Couldn't the fossils be millions of years old, but because they are preserved they appear more recent? If so, that would explain soft tissue blood cells. So it could still be millions of years old. This doesnt explain carbon14 decay to nitrogen, which estimates its age to 10's of 1000's years old. Carbon dating is pretty reliable I believe.

This has to mean dinosaurs still lived within million years ago.

I don't see what's at dispute? It seems clear dinosaurs didnt die 65mill years ago. How do they still defend this old hypothesis? What am I missing?