Radiometric dating of sedimentary rocks is unreliable because

In the early 1960s new data from ocean exploration led to the idea of seafloor spreading.A few years later, these and other concepts were synthesized into the model of plate tectonics, which was originally called "the new global tectonics." According to the orthodox model of plate tectonics, the earth's outer shell, or lithosphere, is divided into a number of large, rigid plates that move over a soft layer of the mantle known as the asthenosphere, and interact at their boundaries, where they converge, diverge, or slide past one another.Most reversals are estimated to take between 1,000 and 10,000 years.The latest one, the Brunhes–Matuyama reversal, occurred 780,000 years ago, and may have happened very quickly, within a human lifetime. With a half-life of only 5730 years, carbon-14 dating has nothing to do with dating the geological ages! Hovind is confusing the carbon-14 "clock" with other radiometric "clocks." The only thing in the geologic record which has anything to do with calibrating carbon-14 dating is the coal from the Carboniferous Period.

One creationist editor, who is more mellow than his unfortunate statement suggests, phrased the argument thus: Unfortunately the geologists date the rocks as the paleontologists tell them to. That passage might have come out of one of Henry Morris' books, except that Morris usually avoids crude slander. Hovind is not aware of the fact that by 1815 the broad outlines of the geologic column from Paleozoic times onward had been worked out by people who were mostly geologists.

Evidence is presented that appears to contradict continental drift, seafloor spreading and subduction, and the claim that the oceanic crust is relatively young.

The problems posed by vertical tectonic movements are reviewed, including evidence for large areas of submerged continental crust in today's oceans.

Second, creationists appeal to the Omphalos hypothesis and argue that God deceptively created the world to appear old.

This is an unfalsifiable hypothesis, and is unscientific.