and we all know how 'accurate' carbon dating is- Heck there are any number of different dating methods that are more accurate and disprove carbon dating. Not to mention we have modern examples of instant pertification that when tested show falsly long dates. but oh well-
I asked you to support your contention and you have not. You have only repeated oft-refuted talking points from creationist websites.
I challenge you to show me any accepted scientific dating method that disproves radiocarbon dating to the extent that the earth is on the close order of 6000 years rather than >50,000 years (the upper limit of the radiocarbon method).
In the meantime, here are some excellent links that will provide you with real information about radiocarbon dating, not the distortions, fabrications, and wishful thinking found on creationist websites:
ReligiousTolerance.org Carbon-14 Dating (C-14): Beliefs of New-Earth CreationistsThe American Scientific Affiliation: Science in Christian Perspective Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
This site, BiblicalChronologist.org has a series of good articles on radiocarbon dating.
Are tree-ring chronologies reliable? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
Tree Ring and C14 DatingHow does the radiocarbon dating method work? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
How precise is radiocarbon dating?
Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?
Has radiocarbon dating been invalidated by unreasonable results?
Radiocarbon WEB-info Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Waikato, New Zealand.
-and we all know how 'accurate' carbon dating is- Heck there are any number of different dating methods that are more accurate and disprove carbon dating.--
Put your facts where your mouth is.
I don't suppose you have a link for that would you??