Is carbon dating accuracy or not
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.
(They conveniently forget to mention that the tree ring chronology was arranged by C14 dating.
The scientists who were trying to build the chronology found the tree rings so ambiguous that they could not decide which rings matched which (using the bristlecone pine).
Dates up to this point in history are well documented for C14 calibration.
For object over 4,000 years old the method becomes very unreliable for the following reason: Objects older then 4,000 years run into a problem in that there are few if any known artifacts to be used as the standard.
So they tested some of the ring sequences by C14 to put the sequences in the 'right' order.
Archaeologist Sturt Manning and colleagues have revealed variations in the radiocarbon cycle at certain periods of time, affecting frequently cited standards used in archaeological and historical research relevant to the southern Levant region, which includes Israel, southern Jordan and Egypt.
In fact, 14C is forming FASTER than the observed decay rate.
This skews the 'real' answer to a much younger age.
You can find some further good information here: -- read the full page if you get the chance.
Radiocarbon dating is a key tool archaeologists use to determine the age of plants and objects made with organic material.