There seems to be some pretty big discrepancies in carbon dating as well as what the geologic record contains.
I have not come to a conclusion yet.
Actually, carbon dating is not used to date stone. It could be used to date the handle, but I don't think anyone really disputes the recent age of the hammer.
About the rock deposits, I found these sentences in the article:
Other relatively recent implements have been found encased in by similar nodules, and can form within centuries or even decades under proper conditions (Stromberg, 2004). The hammer in question was probably dropped or discarded by a local miner or craftsman within the last few hundred years, after which dissolved limy sediment hardened into a nodule around it.Does not seem to be a very good issue with which to be supporting the young earth idea.
It's my understanding that geologist use the surrounding strata to help date their fossil finds.
[rock-encrusted hammer]
There are stalactites in the crypt under the Lincoln Memorial. Not terribly big, but growing.