"Radiometric Dating a Christian Perspective"

Hardcore Creationism - ignore any amount of 'inconvenient' evidence, no matter how large, and dismiss every well established and justified scientific conclusion as nothing more than 'opinion'.

Job done!

The 'funny thing' is I haven't actually presented any 'subjective opinions.' I haven't presented any opinions in this OP at all, because I am not a qualified expert on the subject. What I *have* done is provide a link to an article "Radiometric Dating a Christian Perspective" written by an actual expert in radiometric dating---an article that is the basis for this OP and an article that you still have yet to read!

*There is NO point in you commenting if you're not going to actually read and take seriously the article by an expert. Don't worry about my 'opinions.' If you want to convince us of your 'subjective opinions,' then mine aren't the problem: you need to DEBUNK the article with actual EVIDENCE (not flawed analogies to computer programming).

Well, that sort of hollow claim when you are relying upon “justified scientific conclusions” as if those are anything other than conclusions.

Do you not see how "hollow" your claims are as a non-expert who so glibly dismisses an expert article as erroneous when you haven't even read the article??? Seriously, I don't know why you think that would be convincing to anyone. You just repeat the same old nonsense without ever offering EVIDENCE to debunk or support what you're saying. That's pretty much the definition of a "hollow claim."

The Emperor has no clothes!

Still haven't read the article, huh? 

And regarding your comment, have at it. You're welcome to criticize. Just provide some actual EVIDENCE for a change. That's how to convince people of something.

You blow off the things I say, then when I point out to you that you telling me the history of fossils simply by looking at them and the environment they are found in, I find it simply unconvincing. You are simply asking me to come up with another story, one that perhaps can replace the story you currently believe in, which you and or others can call factual. From my point of view that would be falling into the same error, you have taken what we see today and come up with something we cannot possibly know for sure.

There you go with your strawman arguments again, misrepresenting what I say and in the wrong forum OP. This OP is not about fossils but radiometric dating, and you still have not read the article. 

(And the scientific facts and evidence that have been established vs. your lack of facts and lack of evidence are not on equal footing. But nice try. A typical ploy by those with no evidence: you are unable to substantiate or legitimize your claims, so you unsuccessfully have to try to bring the rest down to your level. Sorry. That doesn't work without evidence)

My complaint is how far you take the very things you see as evidence, I'm not bringing anything new to the table simply telling you what the claims are with what is there may not be true due to our limitations with the past, you claiming I'm bringing strawman arguments simply is missing the points and once again going after me not the th8ings I have said, again.

Still waiting for you to read and debunk the article with evidence... anytime now