False. Radiocarbon depends on the half-life of C-14; by the time you get to 50,000 years, the signal to noise ratio makes normal techniques inadequate. (There are a few labs experimenting with better methods which may permit analysis of older samples, but those are not commonly used.)
Archaeologists know this, and take it into account. "Evos" don't often use radiocarbon dating. They use other forms of radiometric dating that are suitable for older specimens and specimens that contain no carbon.
Please read the links I provided upthread.
all of which have hteir own problems as I hspowed in the links I provided- and all throwing out evidences that contradict their preconceived ideas- Carbon dating is not accurate even to 50,000 as I said due to events unknown to those doing hte testing- As I stated- previous notions of coal and subsequent tersting showed it to supposedly be millions of years old- the fact is that catastrophic events throw that whole concept on it's head