The study is in the journal Human Evolution.... not a creationist source. - Perry
My question was why you posted a link to a ridiculous, dishonest article that totally misrepresented the paper rather than posting a link to the original paper. You avoid answering the question and pretend you did the opposite. Why?
I post this because it is favorable toward a worldview which I believe
Except that it isn't. The paper about mitochondrial DNA discusses the age of extant species. It points to a date of approx 200,000 years when most modern species emerged from pre-existing species. It presupposes common ancestry from an origin billions of years ago. It does nothing to support your creationist superstitions.
The rest of your post about dinosaur DNA has been answered so many times on this forum it is risible that you keep raising it without acknowledging that. The mere fact that you are still linking carbon dating with dinosaur bones proves that you have no interest in learning anything.