They've found a variety of elephant species, not just mammoths. As to whether they look exactly like today's elephants is beside the point. There could have been species that went extinct 6000 years ago in the flood, or even after the flood for that matter. They wouldn't have to look exactly like today's species. Creationist believe a certain amount of evolution occurs, just not the massive transformations that Darwinian dogma alleges. Plus God probably created more than one variety of elephants from the start.
she keeps saying that the fossils were just amazingly preserved fossils from fifty million years ago
Of course she keeps saying that. What else is she going to say? She's an evolutionist.
According to this,
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i4/dogma.asp
they don't directly date fossils, but the rocks around them.
This gives an example of how games are played with radioactive dating. It is circular.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0816dating-game.asp
As I said before, mineralization, your first argument, doesn't seem to be a dating method at all.
This discusses the rate at which fossils form under flood conditions:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/cfol/ch3-how-fast.asp
Only what the evidence supports.
That is science.
Contorting the evidence so it supports what you already supposedly ‘know’ about Biblical floods and ‘kinds’ is not science, it is apologetics.
So evolution only happens after great floods, where it happens at thousands of times the pace ever proposed by evolutionary biology, but only within set limits that have never been defined.
So what is going to stop a 2% genetic DNA difference between humans and chimps after six million years if creatures are capable of much greater changes after only six thousand?