Using geological strata to date the fossils within is imprecise at best, so I would likely agree with them. There are now better ways to establish the age of a sample. I would disagree with the notion that fossil-dating is a "lie" -- it was actually the best available technology at the time it was being used.
The problem is that fossilization replaces the organic molecules of the dead organism with inorganic minerals. Essentially, nothing is left of the deceased organism, but a rocks in the shape of its bones. Dating the geological strata where the fossil was found is an important clue, but the best dates are obtained from non-fossilized samples. For example, from the carbon isotope ratio of the charcoal of cooking fires found with the ancient remains, or from the magnetic orientations of local iron ore samples.
I'm guessing that you embrace the young-Earth hypothesis, and imagine you can discredit the science which supports the old-Earth motion. That "ship" sank centuries ago. Believe whatever you wish, but know there really is no valid evidence to support that impossible notion.