I'm not exactly a young-earth creationist. What I believe to be the case is that once you admit the possibility of even one cosmic catastrophe such as the flood at the time of Noah, then basically all of the assumptions which dating schemes are based on go out the window. Bob Bass once redid Lord Kelvin's heat equations for the Earth with a maximal figure for radioactive elements included in the calculation, and came up with a maximal age of about 200 million years for the planet. I have a hard time seeing how you could square that with dinosaurs being around 60 million years ago.
Fine; there's no problem then, as there is no evidence for Noah's flood at the appointed time of about 4350 years ago.
"What I believe to be the case is that once you admit the possibility of even one cosmic catastrophe such as the flood at the time of Noah, then basically all of the assumptions which dating schemes are based on go out the window."
Why ? A flood could have occured with any effect whatsoever on the fossils that were laid down millions of years before. Would a flood somehow change radioactive decay rates ?
So this Bob Bass took Lord Kelvin's numbers, which were supposed to be some sort of proof, and revised them.
Who is to say that Bob Bass neglected to consider something in his computations that would extend it by a few more decimal places ?
The author of this article uses a lot of your same arguements - do you agree with him that dinosaurs and therefor their fossils, are all younger then a few tens of thousands of years old ?
http://designeduniverse.com/th/agesofearth/