You meant to say: What has been reported, on occasion, is that..."
Sure, no method is fool-proof, all are subject to errors depending on circumstances.
When several methods -- including indexing fossils -- can be used to produce similar results, then the data is more reliable.
This is especially true when the ages of those "indexing fossils" were confirmed by several different radio-metric methods.
But those who use all this to argue that therefore the Earth is only 6,000 years old, are in no sense being scientific.
“But those who use all this to argue that therefore the Earth is only 6,000 years old, are ...”
...being silly. God is not bound by time. Whatever methods he used to bring all this about could take as much or as little time as He pleased.
After you get past the fact that God created the heavens and the Earth, all that is seen and unseen, what does it matter whether He did it in the twinkling of an eye or billions of years?
When you say that God created Adam from dirt, are you really excluding the possibility that He used a method that is in complete congruence with what science has discovered about the origins of the universe and our planet?
I’ve been toying with a spectulation—and that’s all it is, just idle speculation—that when God breathed life into Adam, that is, when He ensouled humanity, it might have been just after the big die-off after Toba.
Maybe the dieback served to eliminate some genes He didn’t want in homo sap.
Again, just idle speculation for the purpose of amusing myself.