Jed, The examples I enumerated are samples that appear on a scientific paper of wide circulation. Do you think these are all errors? Don't you think they would have checked for errors before publishing it? Your contention that these measured dates are errors simply do not make sense. Every measurement that does not fit your preconcieved theory must be an outlier and an instrument error. Only those that fit your theory are valid, hence carbon dating is valid.
I was challenged for proof that Carbon dating is unreliable, these are just a few I found. There are hundreds more cases of such faulty readings. Yet, you claim that all these are faulty and instrument errors. How can one discuss science in the face of such INTRACTABLE RIDICULOUSNESS? Jojo