I was just reading an article on the AiG website where a 33,000 year old tree stump was found in Permian rock. The tree stump was dated with Radiocarbon (although obviously one shouldn't be using radiocarbon dating to test a 250 million year old rock). The notes after the creationist article claims that it most certainly was not due to contamination as well as in the article itself. The author seems pretty confident that it is genuine.
As many of you know the amount of C-14 in an atom becomes unnoticeable after 50,000 years, so the rationale is why is this C-14 has not become untraceable being that the rock it was found in is supposed to be 250 million years old? Being that it was written in 1998 Talk Origins probably already has a response to it. Otherwise could this be the "Cambrian bunny rabbit" that we have been asking creationists for? Young Earth Creationists don't get too excited but this could be something that genuinely contradicts the geological record as seen by modern science.
And to my fellow old earthers who may or may not also be creationists; it is your duty to debunk this.