[tacticalogic]

If any of the assumptions I stated were taken individually, sure, you could still say that this specific assumption, by itself, cannot account for the apparent age of the sample,

but all the assumptions are in effect in every age determination.

The assumptions are consistent with the observed physical properties of the radioisotopes. The calculated time spans are based on observed decay rates. An assumption of a maximum age of 6,000 years requires an assumption of a decay rate that has never been observed.

[MrB]

Conversely, variations in these assumptions do not allow for “billions” of years, either.

So, if the earth is a “mere” “millions of years old”,
what of the magic evolutionary requirement of TIME?

[editor-surveyor]

>> “An assumption of a maximum age of 6,000 years requires an assumption of a decay rate that has never been observed.” <<

.
No, it merely requires a more reasonable assumption of the original distribution of the elements that would better match the requirements of life on Earth.