bill, whether or not you approve of my use of words, does not directly affect the argument since I explained the basis of my use of those words. my argument is that evolutionists are so devoted to their doctrine [ at least in the core teaching ] that formerly accepted experimental science is set aside in the hope that some discovery will change the science. I call that a faith position , even if you do object to that.
using upper case to your assertion that the dating interpretations are so accurate does not make it so, though I presume you did so because you want to stress the importance of the argument. but this acclaimed accuracy/consistency is the question at hand that you seem to view as crucial. do you deny that scientists have come up with different readings using different methods and interpretation of the data ?.
if you do deny it, I can give examples. if you don't, your argument loses something, or you have to say that someone got it wrong....but which, and why. maybe, not properly applied ? . trouble is, a lot of that dating was done at highly regarded labs.
maybe there is some other option than the foregoing, but I cant think what at present.
btw, when I use "imo" it is not to add authority, but an admission that I might be missing something in the argument.

I hear you, ed. it would be another discussion as to why I trust the bible as opposed to some other account of creation. just debating that there was a creation as opposed to a big bang out of nothing is time consuming enough for now!

I was quite aware , stu, of the contested belief that little robin was a dino many moons past.
so, are you saying that they are getting at how science has formerly been mistaken about how long soft tissue can last......or still hoping to come up with something to evidence its endurance ?
that is, other than we "know" they were 65+myo and therefore the current experimental science must need revising to accommodate the "discovery"

steve, must admit your little joke at my expense was funny.
makes a change from your wordy assertions.