The definition I use for the Goldilocks Zone is where the temperature of a planet is just right for water in liquid form to be present making it habitable all over it, not your definition. The rest of your post is pure conjecture.
So geologists age the earth to 4.5 billion years using the aforementioned radiometric dating. Who then is in a position to argue with them? How do you know the other fields don’t all work to this figure, which they all do, what’s miraculous about it?
Wrong. A chemical treatment was mentioned prior to heating which wasn’t explained. This only shows you cannot weigh evidence up.
Regards the non-radiometric methods stated in your link:-
Dendrology- Tree rings can be multiple annually.
Ice cores- same here as in dendrology with observed data and...
You can’t date rocks by stars and stars by rocks, that’s tautology and is the same for any dating procedure you come up with, it will all be circular reasoning.
You weren’t able to offer anything to prove radiometric dating was nothing but flawed in conversations yesterday. Yesterday, with the ‘evidence’ you provided, it was noticeable scientists thought rocks behaved like closed systems in the natural environment but when the scientists chip/knock...
It’s actually very logical when viewed with a balanced mind, with all reliable documented history and no theoretical nonsense going back millions of years.
Radiometric dating is inherently inaccurate, full of discrepancies and unreliable. Anything dated beyond 6000 years can readily be thrown out because of the flood of Noah making all dating methods corrupt.
My mind is quite balanced. You have said homo sapiens are 250,000 years old, the boom in...
“Some of the members debating” me here is an interesting term. I find the scientific evidence they purportedly have is flimsy.
FYI, I have a PhD in organic synthetic chemistry.