Their responses are numbered below

Carbon dating not reliable

It does discreditThe samples of

The beginning amount is hard to find. They should not change the facts to fit the theory.

Anything beyond that is problematic and highly doubtful. Yes, Cook is right that C is forming today faster than it's decaying. If anything, the tree-ring sequence suffers far more from missing rings than from double rings.

Thus it can be demonstrated that the magnetic field of the earth has reversed itself dozens of times throughout earth history. So, in the end, external evidence reconciles with and often confirms even controversial C dates.

The samples of bone were blind samples. It does discredit the C dating of freshwater mussels, but that's about all. Unfortunately, we aren't able to reliably date artifacts beyond several thousand years. This is just one of many inaccurate dates given by Carbon dating. They have their work cut out for them, however, because radiocarbon C dating is one of the most reliable of all the radiometric dating methods.