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.
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 also has to be corrected for. Second, the ratio of C in the atmosphere at that time to be estimated, and so partial calibration of the “clock” is possible.
Accordingly, carbon dating carefully applied to items from historical times can be useful.
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.
So, we have a “clock” which starts ticking the moment something dies.
Obviously, this works only for things which were once living.
However, even with such historical calibration, archaeologists do not regard C produced and therefore dating the system.
The amount of cosmic rays reaching the Earth varies with the sun's activity, and with the Earth's passage through magnetic clouds as the solar system travels around the Milky Way galaxy.
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.