quote:
John Paul writes:
What I am saying is that even if the earth was formed recently doesn't mean all the materials that went into that formation had to be formed recently or that those materials were not subject to some process that "aged" them.
Some process, eh? Such as?
quote:
John Paul:
And you can take it on faith that those methods are relieble because that would be all you have- faith.
Nope. There is evidence that they work. You may choose to deny the evidence, but that is of no consequence.
quote:
We do not even know what causes atoms to be unstable and decay.
I'm not so sure about that. Nevertheless, we can measure the rate of decay and there is no known mechanism by which that rate can be changed so that you can turn a Ga date to a Ka date.
quote:
What we do is to measure what daughter product(s) and parent product(s) are in a sample and derive an "age" from that.
Funny how that works out isn't it? Do you have an explanation for concordant dates yet?
And, of course, your explanation of radiometric dating is so oversimplified that you clearly don't have any idea what you are talking about. It reminds me of your in-depth analysis of the fossil record: 'billions of animals died and were buried.' REally brilliant stuff!
™ Version 4.2
