no, really...why do dates from different methods largely agree with each other? This goes beyond just radiometric dating, although that's enough.
There has to be an explanation for the consistency. "Unreliable" doesn't cut it. For example:
The Age of the Earth
gives examples of meteorites which were dated by either 1) different methods or 2) by multiple applications of the same method; as is nearly always the case, the dates were consistent with each other.
Regardless of whether or not you think the methods are reliable, why would they be unreliable in such a way that they all agree in the vast majority of cases? This topic was the focus of a pretty recent thread, and I don't think the featured creationist had any response beyond miracles. Can you do better?
[This message has been edited by Zhimbo, 08-11-2003]
™ Version 4.2
