Radiocarbon dating other methods
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. 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. Also, volcanoes emit much COC.These techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in radioactive decay chains.
This will make old things look older than they really are.The strength of the Earth's magnetic field affects the amount of cosmic rays entering the atmosphere.A stronger magnetic field deflects more cosmic rays away from the Earth.Also, the Genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance.The flood buried a huge amount of carbon, which became coal, oil, etc., lowering the total C ratio in plants/animals/the atmosphere before the flood had to be lower than what it is now.
This also has to be corrected for. Second, the ratio of C in the atmosphere at that time to be estimated, and so partial calibration of the “clock” is possible.