But it takes a LOT of pull to publish any story that goes against mainstream logic.

While the basis of carbon dating is actually pretty legit, it's based on the assumption that the ratio of radioactive & nonradioactive carbons in the atmosphere always remained constant over time. Since this ratio is definitely not constant, especially changing quite a bit around 30,000 yeas ago, revisions in carbon dating methods are a must. I'd love to hear a middle school kid explain it!!