Creationist radiocarbon dating
So a stronger magnetic field in the past would have reduced the influx of cosmic rays.
This in turn would have reduced the amount of radiocarbon produced in the atmosphere.
If this is true, the earth’s magnetic field would have been much stronger at the time of the Flood, and the carbon-14 levels would be significantly smaller.
So if you mistakenly assume that the radiocarbon levels in the atmosphere and biosphere have always been the same as they are today, you would erroneously estimate much older dates for early human artifacts, such as post-Babel wooden statuettes in Egypt.
So the radiocarbon “puzzle” can be solved, but only in the biblical framework for earth history.
Research is therefore underway to find a means of recalibrating the radiocarbon “clock” to properly account for the Flood and its impact on dates for the post-Flood period to the present.
Now if this model of the earth’s past radiocarbon inventory is correct, then a logical prediction follows.
For example, conventional radiocarbon dating gives an age of “48,000 years” for a coal bed deposited during the Flood, about 4,350 years ago.
This could be explained if the C ratio at the time of the Flood was only 1/200th the ratio of the present world.
Since all pre-Flood plants would have had the same low radiocarbon levels when they were buried, and they all formed into coal beds during that single Flood year, then those coal beds should all have the same low radiocarbon content. Samples from coal beds around the United States, ranging from Eocene to Pennsylvanian deposits, supposedly 40–320 million years old, all contain the same low radiocarbon levels equivalent to “ages” of 48,000–50,000 years.9 This makes sense only if these coal beds were all formed out of pre-Flood plants during the year-long Flood, about 4,350 years ago.
Carbon-14 dates of the same value are expected in creation theory but contrary to the expectations of conventional old-earth theory.