[rjsimmon]

It is not a foolish argument but one that needs explaining to those who do not understand the scientific method and simply take a scientists word for it since they hold a PhD.

I have worked with myriad PhDs from a variety of disciplines and all have their opinion on radiometric dating.

Indeed there are lots of ways to measure aging, but not one single method is without serious flaws that need mitigating, or at the very least require a great deal of explaination.

Trees are a poor example because they can be observed, rings are also considered a mere guideline to age, not actual age since environmental factors can modify the ring. Radiometric dating allows for no such variable and is flawed in this respect. A prime example is the dating of igneous rock being dated from recent volcanic activity. One could hardly debate the age of such a rock if it is taken from a lava flow. However, radiometric dating puts its age at hundreds of thousands to millions of years old.

Using the example of watching the forest for the trees, you fall into the same logical fallicy as the scientific community that says a fossil is 650 MYO because the rock around it is 650 MYO, and they date the rock at 650 MYO because the fossil is 650 MYO.

[Rebel_Ace]

"...Trees are a poor example because they can be observed..."

Trees are an excellent example. Trees are simply EASIER to observe than ATOMS, since trees are so big. You brought up OBSERVATION of Thorium decay. The implication was that no one has sat and watched a SINGLE Thorium atom decay, and as such, the figure for it's Half Life could not be trusted. No one has sat and watched a single tree grow for 4000 years either. The AGE of existing trees are INFERRED by observing OTHER TREES during their life cycle.

Similarly, the HALF LIFE of atomic isotopes is INFERRED by observing OTHER ATOMS during their life (decay) cycles. We don't watch ONE Thorium atom, we watch a ZILLION at once.

The PRINCIPLE is exactly the same.

There are MANY things that take longer than a human lifespan to complete. The orbit of Pluto for example. In fact, since it has been discovered, NO ONE has sat and watched Pluto completely orbit the Sun. Should I call into question the calculated orbital period?