No, science is about finding the answers NOT having all the answers from the start which is what you are basically saying.
I've never said it's inviolate. It is, however, way more accurate than you'd like to believe. And it's rather noteworthy IMO that you didn't/couldn't provide any evidence that "a considerable body" or "most of archaeology" considered radiocarbon dating to be in error. Overstepped yourself, didn't you?