I'll grant it's possible for a given sample to have formed with all the necessary daughter elements in the mix to give a false representation of age, but it's irrational to believe that they all did.
If the Earth is, at most, a few million years old, then we shouldn't be finding Uranium ore with more than a few million years worth of accumulation of the daughter elements, but we consistently find it with accumulations indicating a much longer period of decay.
I'll grant it's possible for a given sample to have formed with all the necessary daughter elements in the mix to give a false representation of age, but it's irrational to believe that they all did.
If the Earth is, at most, a few million years old, then we shouldn't be finding Uranium ore with more than a few million years worth of accumulation of the daughter elements, but we consistently find it with accumulations indicating a much longer period of decay.
If the Earth actually arose from swirling masses of solar material 4B years ago as we read in our public school Earth science books, then why are there any heavy metals anywhere near the surface at all? Shouldn't they be at or near the planet's core??
There are two possibilities: Either heavy metals arrived here via impact events or they were formed here by plasma-physics style events (electrical arc discharges between Earth and other bodies), either way they have not been sitting around here for billions of years.