"..., that the presence of soft tissue does not suggest 65+ myo."

Oh exactly so... it does not! Dating of the surrounding strata & the bones themselves by several independent methods suggest the date. Soft tissue is a very unusual thing to find in things dated that old.... which is why they worked so long & hard to find a reasonable explanation that was consistent.
Ah... but you, Pete have already determined that they were only inventing silly sorts of 'science' to validate their faulty conclusions. You should write them a letter explaining how the Bible makes all their work a waste of time & resources.

(Ummm... I don't offer an argument because I have given the scientific argument for the various dating procedures several times. Just as I know YOUR basic explanation for biblical answers without you having to mention it in every post.)