I'd go hear this doctor out and ask why he stopped resurfacing, but I'd still have one.
My hips are almost two years old. I talked to both resurf and THR docs. One THR doc did make a persuasive case for the procedure, telling me about newer, longer lasting devices and better surgical techniques. Best of all, he told me I could run post op. THR is a better option than it was six years ago.
However, it still suffers from a few basic defects. First, you lose more bone and when it's gone, it's gone. Second, as a result, your hip won't feel as natural. (There is a study out there comparing the gaits of resurf and THR patients, and resurf patients move more naturally and feel better about their hips).Also as a result, the stresses of movement will go into your femur differently, causing you to LOSE bone with a THR and GAIN bone with a resurf. Pat just posted a clip about this, a McMinn presentation at ISTA. I am no expert, not an engineer nor a doctor, but I wonder if this would cause a greater likelihood of aseptic loosening, of the device coming loose from the bone. Even if your device can last fifty years, if it comes loose from your bone, you will need a revision.
On the side of having the THR, I'd argue that if you have problems someday, finding a THR revision specialist will likely be easier. Plenty of docs do THRs and those devices are abundant. Resurfs? The number of docs doing the procedure has decreased so it will likely be tougher to find a doctor who could revise you if needed.
I'd be curious when this doctor stopped resurfacing and how long he did it. There are some recent studies that show extremely good results of resurfacing FWIW. (The clip referenced earlier. Also Dr Gross has a recent study of dysplastic women, the hardest group to get right, with great results.)
Good luck. I am sure you will pick the best option for you.