We will deal with carbon dating first and then with the other dating methods.Carbon has unique properties that are essential for life on Earth.
This also has to be corrected for.[2] Second, the ratio of C in the atmosphere at that time to be estimated, and so partial calibration of the “clock” is possible.
Accordingly, carbon dating carefully applied to items from historical times can be useful.
So, we have a “clock” which starts ticking the moment something dies.
Obviously, this works only for things which were once living.
It cannot be used to date volcanic rocks, for example.
The rate of decay of N in 5,730 years (plus or minus 40 years).Unless this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages.Creationist researchers have suggested that dates of 35,000 - 45,000 years should be re-calibrated to the biblical date of the flood.[6] Such a re-calibration makes sense of anomalous data from carbon dating—for example, very discordant “dates” for different parts of a frozen musk ox carcass from Alaska and an inordinately slow rate of accumulation of ground sloth dung pellets in the older layers of a cave where the layers were carbon dated.[7] Also, volcanoes emit much COC.That is, they take up less than would be expected and so they test older than they really are.Furthermore, different types of plants discriminate differently.Since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism (see Noah's Flood…, How did animals get from the Ark to isolated places? ), fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give radiocarbon ages older than they really are.