No, so sorry but I do not subscribe to your limited view of carbon 12 vs 14 ratios not being affected by removal of vast amounts of carbon. I may have stated it akwards [or somewhat backwards] but the flood is a major consequence for carbon dating.
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ223.html#wp4866524
Tree ring data has been shown to be unreliable as the rings do not represent one year - rather simply another growth cycle - sometimes several growth cycles within 1 year.
I will grant that it is possible to get more than one growth ring in a calendar year, due to local conditions of rain and drought. I'll even go so far as to agree that IF you based all your tree ring dating on trees from one small area, you could be misled.
Unfortunately for you, the basis is spread out and cross checked from area to area, continent to continent, hemisphere to hemisphere.
If you prefer to base your entire belief system on the interpretation of one medieval man of one book, a book that was intended as a guide to mankind and his relationships with God and each other, not as a textbook on boat building, astronomy, physics and the history of every breath drawn by every person who ever lived, and is told from the viewpoint of a single tribe wandering the the desert, more power to you, I guess.