Well to some extent maybe but it reveals a very simplistic understanding of dating techniques and of science itself.
He is one example I have offered in the past to this exact comment above: That the earth is assumed to be billions of years old cannot be considered an a-priori assumption given that this this age for the earth has only been estimated in the last 100 years.
L-amino acids are present in living organisms, while D-amino acids are formed post-mortem by racemisation.
This is a very common claim among young earth creationists and to the lay Christian sounds like common sense.
Aren’t dating mechanisms used to test the validity of other testing mechanisms?
The date on a coin is an absolute date, as are AD 1492 or 501 in which the proportion of carbon isotopes is counted directly (as contrasted with the indirect Geiger counter method) using an accelerator mass spectrometer.
The method drastically reduces the quantity of datable material required.