creationist tried to tell me embrology doesn't support evolution.

[popeyespappy]

I’ll just leave this here for you Statler.

Radiometric Dating A Christian Perspective

Why are you being so intellectually lazy by linking to an article you’ve never read? Surely you know that Dr. Wiens never answers my question in that article (although he does admit that the empirically measured diffusion rates of Helium contradict the deep time model); so I will ask it again. Radiometric dating requires that the decay rate of Uranium is uniform for the entirety of Earth’s history; if it is not uniform the method is rendered useless, so how do you know the decay rate has remained uniform? I see no reason for holding that assumption and therefore I cannot accept the method as scientifically valid.

Sorry Stat but it looks you should have read the article before calling the kettle black. Doctor Wiens does address your concerns in his article starting on page 19 in the section titled Can We Really Believe the Dating Systems?. The essence of his argument is that there are basically only two variables in radiometric dating. Those variables are half life and time. The half life of the many radioactive isotopes used in radiometric dating are all different yet they all yield similar age ranges when materials are tested. That only leaves time. I don't remember you arguing anything about anyone playing with time.

Furthermore your statement, "Radiometric dating requires that the decay rate of Uranium is uniform for the entirety of Earth’s history" is incorrect. There are many methods of radiometric dating. Most of them don't require uranium. Once again, all of them yield similar results. Of course you would have know that had you bothered to read the article.