Upload
Login or register

captainfuckitall

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:4/12/2010
Stats
Comment Ranking:#4158
Highest Content Rank:#8779
Highest Comment Rank:#49
Content Thumbs: 42 total,  99 ,  57
Comment Thumbs: 79198 total,  97226 ,  18028
Content Level Progress: 77.96% (46/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 14.9% (149/1000)
Level 368 Comments: FJ Noble → Level 369 Comments: FJ Noble
Subscribers:22
Content Views:10929
Total Comments Made:20878
FJ Points:40264

latest user's comments

#142716 - Then what do you believe?  [+] (7 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board 0
User avatar
#142720 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
I believe life was created more-or-less in its current form somewhere between 6000-10000 years ago
User avatar
#142722 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
But what of those who dispute that fact? The vast majority of them believe in their version, and without a doubt they are educated and well learned, are they not?
User avatar
#142724 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
Sure, i chalk it up to science's implementation of methodological naturalism. evolution is the only game in town, so to speak, because supernatural explanations aren't allowed in science
User avatar
#142726 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
That's true, but if you find no proof of something, isn't it 'right' to focus on the fields you have found proof for? At least mainly.
User avatar
#142728 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i admit there's no scientific proof of God, what i would dispute is whether evolution has been proved. i've seen the evidence, and i think all of it can be explained under creationism. genetic similarities, for instance, would be the result of God using the same template for all life
User avatar
#142730 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
But what of certain lacks of proof? Such as no proof of humans or dinosaurs living together, or the Earth being older than claimed?
#142731 - zlane (06/26/2016) [-]
I don't think the evidence is all on one side here. Dinosaur bones should not have carbon-14 or soft tissue if they are millions of years old, yet they do.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065128113000020
Figure 8 "three osteocytes with fine filopodial processes which interconnect"
9 and 10 "intracellular organelle-like structures"
11 and 12 "the center of each Haversian system is populated by possible preserved blood products"
13 "hollow blood vessel emanating from Haversian canal. Blood vessels are flexible and pliable."
15 and 16 "possible blood products lining inner wall of hardened vessel"
7-19 "large oblate osteocytes lying on fibrillar bone matrix"

www.newgeology.us/presentation48.html
this group of creationists C14 dated various dinosaur bones to 22-39ka
#142713 - "He's asking for proof" "Well we're made of…  [+] (6 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board +1
User avatar
#142717 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
No get it right, you have to say it properly. Come on, do it with me now, "I am a moron, and will refrain from being stupid in future".

My claim was in no way radical, it is the logical conclusion of two facts, and so it makes absolutely no sense to ask for proof. It's like asking what the proof of gravity is.
User avatar
#142718 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
You're doing it again. I'm not going to indulge you. Goodbye.
User avatar
#142723 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
He's a troll. he actually told me he just comes here to make fun of me
User avatar
#142725 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I figured so. I argued with him once before now with the same result.

I actually think he may not be, and this is just genuinely how he strokes his ego, and he only doesn't want to admit it. It really IS depressing if this is the most someone social interaction that someone can benefit from.
User avatar
#142727 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i think he's genuine, but he uses tactics that he knows are dishonest.
#142721 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
Maybe you should realise that you invite baiting by grey-knighting.
#142709 - Yes that's all well and good. PROOF. You are…  [+] (8 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board +1
User avatar
#142711 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
It's hard to understand you when you constantly have your feet in your mouth.

I presume you aren't contesting what a cousin is, no one is that much of a moron, so I'll assume you're taking umbridge with the claim that chickens and humans have a common ancestor.

Chickens are a type of bird, yes? Birds (or Aves as a biologist would say) are descended from dinosaurs, something you probably know. Dinosaurs are obviously reptiles, and reptiles are amniotes (that is to say they lay eggs outside water). Humans are primates, which are mammals, which are also amniotes. So humans and chickens are both amniotes. From this we can understand that humans and chickens both share a common ancestor which was an amniote.

mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/1/26.full.pdf+html
According to this paper by Benton and Donoghue amniotes first arose around 312 million years ago, with the first synapsids (the ancestors of mammals) also arose around this time, making it a good estimate for the time at which the two lineages diverged.

And as we know, cousins share a common ancestor, so humans and chickens are therefore cousins, genetically speaking.
User avatar
#142713 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"He's asking for proof"
"Well we're made of chemicals so it works"
"Got proof of that?"
"You didn't bring any either..."
"I didn't claim anything"
"What did I claim?"
"Look up"
"Lol, yeah, we're made of chemicals and stuff"
"That's not, got any proof of that?"
"Oh, yeah, sure"

There's no reason to fluff yourself up, you were just being very stupid.

You're correct, I knew all of that already, and believed you the first time, you just need to learn that NOT being argumentative for the sake of your pride often does much better in efficiency and practicality than any sort of shouting match. I mean, you went through, what, three whole comment chains of mud slinging with that other guy? You can call "them thinking they're winning" sad, but you're the person who enjoys it and goads it; that's just desperate.
User avatar
#142717 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
No get it right, you have to say it properly. Come on, do it with me now, "I am a moron, and will refrain from being stupid in future".

My claim was in no way radical, it is the logical conclusion of two facts, and so it makes absolutely no sense to ask for proof. It's like asking what the proof of gravity is.
User avatar
#142718 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
You're doing it again. I'm not going to indulge you. Goodbye.
User avatar
#142723 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
He's a troll. he actually told me he just comes here to make fun of me
User avatar
#142725 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I figured so. I argued with him once before now with the same result.

I actually think he may not be, and this is just genuinely how he strokes his ego, and he only doesn't want to admit it. It really IS depressing if this is the most someone social interaction that someone can benefit from.
User avatar
#142727 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i think he's genuine, but he uses tactics that he knows are dishonest.
#142721 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
Maybe you should realise that you invite baiting by grey-knighting.
#142706 - "Say hello to your millionth cousin."  [+] (10 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board +1
User avatar
#142707 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
User avatar
#142709 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
Yes that's all well and good.

PROOF.

You are just SAYING that, what I (and likely he) are asking for is a PEER reviewed article or conclusive evidence that you can direct us to.

You are not a scientist, you can just 'say' anything you please, and no matter what you say, it is never anyone's job to look up your sources for you.

Are you doing this intentionally or are you actually just this bad at comprehension?
User avatar
#142711 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
It's hard to understand you when you constantly have your feet in your mouth.

I presume you aren't contesting what a cousin is, no one is that much of a moron, so I'll assume you're taking umbridge with the claim that chickens and humans have a common ancestor.

Chickens are a type of bird, yes? Birds (or Aves as a biologist would say) are descended from dinosaurs, something you probably know. Dinosaurs are obviously reptiles, and reptiles are amniotes (that is to say they lay eggs outside water). Humans are primates, which are mammals, which are also amniotes. So humans and chickens are both amniotes. From this we can understand that humans and chickens both share a common ancestor which was an amniote.

mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/1/26.full.pdf+html
According to this paper by Benton and Donoghue amniotes first arose around 312 million years ago, with the first synapsids (the ancestors of mammals) also arose around this time, making it a good estimate for the time at which the two lineages diverged.

And as we know, cousins share a common ancestor, so humans and chickens are therefore cousins, genetically speaking.
User avatar
#142713 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"He's asking for proof"
"Well we're made of chemicals so it works"
"Got proof of that?"
"You didn't bring any either..."
"I didn't claim anything"
"What did I claim?"
"Look up"
"Lol, yeah, we're made of chemicals and stuff"
"That's not, got any proof of that?"
"Oh, yeah, sure"

There's no reason to fluff yourself up, you were just being very stupid.

You're correct, I knew all of that already, and believed you the first time, you just need to learn that NOT being argumentative for the sake of your pride often does much better in efficiency and practicality than any sort of shouting match. I mean, you went through, what, three whole comment chains of mud slinging with that other guy? You can call "them thinking they're winning" sad, but you're the person who enjoys it and goads it; that's just desperate.
User avatar
#142717 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
No get it right, you have to say it properly. Come on, do it with me now, "I am a moron, and will refrain from being stupid in future".

My claim was in no way radical, it is the logical conclusion of two facts, and so it makes absolutely no sense to ask for proof. It's like asking what the proof of gravity is.
User avatar
#142718 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
You're doing it again. I'm not going to indulge you. Goodbye.
User avatar
#142723 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
He's a troll. he actually told me he just comes here to make fun of me
User avatar
#142725 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I figured so. I argued with him once before now with the same result.

I actually think he may not be, and this is just genuinely how he strokes his ego, and he only doesn't want to admit it. It really IS depressing if this is the most someone social interaction that someone can benefit from.
User avatar
#142727 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i think he's genuine, but he uses tactics that he knows are dishonest.
#142721 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
Maybe you should realise that you invite baiting by grey-knighting.
#142703 - I brought proof for what I claimed. I am not arguing …  [+] (12 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board +1
User avatar
#142705 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
What claim did I make, eh?
User avatar
#142706 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"Say hello to your millionth cousin."
User avatar
#142707 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
User avatar
#142709 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
Yes that's all well and good.

PROOF.

You are just SAYING that, what I (and likely he) are asking for is a PEER reviewed article or conclusive evidence that you can direct us to.

You are not a scientist, you can just 'say' anything you please, and no matter what you say, it is never anyone's job to look up your sources for you.

Are you doing this intentionally or are you actually just this bad at comprehension?
User avatar
#142711 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
It's hard to understand you when you constantly have your feet in your mouth.

I presume you aren't contesting what a cousin is, no one is that much of a moron, so I'll assume you're taking umbridge with the claim that chickens and humans have a common ancestor.

Chickens are a type of bird, yes? Birds (or Aves as a biologist would say) are descended from dinosaurs, something you probably know. Dinosaurs are obviously reptiles, and reptiles are amniotes (that is to say they lay eggs outside water). Humans are primates, which are mammals, which are also amniotes. So humans and chickens are both amniotes. From this we can understand that humans and chickens both share a common ancestor which was an amniote.

mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/1/26.full.pdf+html
According to this paper by Benton and Donoghue amniotes first arose around 312 million years ago, with the first synapsids (the ancestors of mammals) also arose around this time, making it a good estimate for the time at which the two lineages diverged.

And as we know, cousins share a common ancestor, so humans and chickens are therefore cousins, genetically speaking.
User avatar
#142713 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"He's asking for proof"
"Well we're made of chemicals so it works"
"Got proof of that?"
"You didn't bring any either..."
"I didn't claim anything"
"What did I claim?"
"Look up"
"Lol, yeah, we're made of chemicals and stuff"
"That's not, got any proof of that?"
"Oh, yeah, sure"

There's no reason to fluff yourself up, you were just being very stupid.

You're correct, I knew all of that already, and believed you the first time, you just need to learn that NOT being argumentative for the sake of your pride often does much better in efficiency and practicality than any sort of shouting match. I mean, you went through, what, three whole comment chains of mud slinging with that other guy? You can call "them thinking they're winning" sad, but you're the person who enjoys it and goads it; that's just desperate.
User avatar
#142717 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
No get it right, you have to say it properly. Come on, do it with me now, "I am a moron, and will refrain from being stupid in future".

My claim was in no way radical, it is the logical conclusion of two facts, and so it makes absolutely no sense to ask for proof. It's like asking what the proof of gravity is.
User avatar
#142718 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
You're doing it again. I'm not going to indulge you. Goodbye.
User avatar
#142723 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
He's a troll. he actually told me he just comes here to make fun of me
User avatar
#142725 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I figured so. I argued with him once before now with the same result.

I actually think he may not be, and this is just genuinely how he strokes his ego, and he only doesn't want to admit it. It really IS depressing if this is the most someone social interaction that someone can benefit from.
User avatar
#142727 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i think he's genuine, but he uses tactics that he knows are dishonest.
#142721 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
Maybe you should realise that you invite baiting by grey-knighting.
#142698 - But you're not bringing any proof to the table for that, you'r…  [+] (14 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board +1
User avatar
#142699 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
You didn't bring any proof either...

The evidence has already been presented, discussed, and a theory devised. It's your job to provide evidence to disprove the theory.
User avatar
#142703 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I brought proof for what I claimed.

I am not arguing for what he claimed.

I am arguing that YOU made a claim and thus you have an obligation to provide proof for said claim rather than telling others to go and seek it themselves.
User avatar
#142705 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
What claim did I make, eh?
User avatar
#142706 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"Say hello to your millionth cousin."
User avatar
#142707 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
User avatar
#142709 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
Yes that's all well and good.

PROOF.

You are just SAYING that, what I (and likely he) are asking for is a PEER reviewed article or conclusive evidence that you can direct us to.

You are not a scientist, you can just 'say' anything you please, and no matter what you say, it is never anyone's job to look up your sources for you.

Are you doing this intentionally or are you actually just this bad at comprehension?
User avatar
#142711 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
It's hard to understand you when you constantly have your feet in your mouth.

I presume you aren't contesting what a cousin is, no one is that much of a moron, so I'll assume you're taking umbridge with the claim that chickens and humans have a common ancestor.

Chickens are a type of bird, yes? Birds (or Aves as a biologist would say) are descended from dinosaurs, something you probably know. Dinosaurs are obviously reptiles, and reptiles are amniotes (that is to say they lay eggs outside water). Humans are primates, which are mammals, which are also amniotes. So humans and chickens are both amniotes. From this we can understand that humans and chickens both share a common ancestor which was an amniote.

mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/1/26.full.pdf+html
According to this paper by Benton and Donoghue amniotes first arose around 312 million years ago, with the first synapsids (the ancestors of mammals) also arose around this time, making it a good estimate for the time at which the two lineages diverged.

And as we know, cousins share a common ancestor, so humans and chickens are therefore cousins, genetically speaking.
User avatar
#142713 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"He's asking for proof"
"Well we're made of chemicals so it works"
"Got proof of that?"
"You didn't bring any either..."
"I didn't claim anything"
"What did I claim?"
"Look up"
"Lol, yeah, we're made of chemicals and stuff"
"That's not, got any proof of that?"
"Oh, yeah, sure"

There's no reason to fluff yourself up, you were just being very stupid.

You're correct, I knew all of that already, and believed you the first time, you just need to learn that NOT being argumentative for the sake of your pride often does much better in efficiency and practicality than any sort of shouting match. I mean, you went through, what, three whole comment chains of mud slinging with that other guy? You can call "them thinking they're winning" sad, but you're the person who enjoys it and goads it; that's just desperate.
User avatar
#142717 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
No get it right, you have to say it properly. Come on, do it with me now, "I am a moron, and will refrain from being stupid in future".

My claim was in no way radical, it is the logical conclusion of two facts, and so it makes absolutely no sense to ask for proof. It's like asking what the proof of gravity is.
User avatar
#142718 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
You're doing it again. I'm not going to indulge you. Goodbye.
User avatar
#142723 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
He's a troll. he actually told me he just comes here to make fun of me
User avatar
#142725 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I figured so. I argued with him once before now with the same result.

I actually think he may not be, and this is just genuinely how he strokes his ego, and he only doesn't want to admit it. It really IS depressing if this is the most someone social interaction that someone can benefit from.
User avatar
#142727 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i think he's genuine, but he uses tactics that he knows are dishonest.
#142721 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
Maybe you should realise that you invite baiting by grey-knighting.
#142690 - "I didn't make the truth, I…  [+] (16 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board +1
User avatar
#142693 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
I agree with the first article.
Black Pidgeon's a fucking idiot... even if you're going to be anti at least pick better rhetoric.
I agree with the third one.

If you wanted me to address you properly you could have just said so.
We are "made" of chemicals. These chemicals come together in the same predictable ways each time, that's why we're made of the same sort of stuff. In terms of genetic material, a shared creator is not sufficient to explain it, as a creator would not need to bother with genes at all.
User avatar
#142698 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
But you're not bringing any proof to the table for that, you're just saying it.

Bring links, peer reviewed articles and such.
User avatar
#142699 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
You didn't bring any proof either...

The evidence has already been presented, discussed, and a theory devised. It's your job to provide evidence to disprove the theory.
User avatar
#142703 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I brought proof for what I claimed.

I am not arguing for what he claimed.

I am arguing that YOU made a claim and thus you have an obligation to provide proof for said claim rather than telling others to go and seek it themselves.
User avatar
#142705 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
What claim did I make, eh?
User avatar
#142706 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"Say hello to your millionth cousin."
User avatar
#142707 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
User avatar
#142709 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
Yes that's all well and good.

PROOF.

You are just SAYING that, what I (and likely he) are asking for is a PEER reviewed article or conclusive evidence that you can direct us to.

You are not a scientist, you can just 'say' anything you please, and no matter what you say, it is never anyone's job to look up your sources for you.

Are you doing this intentionally or are you actually just this bad at comprehension?
User avatar
#142711 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
It's hard to understand you when you constantly have your feet in your mouth.

I presume you aren't contesting what a cousin is, no one is that much of a moron, so I'll assume you're taking umbridge with the claim that chickens and humans have a common ancestor.

Chickens are a type of bird, yes? Birds (or Aves as a biologist would say) are descended from dinosaurs, something you probably know. Dinosaurs are obviously reptiles, and reptiles are amniotes (that is to say they lay eggs outside water). Humans are primates, which are mammals, which are also amniotes. So humans and chickens are both amniotes. From this we can understand that humans and chickens both share a common ancestor which was an amniote.

mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/1/26.full.pdf+html
According to this paper by Benton and Donoghue amniotes first arose around 312 million years ago, with the first synapsids (the ancestors of mammals) also arose around this time, making it a good estimate for the time at which the two lineages diverged.

And as we know, cousins share a common ancestor, so humans and chickens are therefore cousins, genetically speaking.
User avatar
#142713 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
"He's asking for proof"
"Well we're made of chemicals so it works"
"Got proof of that?"
"You didn't bring any either..."
"I didn't claim anything"
"What did I claim?"
"Look up"
"Lol, yeah, we're made of chemicals and stuff"
"That's not, got any proof of that?"
"Oh, yeah, sure"

There's no reason to fluff yourself up, you were just being very stupid.

You're correct, I knew all of that already, and believed you the first time, you just need to learn that NOT being argumentative for the sake of your pride often does much better in efficiency and practicality than any sort of shouting match. I mean, you went through, what, three whole comment chains of mud slinging with that other guy? You can call "them thinking they're winning" sad, but you're the person who enjoys it and goads it; that's just desperate.
User avatar
#142717 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
No get it right, you have to say it properly. Come on, do it with me now, "I am a moron, and will refrain from being stupid in future".

My claim was in no way radical, it is the logical conclusion of two facts, and so it makes absolutely no sense to ask for proof. It's like asking what the proof of gravity is.
User avatar
#142718 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
You're doing it again. I'm not going to indulge you. Goodbye.
User avatar
#142723 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
He's a troll. he actually told me he just comes here to make fun of me
User avatar
#142725 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
I figured so. I argued with him once before now with the same result.

I actually think he may not be, and this is just genuinely how he strokes his ego, and he only doesn't want to admit it. It really IS depressing if this is the most someone social interaction that someone can benefit from.
User avatar
#142727 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i think he's genuine, but he uses tactics that he knows are dishonest.
#142721 - platinumaltaria (06/25/2016) [-]
Maybe you should realise that you invite baiting by grey-knighting.
#142689 - If humans were indeed made out of material from Earth, even if…  [+] (9 replies) 06/25/2016 on Religion Board 0
User avatar
#142714 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
I believe God designed all life using the same template. we are all related in a sense, but i don't believe that everything has a common ancestor
User avatar
#142716 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
Then what do you believe?
User avatar
#142720 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
I believe life was created more-or-less in its current form somewhere between 6000-10000 years ago
User avatar
#142722 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
But what of those who dispute that fact? The vast majority of them believe in their version, and without a doubt they are educated and well learned, are they not?
User avatar
#142724 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
Sure, i chalk it up to science's implementation of methodological naturalism. evolution is the only game in town, so to speak, because supernatural explanations aren't allowed in science
User avatar
#142726 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
That's true, but if you find no proof of something, isn't it 'right' to focus on the fields you have found proof for? At least mainly.
User avatar
#142728 - zlane (06/25/2016) [-]
i admit there's no scientific proof of God, what i would dispute is whether evolution has been proved. i've seen the evidence, and i think all of it can be explained under creationism. genetic similarities, for instance, would be the result of God using the same template for all life
User avatar
#142730 - captainfuckitall (06/25/2016) [-]
But what of certain lacks of proof? Such as no proof of humans or dinosaurs living together, or the Earth being older than claimed?
#142731 - zlane (06/26/2016) [-]
I don't think the evidence is all on one side here. Dinosaur bones should not have carbon-14 or soft tissue if they are millions of years old, yet they do.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065128113000020
Figure 8 "three osteocytes with fine filopodial processes which interconnect"
9 and 10 "intracellular organelle-like structures"
11 and 12 "the center of each Haversian system is populated by possible preserved blood products"
13 "hollow blood vessel emanating from Haversian canal. Blood vessels are flexible and pliable."
15 and 16 "possible blood products lining inner wall of hardened vessel"
7-19 "large oblate osteocytes lying on fibrillar bone matrix"

www.newgeology.us/presentation48.html
this group of creationists C14 dated various dinosaur bones to 22-39ka