You may want to look at the discussion in this topic’s parent thread. This topic was forked from there as this particular question was deviating a bit from the question at hand. It does unfortunately mean that @Nareus’s post has become somewhat detached from the context in which it was posted.
The linked articles are all attempts to debunk conventional dating methods. The problem I have with young-earth attempts to debunk conventional dating methods is that they never describe them accurately. It’s quite common to see them claiming that these methods make certain “untestable” assumptions, then when you read up about how these methods are actually conducted in reality, you find out that these “untestable” assumptions have, in actual fact, been tested rigorously.