I love TalkOrigins.org :
HST did get one thing correct. The site that ran the tests said, at that time, they could not date any sample younger than 2 million years.
There have been a few hypotheses on how Austin got such bad results. The number one hypothesis is that there was atmospheric contamination of the sample. He also noted that there were phenocrysts in the rock meaning it should not be dated by this method for a young rock ever.
Today they can get the date off of individual crystals. That means they can date the phenocrysts separate from that of the matrix that old the rock together.
The lab did not have the equipment to measure samples less that 2 million years old. The lab ADMITTED they did not have the equipment to do K-Ar dating for a shorter period than that.