These techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in radioactive decay chains.For example, potassium-40 decays to argon-40; uranium-238 decays to lead-206 via other elements like radium; uranium-235 decays to lead-207; rubidium-87 decays to strontium-87; etc.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.
problems with radioisotope dating - Bible and radiocarbon dating
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 is the “half-life.” So, in two half-lives, or 11,460 years, only one-quarter of that in living organisms at present, then it has a theoretical age of 11,460 years.
Anything over about 50,000 years old, should theoretically have no detectable C.
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.
In summary, the carbon-14 method, when corrected for the effects of the flood, can give useful results, but needs to be applied carefully.
Familiar to us as the black substance in charred wood, as diamonds, and the graphite in “lead” pencils, carbon comes in several forms, or isotopes.
One rare form has atoms that are 14 times as heavy as hydrogen atoms: carbon-14, or C ratio gets smaller.
It does not give dates of millions of years and when corrected properly fits well with the biblical flood.
There are various other radiometric dating methods used today to give ages of millions or billions of years for rocks.
Also, the Genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance.