Ice Core Chronology

[CabVet]

Not in any way is that remotely related to the truth. My refusal to deny history and reality beyond last week, that has abundant evidences and witnesses is nothing like you making up stuff.

Last week or 6,000 years ago makes absolutely no difference. Both are fantasies. Unless of course you are saying that God is not capable of creating a world with embedded memory and history last Thursday.

 

[dad]

Last week or 6,000 years ago makes absolutely no difference.

It makes all the difference in the world. Where people have observed and records and evidence are available make all the difference.

Unless of course you are saying that God is not capable of creating a world with embedded memory and history last Thursday.

No, He is not capable of lying.

 

[CabVet]

It makes all the difference in the world. Where people have observed and records and evidence are available make all the difference.

No, He is not capable of lying.

Observations and records are memories, that is all. Creating a world with embedded history is not lying.

 

[Cromulent]

I find it insulting that Dad denies the power of the Creator to implant memories and create "evidence", while still saying that his "god" can change the laws of physics at will. You should respect my beliefs Dad. They are the truth.

 

[dad]

Observations and records are memories, that is all. Creating a world with embedded history is not lying.

I don't say that anything is embedded. Strawman.

 

[dad]

I find it insulting that Dad denies the power of the Creator to implant memories and create "evidence", while still saying that his "god" can change the laws of physics at will. ..

Free will is not about insane memory implants or anal probes. Get a grip.

 

[Cromulent]

Free will is not about insane memory implants or anal probes. Get a grip.

Where did I mention anal probes? I think it is you who needs to get a grip. You're the one who keps talking about the laws of physics changing 6000 years ago, when it should be obvious that if the world was only created last Thursday, the entire concept of "6000 years ago" is risible.

 

[dad]

Where did I mention anal probes?

You didn't. But the alien abduction folks do. They also share your memory implant fears and claims.

I think it is you who needs to get a grip. You're the one who keps talking about the laws of physics changing 6000 years ago,

No. I suggest that our laws came to exist, and whatever different laws that were here are what changed. That was likely closer to 4500 years ago.

when it should be obvious that if the world was only created last Thursday, the entire concept of "6000 years ago" is risible.

So you don't believe in your own mother?? I assume you were born after last week?

 

[RickG]

Up to a certain point. One can't for example just look at how much radioactivity a whole sample has and kind of average it out or some such.

Again, the reason I started this thread is for people to ask questions about information that can be derived about past climates through ice cores. So please ask questions before making judgements.

The post you are responding to has nothing to do with radioactivity, this is about stable isotopes. Stable isotopes are not radioactive, therefore do not decay.

So, now we need to look at ice that is on the bottom of the pile...name some useful ions or visual features etc that is 'useful'?

Please read the post to which you are commenting, I named a number of useful ions and described some of their uses. Robustness and verification of ice core profiles is also reflected in deep ocean sediment cores, speleothems and boreholes. Boreholes are especially useful in that like ice cores, they are reflecting real-time data.

The important thing to understand is that this information does not rely on just a few samples, but many samples from many independent methods and many independent sources as well. This is how past climates (paleoclimates) are derived, verified and understood. This is very important in understanding how today's anthropogenic influence with respect to heat content of the atmosphere and oceans and what may be expected in the future based on business as usual scenarios.

Thanks for asking the question.

 

[dad]

Again, the reason I started this thread is for people to ask questions about information that can be derived about past climates through ice cores. So please ask questions before making judgements.

The post you are responding to has nothing to do with radioactivity, this is about stable isotopes. Stable isotopes are not radioactive, therefore do not decay.

OK, so why would they matter? In what way do you think they help your case?? Where are they, in the ice? Try to be clear here.

Please read the post to which you are commenting, I named a number of useful ions and described some of their uses. Robustness and verification of ice core profiles is also reflected in deep ocean sediment cores, speleothems and boreholes. Boreholes are especially useful in that like ice cores, they are reflecting real-time data.

So what use is any given ion in an ice core? Let's look at just one. Give it your best shot here. I am losing patience.

The important thing to understand is that this information does not rely on just a few samples, but many samples from many independent methods and many independent sources as well.

I would assume that all ice is in our present state and so....???? This is news? How would this help you in any way??

This is how past climates (paleoclimates) are derived, verified and understood.

"This" meaning...??? what?? Ions in ice? Name one and why it must be present state caused?

This is very important in understanding how today's anthropogenic influence with respect to heat content of the atmosphere and oceans and what may be expected in the future based on business as usual scenarios.

"This" Is??? great. Now all you have to do is tell us what "this" is supposed to mean! "That" would be very important to your claims.

Thanks for asking the question.

No sweat. Just to be clear what was the question?

 

[RickG]

RickG: One of the cornerstones of ice core research is of course the ratio of oxygen isotopes trapped in the ice. The ratio of heavy and light oxygen (d 18O/16O) is temperature dependent, thus two important sets of data can be extracted for this.

In this state, yes. However, how would we know if that was true before we can prove this state existed?

This occurs through fractionation which is temperature dependent. The stable isotope 18-O is heaver than 16-O. As temperature decreases more O-18 fractionates from the atmosphere; therefore yielding oscillating ratios of the two representing summer and winter. So within each oscillation we not only can see each season and annual marker, but the ratios of the isotopes also reveals the surface temperature at the time of their accumulation. Neat huh!

 

[RickG]

RickG: So, each summer and winter will be seen as an oscillation, revealing both summer and winter in each annual layer.

That is the process that now produces certain things, yes. But that cannot be used all the way back beyond where we know our laws did exist. (which in real time I guess was likely about 4500 years)

As previously stated, ice cores capture what was in the atmosphere at the time of its deposition. It is real time information. If anything had changed, that change would be easily seen. consequently, there is no change seen. All annual layer chemistry, physics, and physical conditions before 4500 years ago are the same as today.

 

[dad]

This occurs through fractionation which is temperature dependent. The stable isotope 18-O is heaver than 16-O.

What is heavier now, may or may not have been so in the former state. For example if the forces in place allowed for huge blocks of stone to be of little weight, they could be easily moved. The pyramids for example, who knows? As it is, you are making a claim that our forces were here to make 18-0 be as it is now in comparison to 16-0. Seems to me you need to prove that. One can't look at it now and model backward until you know.

So, show us the 18-0 in the lowest part of the ice core? Forget the rest for now. Let's see how it was say within the first ten years of being laid down. Got anything specific???

As temperature decreases more O-18 fractionates from the atmosphere; therefore yielding oscillating ratios of the two representing summer and winter.

Agreed. This now apparently occurs. So? Let's see that lowest sample. Let's see proof that any 0 there can be shown to have been laid down as it is today.

So within each oscillation we not only can see each season and annual marker, but the ratios of the isotopes also reveals the surface temperature at the time of their accumulation. Neat huh!

[/QUOTE] Not really. Let's see this applied to the earliest part of the ice! You see, if there is any ) there, and you can demo the same pattern, then I would like to see it. Not some giddy surface based, present state based mental projecting to the deepest ice.

 

[dad]

As previously stated, ice cores capture what was in the atmosphere at the time of its deposition. It is real time information. If anything had changed, that change would be easily seen. consequently, there is no change seen. All annual layer chemistry, physics, and physical conditions before 4500 years ago are the same as today.

So let's look at the first ten years then. Let's test your claim.

 

[dad]

Again, the reason I started this thread is for people to ask questions about information that can be derived about past climates through ice cores. So please ask questions before making judgements.

The post you are responding to has nothing to do with radioactivity, this is about stable isotopes. Stable isotopes are not radioactive, therefore do not decay.



Please read the post to which you are commenting, I named a number of useful ions and described some of their uses. Robustness and verification of ice core profiles is also reflected in deep ocean sediment cores, speleothems and boreholes. Boreholes are especially useful in that like ice cores, they are reflecting real-time data.

Rather than obfuscate the issues with many claims, let's look at your 0 claim. Let's see a deep sample where we can focus on the ratios of oxygen there? Let's see how only a summer winter deposition could possibly explain it.

The important thing to understand is that this information does not rely on just a few samples, but many samples from many independent methods and many independent sources as well.

Great. All we need here is ONE sample of the earliest ice, and how it has 0 in it, that supports your claims.

This is how past climates (paleoclimates) are derived, verified and understood.

Excellent, so climate fear mongering was a hoax all along. I suspected as much. Their projections are limited to where the present state can be proven. That means they are severely limited in any value as clocks.

This is very important in understanding how today's anthropogenic influence with respect to heat content of the atmosphere and oceans and what may be expected in the future based on business as usual scenarios.

Thanks for asking the question.

You seem awful nice last few posts....what happened? It throws me a little off guard

 

[RickG]

RickG As previously stated, ice cores capture what was in the atmosphere at the time of its deposition. It is real time information. If anything had changed, that change would be easily seen. consequently, there is no change seen. All annual layer chemistry, physics, and physical conditions before 4500 years ago are the same as today.

Dad: So let's look at the first ten years then. Let's test your claim.

It is quite simple, what ever is in the atmosphere when snow falls is trapped in the snow accumulation on the surface. This includes dust, pollen, any organic matter, volcanic ash, etc. and all gases. It doesn't matter whether it is ten years or ten thousand years. What falls is trapped and what is trapped at that time remains. Again, it is real time information.

 

[RickG]

Rather than obfuscate the issues with many claims, let's look at your 0 claim. Let's see a deep sample where we can focus on the ratios of oxygen there? Let's see how only a summer winter deposition could possibly explain it.

Dark layers are winter accumulation and light layers are summer accumulation. One dark and one light layer equal one annual layer.

Great. All we need here is ONE sample of the earliest ice, and how it has 0 in it, that supports your claims.

Zero what?

Excellent, so climate fear mongering was a hoax all along. I suspected as much. Their projections are limited to where the present state can be proven. That means they are severely limited in any value as clocks.

Actually climate modeling scenarios have under estimated actual observed climate data. Observed global average temperature has risen much faster than predicted. Observed sea level rise has risen faster than predicted, Observed sea ice melt has exceeded all predictions. Observed global glacier retreat has exceeded predictions. Observed ocean acidification has increased than predicted. That's not fear mongering, that's under estimating what is actually happening.

You seem awful nice last few posts....what happened? It throws me a little off guard

Niceness begats niceness. Tossing out derogatory, demeaning, and absurd comments benefits no one. Let's be civil. Okay?

 

[dad]

It is quite simple, what ever is in the atmosphere when snow falls is trapped in the snow accumulation on the surface. This includes dust, pollen, any organic matter, volcanic ash, etc. and all gases. It doesn't matter whether it is ten years or ten thousand years. What falls is trapped and what is trapped at that time remains. Again, it is real time information.

So let's look at the first ten years of a large ice core then. Let's see how much dust and ) we have. So..? Got a sample?

 

[RickG]

Here's an interesting video that talks about "tropical" glaciers. Tropical glaciers yield information about climate that is not seen in the Greenland or Antarctic glaciers.

Teachers' Domain: Tropical Ice Cores Measure Climate

 

[dad]

Dark layers are winter accumulation and light layers are summer accumulation. One dark and one light layer equal one annual layer.

That could be. However looking at your site it seems this is a pic from 1855 meters down?

I notice that

"scientists have drilled ice cores up to 4 kilometres.."

Greenland ice sheet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So you are not even half way down, right!? Why no slice from the first ten years?

But you claim that the arrows point to 'summer layers'. Proof?

Zero what?

Oxygen.

Actually climate modeling scenarios have under estimated actual observed climate data. Observed global average temperature has risen much faster than predicted. Observed sea level rise has risen faster than predicted, Observed sea ice melt has exceeded all predictions. Observed global glacier retreat has exceeded predictions. Observed ocean acidification has increased than predicted. That's not fear mongering, that's under estimating what is actually happening.

No, that is looking a a melting trend, and screaming it is part of the 'sky is falling'. One day we will be under sea water in coastal areas....etc etc. That is prophesy. God did not say that. So why would I accept it? I don't need a weatherman to see which way the wind blows. I don't need a climate 'expert' to tell me it is getting warmer. I can ask an Eskimo. Many bugs and fish are getting further north, and the ice is melting more than in living memory apparently.

Niceness begats niceness. Tossing out derogatory, demeaning, and absurd comments benefits no one. Let's be civil. Okay?

If I insult science in the heat of battle just pretend it is all the other guys but you