[fortheDeclaration]

You seem to believe that radiocarbon dating is wrong

And you seem to be setting up strawman.

I never said that radiocarbon dating is wrong, but that it is only accurate up to 3,500 years.

If you are getting any higher numbers, it is because your evolutionary assumptions are wrong.

[ColdWater]

>>I never said that radiocarbon dating is wrong, but that it is only accurate up to 3,500 years. If you are getting any higher numbers, it is because your evolutionary assumptions are wrong.<<

What about all these other methods that yield answers greater than 6000 years?

argon-argon (Ar-Ar)
fission track dating
helium (He-He)
iodine-xenon (I-Xe)
lanthanum-barium (La-Ba)
lead-lead (Pb-Pb)
lutetium-hafnium (Lu-Hf)
neon-neon (Ne-Ne)
optically stimulated luminescence dating
potassium-argon (K-Ar)
rhenium-osmium (Re-Os)
rubidium-strontium (Rb-Sr)
samarium-neodymium (Sm-Nd)
uranium-lead (U-Pb)
uranium-lead-helium (U-Pb-He)
uranium-thorium (U-Th)
uranium-uranium (U-U)

[mad_as_he$$]

Well ftD this one doesn't use carbon dating. Now what:

UWO researcher finds what may be oldest fossil on Earth Tue, May 29, 2007 By JOHN MINER, SUN MEDIA A team led by a University of Western Ontario scientist has discovered direct evidence there was life on Earth 3.35 billion years ago UWO geologist Neil Banerjee and his team found fossilized tunnels of microbes in ancient rock from Australia. The find was dated by scientists at the University of Alberta using a newly developed laser-dating method. “This is very strong evidence,” Banerjee said. The discovery pushes the fossil evidence of life back to the early period of the Earth’s development. Scientist believe the earth is 4.5 billion years old. With the discovery of the early fossil remains, scientists may be able to pinpoint where to look for life on Mars, said Banerjee.