Dinosaur Blood Protein, Cells Recovered (yet more evidence for Young Earth Creation!!!)

CEH ^ | April 30, 2009

[beefree]

“Ice cores. Count the layers. 1 big layer, 1 big year, 1 small layer, 1 small year.”

This assumption doen’t account for melting/refreezing over the course of, let’s say, a single spring, having multiple icing events with intermittent periods of melting. I see no proof that each Ice layer = single year.

[beefree]

there are over 180 KNOWN craters, when you look at earth by satellite, you can see crater structures EVERYWHERE

[varmintman]

Ice core dating?? Ever see a picture of Glacer Girl??

That's the P-38 rescued from the ice sheets in Greenland a few years back, and which now flies again. According to all dogma and ice core dating theory, Glacier Girl should have been under a foot or two of ice; it was actually found under about 270' of ice.

That makes Glacier Girl an element of the Amalekite Air Force since it makes her around 3500 years old and the Amalekites were the only people with that sort of tech savvy at that time. The basic reality is that all such dating schemes are a bunch of BS.

[beefree]

Excellent, thanks for the info.

[muawiyah]

There are ways the scientists who study ice cores do it. For the most part for most of a glaciation the only problems with melt/thaw you have are at the beginning (like now) or at the end (like 15,000 years ago). Otherwise it’s pretty cold in both Antarctica and Greenland so there’s not any melting/thawing

[wendy1946]

There are ways the scientists who study ice cores do it.

By counting every snowstorm as a year??

[muawiyah]

Of course not. There are seasonal differences in dust content ~ typically you have a very long "dry season" and a short "wet season".

Think of the Arctic and Antarctic areas as being rather desert-like and it all makes sense.

[wendy1946]

Of course not.

Wrong answer apparently. Take a look at post 143 above; there's no other plausible explanation other than people counting snowstorms as years.

[muawiyah]

Having refreshed my memories of the total process by reading several hundred articles in the last few days I am confident that they come close enough using current methods to satisfy any relevant argument.

[muawiyah]

There are numerous discussions regarding why the planes were found buried under ice. Remember, snowfall is not even all over Greenland and this was in the South where it's warmer and where there's more precipitation. Further North where it's colder there's less precipitation.

If Ice builds up faster it squeeshes out the bottom that much faster.

Most likely no one has ever used that part of Greenland to drill ice cores. They'd want (and need) something more stable and not as wet.