Christian speed dating on long island
The unsuspecting reader would assume that here is a real disaster which geochronologists were trying to cover up with some phoney explanation!
In fact, the 34-billion-year figure is the result of an incompetent reading of the data, an attempt by Woodmorappe to see an isochron where none exists!
The interpretation that the data represent a 34-billion-year isochron is solely Woodmorappe's  and is patently wrong.
(Dalrymple, 1984, pp.78-79) Whatever the reasons may be for the scatter, the fact remains that these data were clearly a "discard" case.
Eat one of those and your tummy will curl right up!
He is very good at showing the many ways that things can go wrong; he has not shown that things normally go wrong.
To be sure, Woodmorappe isn't claiming that his table is a normal sample of radiometric dates. However, in order to make his case against radiometric dating he must, at the very least, show a high percentage of bad dates among the credible radiometric candidates.
How different it would be if the mechanic pulled out a statistical study done by a consumer magazine to show that the particular make and year for the lady's car was unreliable, due to certain parts, after so many miles.
That kind of balanced statistical study is the very thing Woodmorappe's paper lacks. The idea of experimental dating is to see whether a given radiometric method can be applied to certain materials or under certain conditions.
This cannot be done by merely citing the numerous ways in which one can get a bad date; nor is it achieved by concentrating on atypical cases.