Is carbon dating really reliable
As the name suggests, fossil fuel is old, and no longer contains C14.
Both of these man-made changes are a nuisance to carbon dating.
If you hear of a living tree being dated as a thousand years old, that is not necessarily an example of an incorrect dating. Wood taken from the innermost ring really is as old as the tree. We can date things for which historians know a "right answer".
And, we can date things that have been dated by some other method.
We know (from other measurements) that the Sun hasn't fluctuated by more than 10 percent in the last million years.
However, even this small an adjustment was a bit of a shock.
It is sometimes possible to match up tree-ring patterns between different trees.
When enough suitable trees are found, living or dead, the matching is completely accurate.
Also, humans are now burning large amounts of "fossil fuel".
On the Web, you could visit a dating laboratory, visit a dating service, read an encyclopedia entry or read a critique.
The Lake Suigetsu varve calibration was reported by ABC News and was published: Atmospheric Radiocarbon Calibration to 45,000 yr B.
The C14 will undergo radioactive decay, and after 5730 years, half of it will be gone. So, if we find such a body, the amount of C14 in it will tell us how long ago it was alive. The method doesn't work on things which didn't get their carbon from the air.
This leaves out aquatic creatures, since their carbon might (for example) come from dissolved carbonate rock.