let me give you another SCIENTIFIC source, Radiometric dating deception, www.cs.unc.edu
This leads you to "Department of Computer Science of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill" - and that is a relevant scientific source. So we don't see anything about "Radiometric Dating Deception" on it. But if you dig deeper, you'll find David Plaisted, Ph.D., a professor of the department. Has he published an article about the "Radiometric Dating Deception"? Not according to his list of his publications... But, alas, on the private part of his site, unlinked, is the article sleeper quoted: "Radiometric Dating Deception". A small sample:
The geological column has too little erosion to allow for such long time periods. Also, there is too little sediment on the sea floor for the oceans to have existed for hundreds of millions of years, and the continents would have worn away many times in this time period at current rates of erosion. Just the fact that there are so many fossils shows that the great sedimentary deposits on earth had to have formed rapidly, because well-preserved fossils do not form under conditions of gradual sedimentation.
He even dishes out "Quotations about Small Evolution", including this:
Stephen Jay Gould, a well-known evolutionist and professor of geology and paleontology at Harvard University, has stated, "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of the branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils."Where to start, oh, where to start....
Natural selection has nothing to do with the farse of macro evolution, which does not exist anywhere.