A question for YEC and/or the extremely devout?

Don't know how many of them I might find here...
But, here goes.

I was told once by a YEC that an object being submirsed in water will render any and all carbon-dating results invalid.

Some quotes from the "Institute of Creation Research" about carbon-dating:

Quote:

Some organic materials do give radiocarbon ages in excess of 50,000 "radiocarbon years." However, it is important to distinguish between "radiocarbon years" and calendar years

Quote:

Since no reliable historically dated artifacts exist which are older than 5,000 years, it has not been possible to determine the relationship of radiocarbon years to calendar years for objects which yield dates of tens of thousands of radiocarbon years. Thus, it is possible (and, given the Flood, probable) that materials which give radiocarbon dates of tens of thousands of radiocarbon years could have true ages of many fewer calendar years.

From Rational Wiki:

Quote:

Experiments show that with conditions mimicking natural forces, oil forms quickly; it does not need millions of years, consistent with an age of thousands of years.

Quote:

Thick, tightly bent strata without sign of melting or fracturing. The Grand Canyon indicates rapid folding before the sediments had time to solidify (the sand grains were not elongated under stress as would be expected if the rock had hardened). This wipes out hundreds of millions of years of time and is consistent with extremely rapid formation during the biblical Flood.

I could keep going.

So, my simple question is this: At what point do you start accepting science, the scientific method and the results of the scientific method?

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1lihffl