I already told you webmaster what data I think is questionable.
All the extrapolated data. If you didn't understand what that meant then you should have asked instead of accusing me of whining.
I never regard extrapolated data as evidence, not when it is used for Creation nor for evolution.
I have said often enough that there is no evidence for evolution, just indications. What is so inconsistent about that???
Talking about inconsistencies: Part of your data is from the tree ring record. Look at the bottom of http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/vw_hyperexchange/largest_erups.html
Tree rings give an unbroken record back more than 11,000 years [Becker and Kromer 1993; Becker et al. 1991; Stuiver et al. 1986].
But you claim that the earth is only 6000 years old???