactive dating is not that advanced yet that we can know for sure that this process works. From this video it sounds like there are many problems with this method such as it only works some of the time. I don't agree with the church people though. Science and Religion are two seperate matters that can't e delt with together
228938
This group did an efficient job addressing nuclear dating, explaining both pros and cons. Though nuclear dating is causing controversy with church members, since nuclear dating is baded on assumptions, the group explains how religion and dating are not relatable, and are able to co-exist. Nuclear dating, caused by radioisotopes, is based on past and present evidence such as written documents. Though I believed religion and science should not be intertwined, I don't think that nuclear dating is a religious topic. I agree that nuclear dating is a much needed process, so we will be able to understand the history of our planet's past.
Post a Comment