More C14 in an organism's remains would theoretically make something old look younger. But the dead are not the ones ingesting the C14. So I don't think it would have any effect on what was measured in the grave yard unless the C14 was somehow put into the structure of the remains.
I am not sure how lightning causing C14 would make much difference unless when the organism was alive it was around lightning so often it had more C14 than other organisms would who were not near where lightning happened. In that case it would make the organism look older than it was....but if this is the case, I would want to know of a study that confirms it before I change my opinion about carbon dating.
What is measured is how many C14 isotopes one has compared to normal carbon atoms. The idea is that there is a certain amount of C14 us living organisms ingest from the environment as we breath and eat. But when e stop living we stop ingesting, and the C14 to regular carbon atom ratio declines as the C14 isotopes become regular carbon atoms at a curved rate of declining decay determined by their half life of around 5730 years.
Thus to estimate age one presumes that there was more or less a certain amount of C14 to carbon ratio in the environment that would come to be reflected to some degree by the organism when its alive, and then one supposes that rate of exchange stops happening when its dead, and we can estimate based on this how long ago it died.
I was 7 years old and came upon the article about radiocarbon in the World Book Encyclopedia. It had illustrations about how carbon dating works, how carbon-14 is absorbed by an organism and then the date of death can be calculated by how much remains in the skeleton.
The article also introduced me to the term "half-life". And to drive home the point it had a drawing of a human skull gradually decaying in a way that not even Wes Craven could conceive.
Interesting.
So, that suggests we should “date” voters. If they have no C14 at all, they are probably ineligible to be voting (and would be voting ‘Rat).
Carbon 14 decays into Nitrogen (14) by beta-emission (going from 6 protons, which is what really makes it Carbon in the first place, to 7 protons, which makes it Nitrogen, as one neutron gives up an electron to become a proton).
More 14C will make something seem younger, not older.
The rate of decay of any radioactive element is a constant particular to that isotope. The half-life is the time for half of what ever you started out with to decay. It doesn't matter how much it was; half will be gone. In the case of 14C, that half-life is, as you stated, around 5730 years, and does not change. This last point is just a clarification of your statement.
But your main point, that lightning isn't going to create the next Lucy, is accurate. Something alive would need to spend a lot of time in the near proximity of lightning for there to be any such effect through normal absorption. Simply isn't going to happen outside of Frankenstein's lab.