this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
1252 points (92.5% liked)

Science Memes

10970 readers
2120 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hope@lemmy.world 313 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (28 children)

Not to argue for creationism, but this argument sucks. Lead can be produced by supernova, not just through decay of heavier elements. But even that's besides the point, since if you believe some entity created the universe, surely said entity could have created whatever ratio of lead to uranium they wanted. It's not a falsifiable claim, there's really no disproving it, unfortunately.

(Not so fun fact: the environmental impact of leaded gasoline was discovered by trying to estimate the age of the earth using the radio of lead to uranium in uranium deposits, but the pollution from leaded gasoline was throwing the measurements off.)

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 67 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (10 children)

Also this doesn’t say anything about the Earth.

Plus you can give a liberal reading of the bible to be:

  1. god created the heaven and the earth. God created the heavenly bodies.
  2. God created the sky - earths atmosphere and climate
  3. God separates oceans - creates continental forms, and plant based life
  4. God creates the moon and sun and stars. This one seems out of order to me… maybe just the earth and solar system stabilize. I don’t know how plants exist without the sun, so maybe it’s microbes or something.
  5. God creates birds and sea creatures. Maybe birds are dinosaurs.
  6. God creates modern land animals, then creates man and woman. That makes sense, mankind is certainly new with only a few hundred thousand years of records before civilization starts.

That doesn’t have to imply the earth is 4000 years old. Even the original wording could be read as eon instead of day.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 39 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

The Bible is a couple thousand chapters long. The creation story is the first two chapters. It's pretty obviously only attempting to establish that God created the universe in some ambiguous way and move on with the story. That doesn't stop people from inferring all sorts of things from what is essentially a poem.

[–] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago

It's literally a poem in the original language.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] PaintedSnail@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This is why you can never disprove creationism sufficiently to convince a young Earth creationist. The hypothesis is unfalsifiable.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TaTTe@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

Also I'm amazed by how people don't seem to understand what half-life is. It's not the time it takes for an atom to decay. It's the time it takes for half of the atoms to decay, meaning there will be some U-238 that decay into Ra-226 in just a couple of seconds.

So even if the Earth was created 4000 years ago with uranium but not lead (for some weird reason), some of that lead would have decayed into lead by now.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] MicrowavedTea@infosec.pub 143 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Pretty sure the point of creationism is that everything was put on the earth when it was created, including fossils etc. You can't argue this with logic. My favorite spin off of this is Last Thursdayism where the earth was created last Thursday (regardless of what day it's now) which basically uses the same argument.

[–] Ddub@lemmy.ca 53 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

That does explain why I can never get the hang of Thursdays

[–] Thorry84@feddit.nl 21 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

And the fun scientific counterpart of the Boltzmann brain. The idea that in an infinite universe (at least in a couple of the spatial dimensions if not also a time dimension) random fluctuations could combine to form your brain. Including all of your memories, thoughts, hopes and dreams. You think you have had an entire life, but in reality your brain was just formed moments ago. And it may possibly stop existing in a few more moments, this moment being the only one the brain has actually experienced.

When taken to its natural conclusion, the entire Earth of even the solar system or galaxy might have just been created by random chance. The perfect storm of randomness. It may have been created longer ago or just nanoseconds before now. There is no way of telling.

Thermodynamics has been used to counter and strengthen this idea. And with infinity on the table anything goes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

“God did it to trick you” is pretty hard to disprove

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nialv7@lemmy.world 103 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

this argument isn't going to work on someone who believes god created said lead... and also, pretty sure not all lead was created from nuclear decay.

i get dunk on people feels satisfying, but this is just bad science communication through and through

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I had a conversation with a woman who strongly believed God put the dinosaur bones there to test our faith.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rockerface@lemm.ee 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Some lead might have been created from supernova fusion, probably. I'm not actually sure if it's the right isotope or if lead even has radioactive isotopes that we know of

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 85 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (21 children)

Technically this could all be true even if the universe were created 4000 years ago. As somebody says in Robert Heinlein's novel Job: A Comedy of Justice, "Yes, the universe is billions of years old, but it was created 4000 years ago. It was created old." (approximate quote from memory)

I absolutely agree with science, but strictly speaking we can't know for sure the universe isn't the creation of some superbeing operating outside of it - or it could even be a simulation.

[–] nickhammes@lemmy.world 76 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

We can't prove that the world we live in wasn't created last Thursday, with our memories, the growth rings in trees, and so on created by a (near) omnipotent trickster to deceive us. But science and rationality give us tools for determining what's worth taking seriously, and sorting out the reasonable, but unconfirmed, claims from the unverifiable hogwash.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

We can't know anything with 100% certainty. We can always imagine some razzle-dazzle, imagined scenario to counter the rational explanation if we like.

The point of the scientific method and logical reasoning is to pick the explanation with the most evidence.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] LilDumpy@lemmy.world 77 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Real question: Is the decay of uranium the only natural way to produce lead? If so TIL.

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 116 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

you can also lead by example

[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Instructions unclear. Got diagnosed with lead poisoning

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nougat@fedia.io 38 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Iron is the heaviest element capable of being created inside stars, via fusion. Once iron is fused, the star begins to rapidly collapse.

Elements heavier than iron (28) are the result of supernova explosions, which produce energies high enough to create these heavier atoms. It is further possible, as described in the image, for very heavy elements to decay into lighter more stable elements, those still being heavier than iron.

Lead is 82.

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 30 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That's what I learned in school, but there's been some research since suggesting stars produces significant quantities of elements up to lead during their lifetimes, even though it's a net energy loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-process

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gork@lemm.ee 31 points 2 weeks ago

No. Nucleosynthesis of lead within stars generated from supernovae make up the bulk of the existing lead on Earth. Uranium decay does provide some additional lead inventory but would be fairly small in comparison.

But the presence of it in the first place within second generation stars proves that lead is billions of years old.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 65 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

unfortunately i don’t believe in uranium or numbers higher than 200, so this argument doesn’t work on me

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 63 points 2 weeks ago (14 children)

When I was being raised as a young earth creationist, the earth was supposedly 12,000-20,000 years old. Then it was 10,000 years old. Then only 6,000. After I outgrew that nonsense, I joked that in a few decades YECs would say that their god created the earth in 1980, and anyone older than 40 are agents of the devil sent to test your faith.

[–] gnutrino@programming.dev 29 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Of course, the universe was actually created in 1970 and anyone claiming to be older than 54 is an agent of Microsoft sent to test your faith in Unix.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] sweetpotato@lemmy.ml 59 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

I genuinely don't understand how uranium can exist a priori in this argument but lead not? I might be missing something.

[–] Pazuzu@midwest.social 47 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

The original post only gave half the explanation. It's not that lead exists in general, it's that lead exists within zircon crystals.

Under normal circumstances that would be impossible, zircon crystals strongly reject lead atoms as they form. There's no way to stuff lead into the crystal lattice in the quantity we find them there. But uranium and zircon go together just fine, we just have to wait for it to decay into lead. The trouble is it takes ~4.5 billion years for just half of those uranium atoms to turn into lead. So any zircon crystal we find with half as much lead as uranium must be roughly that old

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 56 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Yeah, this is broken because all lead did not have to come from polonium, that's how half-lives work.

It's still 100% bullshit in every way, someone just needs to have chatgpt4 sort out the current mass fraction to explain why, I'm way too lazy to argue against insanity.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ClassifiedPancake@discuss.tchncs.de 54 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

You can throw as much science at them as you want. God could have just created everything in whatever state he wanted to. Same thing with the virgin mary discussion. Who cares if it makes sense scientifically, god can just make a fertilized egg appear. How lame would god be if he could not do that? This is the basis christians start from, so why even bother trying to debate that?

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

But could he heat up a burrito so hot that even he could not eat it?

If not, that's pretty weak. But if so, also pretty weak.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 53 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

the answer completely disregards the fact that people who even remotely understand how these things work wouldn't believe stupid shit in the first place. there are so many ways for this guy to just dismiss this.

how would you even know, you can't have studied these for billions of years

who says lead only can exist in this manner

what if this is true but god also made lead along with the earth

etc etc... this is very weak if the goal is really try to convince this guy to look into some things rather than smell your own farts.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] yarr@feddit.nl 51 points 2 weeks ago (11 children)

Here's the bad faith argument:

At the moment of creation, God placed some partially decayed metals on the planet to fool the non-believers.

This is basically why the existence of dinosaur bones doesn't bother them either -- they just hand-wave it away.

[–] matt1126@feddit.uk 15 points 2 weeks ago

Hehe bad faith

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 37 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I assume someone saying this is a creationist and can just say god created Earth already with the lead in it. Therefore it is a pointless discussion.

[–] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Which raises the question of why he would create a planet with the illusion of age and send you to hell for falling for his own trick.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NegativeLookBehind@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Lol, look at this guy, trying to use science and facts to disprove my fairytale. What a joke!

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, No amount of evidence will cut through the fog of wilful ignorance here.

[–] Linsensuppe@feddit.org 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

Can someone explain to me why lead HAS to come from another element? Why cant it just… exist?

[–] LouSlash@szmer.info 15 points 2 weeks ago

Because it needs a...

... leader

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] T156@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The problem with that argument is that it falls into the Last Thursdayist problem.

It could just as well be argued that the lead was created instantly in that state, or mid-decay.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bobmighty@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago

Engagement bait.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 25 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (9 children)

I'm not even sure how you get to 4000 years old from biblical literalisim.

Edit: going strictly by the biblical account, Adam lived to 930 years, and Noah 950. IIRC, their lives did not overlap. Jesus lived 2000 years ago. A whole bunch of stuff happens in between Noah and Jesus. So even if you're working strictly from the bible, how the hell do you get 4000 years?

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 22 points 2 weeks ago

So even if you’re working strictly from the bible, how the hell do you get 4000 years?

You can't. The "Young Earth" people are morons.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] cogitase@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Lead 204 is entirely primordial and the other isotopes found on earth would be found at roughly the same concentration were all of the lead on earth primordial. It's the excess ratios of the other isotopes of lead that can be attributed to radioactive decay. That is a substantial proportion of the lead on earth, but to say the "existence of lead" is proof of the age of the earth is entirely incorrect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_lead

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FreakinSteve@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

All young Earth creationist should be exiled to a remote desert island to die

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] kitnaht@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I mean, the existence of lead doesn't necessarily prove the age of the earth so much as that those elements have existed for that long.

HOWEVER -- you're basically guaranteed to find lead in uranium deposits found around the earth, and the ratio of lead/uranium is how we calculated the 4.6 billion years.

Uranium is formed in Neutron stars or Supernova, so at the very least - the uranium found on earth itself is 4.6 billion years old. Whether "Earth" was "Earth" back then, who knows. This could be pre-moon? Could be before the earth even cooled down to have a solid outer layer? So the estimate is bound to be off by a little...

Just not by 4.5 billion years.

I'm pretty sure just soap has been around for more than 4.5k years and that means civilization too. So even if you do some backflips in justification here, there's no way you get 4k.

[–] Mercuri@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

I typically use the fact that there are trees older than 4000 years old based on tree ring data. Or that there are stars in the sky further than 4000 light years away that we can see in the sky.

That usually makes them say something like how their God created an world that was already aged. So I usually counter with the fact that would make their God a lier and deceiver.

Some hold firm and say God did it to test faith. Others back pedal and try to blame it on Satan. That Satan scattered all this false evidence just to make us question the notion that Earth is 4000 years old to make people lose faith in God. And then I have to laugh at how stupid their argument is and how weak their God is. Naturally no amount of evidence or logic will make them change their belief.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Object@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago

Is this even a real tweet? If it is, why even bother trying to recreate it in paint?

load more comments
view more: next ›