Fossils can be carbon dated
Fossils can not be carbon dated because they no longer contain organic material to be dated. Because of your statement the ToE assumes that you don't actually know what a fossil is.
and they are only assumed to be older by the theory of evolution
The ToE assumes nothing of the sort. The ToE states that a process of natural selection and compounding of random copying errors of are sufficient to explain the observed biodiversity. Observations do indicate that the processes of diversification aren't in any hurry, but it's not assumed.
Observations also indicate the the processes of fossilization aren't in any hurry either. But the ToE doesn't even assume fossils yet alone how long they take to form.
which you have chosen to put your faith in.
Not quite. I, if I may be so bold as to assume I know more me about than do you, do not accept evolution as a reflection of reality by not knowing about it. I pulled my head out, examined the evidence and arguments, and found them to be undeniable. "Faith" is a belief unsupported by evidence which you, if I may be so bold as to assume I know more about you than do you, rationalize after the fact.
Furthermore, do you really think a machine that counts
14C atoms gets differing values dependant upon the assumptions of its operator? How does the machine know the assumptions of the operator? Does the operator tell the machine or does the machine sense them somehow?
Your claim that 50k years not being long enough to fossilize a dead animal is unscientific.
Is so.
Suffice to say - since admittedly you're not serious about any of this - that when a fish lies in water and is dead and is rotting the first thing that happens is the ligament attaching the head rots away and the head drops off.
So if I were to take your fantasies seriously the ligament attaching the fish's head wouldn't rot away and the head wouldn't fall off. Why wouldn't it?
Sometimes you have perfect fossils of fish which are eating another fish even.
This fish died in the process of giving the smaller fish a purple-nurple with its tail.
Seriously, there isn't any other possible explanation. Superposition isn't something that just happens. Oh sure, if one looks at dozens and dozens of fish fossils maybe it can happen once. What are the odds of that; like, 24:1?
If you enter [IMG]image address[/IMG] you'll get the image on your page instead of the address.
Oh! And welcome to EvC. Hope you like taking a beating.
You are now a million miles away from where you were in space-time when you started reading this sentence.