You’d be best off reading the material for yourself.
The book is “The Young Earth” by (geology PhD) Dr John Morris.
I looked up something for your answer last night, and it involved dating an igneous layer in the Grand Canyon. They used various methods and multiple times per method. The Potassium-Argon decay measurement, taken 6 times, yielded results from 10,000 yrs to 17 million years. Remember, these are in the same layer, which according to uniformitarian assumptions, should all be approx the same age. On the other end of the spectrum of measurements were the lead-lead isotope decay that yielded a 1.16 billion year age.
No use arguing with me over these data, because I didn’t do the tests or write the analysis. Read it for yourself and judge for yourself.
What I can say is that all the measurements were done under the same isotope decay assumptions of uniform rate, initial state, and absence of leaching.
The "talking points" surrounding it appear to be focused on the argument that whatever fossils are within the same layer would be of the same age, and trying to cast doubt on that assertion by using radiometric dating of the rock.
As I said earlier, volcanos are not nuclear fusion engines. Whatever fossils might be embedded in that layer would have been created relatively concurrent with the volcanic event that created the layer, according to "uniformitarianism" (and Occam's Razor). The elements within the rock were not created by that volcanic event, they were merely deposited there by the event.
Did they do any uranium decay analysis at all?