The problem with radiometric decay dating, as I see it, is the assumption that the rate of decay remains constant over time. On another subject, maybe the dinosaurs went extinct because the Earth's gavity increased. That was also a time of very large insects.
1950s era crackpot "science" was known as rubbish back then, and has gained nothing with passage of decades.
Do we really need to go through a detailed debunking of such nonsense here, and now?
captain_dave: "The problem with radiometric decay dating, as I see it, is the assumption that the rate of decay remains constant over time."
Agreed, that's an assumption, no known way to observe it as fact.
However, it's important to note that no confirmed evidence falsifies the assumption, and we do have dozens of different methods for dating ancient material.
Done correctly, these methods all produce consistent results confirming the basic assumption of uniformity of processes over Deep Time.
Of course we do know that not everything was the same "way back when".
For example, we know that billions of years ago the Earth rotated much faster than it does today, so that a day then would be only, say, ten hours today.
But there's nothing to imply that time itself has changed, or that radiometric decay rates are different now than they were.
captain_dave: "On another subject, maybe the dinosaurs went extinct because the Earth's gavity increased."
I've also seen that suggested here before, but it sounds like wild speculation unsupported by serious evidence.
So I'd leave it "out there" as a remote possibility, pending more reliable data & analysis.
That Earth's size might increase over time -- billions of years -- due to impacts of asteroids, comets, meteors & smaller space-junk seems somewhat possible.
The rate & total amount of increases are not established, to my knowledge.