No, not “exactly” and far from “wild ass guess”.
So the science is settled? Sort of like global warming?
I know there was a man named Jesus that walked this earth about 2000 years ago and I believe in his death, burial, and resurrection. The age of the earth doesn’t really change that belief.
All that said, the age of the earth is still a wild ass guess. There are way too many potential variables to even guess.
By definition, science is never "settled" and always subject to change whenever new data or better ideas require that.
But "global warming" is not even science, it's politics subject to the whims of voters, media masters and super-computer projections.
Nothing "settled" about it.
Age of the Earth calculations are a different matter entirely.
They are real science and confirmed repeatedly by multiple methodologies.
More importantly nothing scientific seriously falsifies such estimates.
Of course, if you wish to assume that all of science is built on false premises, well, that's your prerogative.
boycott: "I know there was a man named Jesus that walked this earth about 2000 years ago and I believe in his death, burial, and resurrection.
The age of the earth doesn’t really change that belief."
Exactly!
No need for me to say more.
boycott: "All that said, the age of the earth is still a wild ass guess.
There are way too many potential variables to even guess."
Except that it's not and there aren't.
In fact, there are multiple -- dozens -- of scientific methodologies which confirm not only the Earth's age, but ages of various rocks & fossils and all are consistent.
Sure, scientists are human and make mistakes, sometimes, but there are no confirmed data points -- none, zero -- which seriously falsify the usual models.
Of course, if you reject science's premises, then it's conclusions necessarily make no sense.
But within it's own internal logic there really isn't that much doubt about long-standing scientific ideas.