I don't know about that Sun pictures hoax story but I have Navvaro's book and it does not read like it was written by a hoaxer. If the only "evidence" of a hoax is the radio carbon dating, that's not very good. That dating method could be faulty in some cases as with the Shroud of Turin where a fire in midevil times gave it a false reading. The radiocarbon dating was taken from a sample that was added and was not from the original cloth. Anyways, there are other scientific ways of knowing the age of wood that are true. From Navarra's book; " Two traits may serve as a base for calculation, with all the margin for error proper in this case to ascertain the poassible age of the wood examined: the density and the color.
The density of the sample seems to have a value of 1.100, and as the normal density of this wood is between 0.800 and 0.850, it is evident that this sample is in the lignitization phase of fossilization.
The color, which tells unquestionably the raised percentage of tannin normal in oak wood, confirms on its part its previous state.
Consequently, one can suppose the age of the wood sample given varies around five thousand years"....Dr. J. Jimenez Herrera, director of Forestry Institute of Research and Experiments, Madrid april 9, 1956.
So the wood was in a stage of fossilization. Add to that that there are no trees anywhere near where Navarra found the beams and it makes a pretty compelling case.
No, the wood was covered in teriyaki sauce and other things to make it look really old. The whole Sun pictures thing and Navarra was a big hoax. Google it, lots of info.