I posted (among other subjects) a point of the unreliability of radio carbon dating a number of months ago.
Radio carbon dating isn't used to determine the age of the Earth.
The original argument that is still being used today is the geological column.
William Smith first used the similarity of fossils to construct detailed geologic maps across wide areas. He used fossils to map and correlate rock layers and constructed the first geologic map of England and Wales in 1815.
By 1885 the finer divisions of the column had been identified based on the principles established by Steno, Smith, and Lyell. These ideas were also beginning to impact the study of biology, and Lyell’s long-age ideas played a major role in Darwin’s development of the theory of biological evolution over vast geologic eras.
It was "assumed" that by identifying the order of fossil succession, the layers could be correlated from one region to the next. Index fossils are still one of the major indicators of the age of a given layer. Shelled creatures such as ammonites and mollusks are the most commonly used index fossils.
Another problem with index fossils is that, rather than being proof of evolution, evolution was already assumed to have occurred. The changes in features in index fossils of different periods are assumed to be caused by evolution, and the presence of different organisms in different periods is then used to support biological evolution. This is a case of using an assumption to prove the assumption is true—circular reasoning by any measure.
Misconception: The strata systems of the geologic column are worldwide in their occurrence with each strata system being present below any point on the earth's surface.
The notion that the earth's crust has on "onion skin" structure with successive layers containing all strata systems distributed on a global scale is not according to the facts. Data from continents and ocean basins show that the ten geologic column systems are poorly represented on a global scale.
Misconception: Tectonic plate shift caused mixing of geologic column levels
If tectonic plates pressed together (quickly or slowly) the massive rock movement would grind any fossil into dust. Instead of finding a mixing of geologic column levels a complete loss of the fossil record would result.
Misconception: The geologic column and the positions of fossils within the geologic column provide proof of amoeba-to-man evolution. Nowhere on earth has a "missing Link" between lower forms and more developed forms ever been found. If inter-developmental species missing links) existed the earth should be over run with them. For almost 200 years those who believe in evolution have searched for missing link existence. They should be as plentiful as the fossils we, so often, find.
This is very interesting, thanx.
There are a few known things I would like to point out and a few of my own thoughts on geological evolution.
In no order to your comment...
There is evidence and observation that proves tectonic plate movement occurs.
GPS monitoring shows movement (about the same rate of movement that fingernails grow).
Geological events occur at points described thru tectonic plate movement.
Subduction zones and lift zones produce mountain rise, volcanoes and earthquakes.
We have mapped out subduction and lift zones and monitor their movement.
Tectonic plates do not equally move as units.
The unequal movement in some plates cause different fossil columns at different parts of a single plate.
That is how rocks dated to 3.8 billion years can still be at the surface on some plates.
This is because the plates shift as a whole while also subducting and rising.
Thus, we have past and future super-continent formations.
If you look at the tree of life representation, evolution does not occur equally either. There are branches that separate the taxonomy.
Homo sapiens did not evolve directly from amoeba. Amoeba evolved from their own taxonomy branch.
The root of life on this planet is not even aerobic.
Life started out as anaerobic and mutated when iron started to rust.
Iron started to rust because the anaerobic life which dominated the planet exhaled oxygen.
As the atmosphere gained more oxygen the anaerobic life started to mutate to aerobic (breathing oxygen). Some chose to bury itself under the surface to escape the oxygen. This is why there are still anaerobic lifeforms present today. For one easy example, look at the lifeforms that dominate black smokers.
A final consideration worth mentioning is that people have only been looking at the fossil record for a rather short period of time and only at the fossil record that still exists.
Life on this planet is 3.8 billion years in the making.
We haven't discovered many species that existed that just didn't fossilize. The "missing link" could be missing for any number of reasons of which 'never existed' is but one.
There may be millions of 'missing' links that can never be found because no fossil evidence occurred. Fossilization doesn't occur with every organism at all times.
The "link's" evolutionary mutation might have occurred in too few of generations for it to be distinguishable.
Evolutionary mutation that occurs in a few 10s of millions of years is insignificant to 3.8 billion years. Hell, humans are barely 2 million years old and we have evolved since then, and are still evolving.
Every human being in the last 2 million years is not preserved as a fossil.