First, watch this video by C0nc0rdance.
Secondly, read up a little on the debate between the advocates of the Modified High Chronology (Mazar, Bruins, van Der Plicht), independent researchers (Sharon 2001, Boaretto 2005, Sharon 2007), and Israel Finkelstein (here). For some understanding of terms, click the “Chronology” tab at the top of this blog.
Notice how relevant C0nc0rdance’s video is to this debate. Most samples in question in these debates either have a high margin of uncertainty, cross the calibration curve twice (cf. Rehov results), or, as in the case of Dor, obviously wrong in quite a few instances.
This is why I suggest using the following as “gold standards” of establishing chronology by means of radiocarbon dating:
a. A large amount of consistent and unambiguous samples from single-period sites such as ‘Atar Haroa.
b. A large amount of consistent and roughly correct dates from a stratified site (the best example for the Iron I would be Ekron).