This is the problem. You think that there actually are 'dozens of ways to accurately date things'. There are not.
Those 'dozens of ways to accurately date things' are interpretations built on assumptions that are extrapolated back into an unobserved past. Until you recognize this fundamental point, you will continue to blindly accept whatever you are told.
Written records are recorded observations and are a different class of evidence than interpretations built on assumptions that have been extrapolated.
The 'abilities' of Homo Erectus are not of the same type of evidence as written observations. They are interpretations built on assumptions and are based more on imagination than anything else.
That is the fundamental difference between them and written records and why it should be clear that you should be very skeptical of what anyone tells you happened 'millions of years ago'.
Tree rings are assumptions? I really don't get the sense that you know what you're talking about.
The 'abilities' of Homo Erectus are not of the same type of evidence as written observations.
I don't know what that sentence is supposed to mean. Abilities?