Creationist view on absolute dating
With all that was said about the assumptions behind the measurements, about non-linear forcing functions (like an expected pulse of non-radioactive carbon at the time of the Flood), and add the two prior comments about the demonstrably changing magnetic field strength of the earth, and I submit there is a lot more "art" than "fact" when generating such dates.
They even miss the flood when it is staring them in the face.
They also brought up the question of "old wood" (the fact that any wood used in an archaeological context must have been growing prior to when it was harvested), which affects my point #3, and warned against using organic material from an aquatic context, corroborating my point #2. Carbon dates can be used to tell the age of organic materials up to around 50,000 years.
And uncalibrated dates are usually only off by less than 20%. (1952) Radiocarbon dating, University of Chicago Press.
Paul, Sadly, I could not include the URL in your reply, but the article you cited was interesting nonetheless. Olsson (Ed.), Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, Proc.
However, the "plateau" certainly does not equate to the Flood, for that would put the Flood in the middle of Egyptian history, the archaeological evidence of which is sitting on top of kilometers of Flood-deposited sediments.