I went to the link you posted. There I read the section titled How Accurate Is Radiocarbon Dating? because that is a field I actually know something about.
The article is loaded with the standard creationist nonsense.
Why should I believe any of the rest of Dr. Brown's writing if the one article I can actually judge the accuracy of is so full of errors?
Is he hoping people won't know the difference?
Sorry, another example of creation "science" failing to include real science.
Was I talking to you?