inasero said:
I've already posted about the inconsistency of radiometric dating...but that debate would go on and on.
haha what type of radiometric dating?
uranium-lead
potassium-argon
argon-argon
rubidium-strontium
Samarium-Neodymium
Lutetium-Hafnium
Rhenium-Osmium
you probably thought there was only carbon 14, lol
a quick google for
problems with radiometric dating gives you plenty of creationist articles fabricating problems with carbon-14 dating to claim the earth is 'thousands, not millions' of years old (well it isn't millions anyway, it's 4.7 billion, LOL)
when they don't even realise carbon dating only works for about 50,000 so no one would ever have used it to estimate the age of Earth anyway
the funny thing is the creationists don't even know the other methods exist
by the way, the second is
defined as the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation of a caesium 133 atom... so I hope you don't have a watch, lol