When I first got involved in the creationism/evolution controversy, back in early 1995, I looked around for an article or book that explained radiometric dating in a way that nonscientists could understand. Young-Earth creationists -- that is, creationists who believe that Earth is no more than 10,000 years old -- are fond of attacking radiometric dating methods as being full of inaccuracies and riddled with sources of error. All these methods point to Earth being very, very old -- several billions of years old.
When they die, they cease to consume them, and the isotope of C-14 begins to revert back to its Nitrogen state at an exponential rate due to its radioactive decay. Other things I've read, also referring to that general time period, have said it is /- 200 years.The defeat and massacre at London realy happened, but there is no outside source for the heads being thrown into the Walbrook."No matter how 'useful' it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not capable of yielding accurate and reliable results.There are gross discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually selected dates.