his document discusses the way radiometric dating and stratigraphic principles are used to establish the conventional geological time scale.
Imagine that throughout your life youve taken many pictures. Certain groups of fossil animals and plants occur in the geologic record in a specific order.
Rather than putting them into a photo album they are stacked up in a box. If a scientist finds one of those fossils, they can then assume the age of the rock based on the age of the fossil.
Geochronologists do not claim that radiometric dating is foolproof (no scientific method is), but it does work reliably for most samples.
It is these highly consistent and reliable samples, rather than the tricky ones, that have to be falsified for "young Earth" theories to have any scientific plausibility, not to mention the need to falsify huge amounts of evidence from other techniques.
The example used here contrasts sharply with the way conventional scientific dating methods are characterized by some critics (for example, refer to discussion in "Common Creationist Criticisms of Mainstream Dating Methods" in the Age of the Earth FAQ and Isochron Dating FAQ).
A common form of criticism is to cite geologically complicated situations where the application of radiometric dating is very challenging.
The laws of physics and chemistry that governed geologic processes in the past are the same as those that govern processes now and in the future.
The geologic timescale is a chronology (calendar) of events on Earth based on obtaining ages of past events.
The process of putting things in a "correct order" based on experience is called relative dating.
Relative dating is determining whether an object is older or younger than other objects or events.
It doesnt give an exact age but a relative (or comparison) age. Each layer will be successively younger or more recent. Superposition is the principle that says younger rocks lie above older rocks in an undisturbed sequence.