Once again, no evidence here. Quick summary: "I'm right and you're wrong." The problem is Russ, I've been giving evidence for several pages now and you don't seem to think that's required to support your position. You have so far avoided just about every question I've asked you here.

Quote
CTD has dealt with this false claim.


By saying is essence, "I don't believe it"? In your book that seems to be all the definitive evidence that's required by your side.

Quote
This is another hypothesis based on vast assumption.


I have asked you at least 3 different times in different threads to refute the evidence I've given that certain rocks form slowly and you've ignored me every time. Now you're simply telling me that I'm making assumptions. The processes that form blueschist, evaporites and limestone are not assumptions. You need to show that these can form rapidly in order to support the YEC position -- though since you now seem to be saying that the earth is old, I don't understand why you are posting and supporting videos that claim it formed 6,000 years ago.

Quote

Strawman.

I have mentioned continually that several credible men in the field have admitted that the "other" dating methods are invented. They use indexing as a target and then calibrate the other method to match the desired index.


Yet for all anyone knows who is reading, you are making this up because you have never once provided evidence that it's actually true. Fact: index fossils can help to date rock layers, and this was more the case a hundred years ago before radiometric dating methods were used. Fact: The relationships between rock layers were noted using relative means such as Steno's Laws, and early geologists also noticed that certain fossils regularly appear only in certain layers. Fact: when radiometric dating methods began to be used, they could have falsified the geologic column as it was understood but instead they verified it. You have consistently refused to deal with this point even though I've repeated it over and over. It refutes your insistence that fossils date rocks and rocks date fossils.

I think that if this discussion is going to continue, you should explain why one of the absolute dating methods that scientists use is wrong. Hard evidence please, not conspiracy theories or "I read somewhere that someone said it was wrong." Or maybe you do accept them, if you believe the earth is old, in which case I don't think there's much for us to actually debate here.