Evidence for an Old Earth

Then how do you explain the fact that all the different radiometric dating methods agree with one another? A miracle? A conspiracy?No one is saying the method is perfect.

Well besides the whole geologic column, I'd have to say plate tectonics.Plate tectonics, which supports the theory of continental drift, is responsible for moving continents and making new ones, creating mountains, for most of the earthquakes and volcanoes around the globe, etc.. There is absolutely no evidence for catastropic plate tectonics, so that is not even a remote possibility.Evidence:-- rocks, as well as mineralized and petroleum systems that match up across divides;-- current movement of the plates (at about a couple cm per year);-- ocean derived sedimentary rocks at tops of mountains;-- paleomagnetism;-- intracontinental island arc and ophiolite remnants;-- tropical vegetation and fossils in todays artic regions and vice versa;-- aulocogens;-- relatively young age of the ocean floor;--overturned, folded, metamorphosed sedimentary layers.

Yes, the conspiracy.Dating helps us find mineral deposits and petroleum fields - these are industries whose sole purpose is to make money, and lots of it. Would they invest millions on a method that doesn't work? Just for the sake of evolution? No.Do you really think we sit in our offices making sure nothing is studied that might negatively affect evolution? That we make sure the dates match so that evolution looks good? What a waste of time and money. No way could you convince the hundreds of thousands of scientists all over the world to continue such a ridiculous charade - and for 200 years at that!!