Radio carbon dating inaccuracies
We believe all the dates over 5,000 years are really compressible into the next 2,000 years back to creation.
Robert Whitelaw has done a very good job illustrating this theory using about 30,000 dates published in Radio Carbon over the last 40 years.But it is already clear that the carbon method of dating will have to be recalibrated and corrected in some cases.Scientists at the Lamont-Doherty Geological Laboratory of Columbia University at Palisades, N..pass_color_to_child_links a.u-inline.u-margin-left--xs.u-margin-right--sm.u-padding-left--xs.u-padding-right--xs.u-absolute.u-absolute--center.u-width--100.u-flex-align-self--center.u-flex-justify--between.u-serif-font-main--regular.js-wf-loaded .u-serif-font-main--regular.amp-page .u-serif-font-main--regular.u-border-radius--ellipse.u-hover-bg--black-transparent.web_page .u-hover-bg--black-transparent:hover. Content Header .feed_item_answer_user.js-wf-loaded . After all, this what the archeologist guessed in their published books.
Some believe trees are known to be as old as 9,000 years. A lot of people doubt this claim for various good reasons I wont go into here.
One of the impressive points Whitewall makes is the conspicuous absence of dates between 4,500 and 5,000 years ago illustrating a great catastrophe killing off plant and animal life world wide (the flood of Noah)!
I hope this helps your understanding of carbon dating.
Despite this she continually uses the c14 dates to create 'absolute' chronologies.
She says this is ok so long as you take into account the correction factors from dendrochronology.
Dates up to this point in history are well documented for C14 calibration.