I'm home, but tired....

Even before I read Stu's post just above, Pete, I had copied this part of your comments:
"what is your evidence that it was not laid down within a year?"

That is both answerable, as Stu has done, and is in another sense the wrong question. Without giving the technical answers Stu provided, it is simply the case that ALL scientific evidence points toward a very long timescale and layered deposition. Asking those of us who follow where scientific evidence leads to show YOU all that evidence is redundant. Every post about the relevant evidence for several years here is "our evidence".

   The point is- YOU and those you follow have made the assertion that the vast majority of science is careless, misled, badly interpreted or just plain lazy and predisposed to ignore the 'inspired' teachings of the bible. YOU have claimed that all that 'stuff' was " was laid down within a year" or some other short period. That is the claim that disputes the standard theories, but when asked for YOUR proof, all we get is rationalized criticisms of OUR evidence. You continuously refer to 'gaps' and 'possible errors in measurement' of radioactive decay as if lack of precise, to the second, calculations therefore casts doubt on the entire system and suggests that YOUR choice, based of much less less precise data, is 'just as good a choice', That ain't how it works. Science is **NOT** faith based. That is your awkward defense in order to preserve your admitted basis of faith in your position. Saying "well, you evolutionists do the same thing" is simply unfair and inaccurate.
Faith in a religious position is what it is... and it leads where it leads... but just because that is how YOU think, it is not reasonable to assume that is how WE think.

Think about it .... no, wait... what am I asking?