It is actually a very cool article. But there some problems:
1. Hugh Ross believes in the Big Bang. That assumption (the Big Bang is not proven) flavors everything else that comes down the line when it comes to science.
2. His commitment to the Big Bang and OEC assumptions forces him to reject the biblical claim of a global flood. The flood mentioned in Genesis is presented by the whole of Scripture as a global deluge, not as a local flood. But it is rejected by OEC proponents due to the fact that it would present a substantive challenge to the millions of years of gradual extinction of animals and the gradual accumulation of fossils being laid down over millions of years.
A global flood would have resulted in a near instant mass exinction not to mention huge amounts of sediment displacement and deposition. Naturally when faced with OECism and the Bible, you can't have both without some serious problems. So when faced with either holding to the Bible's claims or holding to an scientific assumption, the assumption wins over the truth.
When the Bible stands in conflict with scientific assumptions, the Bible becomes conveniently expendable even among those who profess to believe the Bible.
3. Hugh Ross makes the following claim:
"These demonstrations carry several important implications for the Christian faith. First, they testify to the Bible’s capacity to provide a breeding ground for scientific discoveries far into the future. Among the holy books that undergird the world’s religions, the Bible stands alone in making statements about the natural realm that were beyond the knowledge and understanding of its human authors and their contemporaries.
Second, they disprove young-earth creationism. All young-earth creation models depend upon physical laws that altered radically (by factors of a million times or more) either at the time of Adam’s sin in the Garden or Eden or at the time of Noah’s flood."
He makes a similar claim at the end of the article but doesn't support that claim with any specfics which always sends up a red flag for me. What specific laws is he referring to? He doens't say. He simply makes a blanket statement about all YEC ;models and doesn't show where his claim is true. I can only assume he is referrig to the fact that at the moment sin came into the world, death and decay entered the world as well, and that the flood of Genesis resulted in huge rapid sediment deposition and mass extinction of global animal life and rapid fossilization.