Here are a couple of stories from the internet that show the problems scientists have with their assumptions of an old earth. They have trouble even with what should be obvious.
Stone circle in Scotland not nearly as old as archaeologists thought
Stone circle in Scotland not nearly as old as archaeologists thought
Archaeologists in Scotland have acknowledged that a stone circle they identified as 3,500 to 4,500 years old earlier this month is actually a replica of ancient circles and was built by a farmer in the 1990s. "It shows the human side of the job a little bit," said Neil Ackerman, an archaeologist with the Aberdeenshire Council, about the misidentification.
LiveScience (1/21) 
This story is so obvious that the fossil can not be millions of years old. Soft tissue could last maybe a few hundred years but not a hundred million. Why can't they see what is right in front of them?
Well-preserved hagfish fossil dates back 100M years
A well-preserved fossil of a hagfish that lived 100 million years ago has been found in Lebanon with soft tissue present, according to findings published online in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The find offers evidence that hagfish had their slime-producing defense mechanism back then, and it also helps scientists better figure out where the creature fits in among fish.
LiveScience (1/21) 