Evodates are the only type of "Lab testing" that is never done "blind". The labs are always told what results are desired.
Sorry but wrong. "Blind" tests are in reality rarely done because a) a good scientist will have some idea of the provenance of the rock sample and b) it costs a lot of money to keep trying different dating methods, hence a).
Blind tests are done as standard procedure
in ALL FIELDS of REAL SCIENCE. This is because that's SO obviously the most scientific and honest approach. Scientists in other fields aren't all idiots; they know what they're expecting in most cases, and many of their tests have costs as well.
This practice is unprecedented and inexcusable. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why it's done the way it is; on the contrary, it takes a willfully naive victim to believe it has any merit at all.
But that isn't to say that you couldn't go on a blind date if you wanted to.
Oh? And you know this how?
If you were really interested in finding the age of a sample with no prior information,
It's not a matter of prior information for other (real) sciences.
you do it with several methods and you do them on individual minerals separated from the rocks.
False. Different methods are used for different kinds of rock. You can't use
several evodating methods on
any sample.
Then if the methods agree you almost certainly have a good date.
Mighty big 'if', and even then, it's only really good if the assumptions are good.
I find myself having to repeat the same thing as always: don't criticise things you don't understand. Don't you think that's a sensible rule of thumb?
Oh? Like you criticizing creation models?
I understand what talkdeceptions & the other Atheism ? Us websites have to say. I've read some other sources as well. Have you?
Like, cherry-picking articles from scientific journals on nuclear physics for words like "inaccurate" and "discrepancy", when the people who wrote those articles and those who reviewed them for the journals know a little more about the topic than you?
What are you saying? Do you suggest my links say anything other than what I claim they say? I suggest you scroll up and review my claims. Had you not jibber-jabbered and tried to discuss everything
but the pertinent issue, you'd likely remember.
