Tree dating activity
So the carbon ‘date’ is used to constrain just which match is acceptable.
Consequently, the calibration is a circular process and the tree ring chronology extension is also a circular process that is dependent on assumptions about the carbon dating system.
However, when the interpretation of scientific data contradicts the true history of the world as revealed in the Bible, then it’s the interpretation of the data that is at fault.
It’s important to remember that we have limited data, and new discoveries have often overturned previous ‘hard facts’.
As a tree physiologist I would say that evidence of false rings in surely counts much more strongly against such the notion. Considering that the immediate post-Flood world would have been wetter with less contrasting seasons until the Ice Age waned (see Q&A: Ice Age), many extra growth rings would have been produced in the Bristlecone pines (even though extra rings are not produced today because of the seasonal extremes).
Dendrochronology is useful for determining the precise age of samples, especially those that are too recent for radiocarbon dating, which always produces a range rather than an exact date, to be very accurate.
However, for a precise date of the death of the tree a full sample to the edge is needed, which most trimmed timber will not provide.
The extended tree ring chronologies are far from absolute, in spite of the popular hype.
To illustrate this we only have to consider the publication and subsequent withdrawal of two European tree-ring chronologies.