Carbon dating is not flawed
The amount of Sr-87 that was already in the rock when it formed, for example, should be proportional to the amount of Sr-86 that is currently there.
Since the data are divided by the amount of Sr-86, the initial amount of Sr-87 is cancelled out in the analysis.
Such uncertainties are usually glossed over, especially when radioactive dates are communicated to the public and, more importantly, to students.
Generally, we are told that scientists have ways to analyze the object they are dating so as to eliminate the uncertainties due to unknown processes that occurred in the past. Hayes has pointed out a problem with isochrons that has, until now, not been considered.
Most likely, that is the least important source of error.However, it’s important to note that some radioactive dates (like those that come from carbon-14) don’t use the isochron method, so they aren’t affected by this particular flaw.As a young-earth creationist, I look at this issue in a different way.Most likely, the effect will be dependent on the age.I would think that the older the sample, the larger the overestimate.