My Ice Core Chronology Challenge

[RickG]

Now your an expert on ice cores? I think the argument is that one layer represents one snow storm, not a whole season. This is the same discussion we have on the trees that are suppose to be 6,000 years old.

No Jamin, that is incorrect.

 

[RickG]

The question is do we trust the so called experts. W

Why would you not trust the experts. What evidence do you have not to trust the experts.

what reason do we have to trust them?

Perhaps because Physics works.

 

[Jamin4422]

Why would you not trust the experts. What evidence do you have not to trust the experts.

It does not matter to me. The nanodiamond layer is right where I need it to be. You say the volcanoes line up where they should be. So I guess there is no problem.

 

[RickG]

Answers in genesis seems to deal with all of that. So what is the problem?


Do Greenland Ice Cores Show over One Hundred Thousand Years of Annual Layers? - Answers in Genesis

Michael Oard

Now your an expert on ice cores?

No Jamin, I do not claim to be an expert. However I do happen to have an academic background in paleoclimatology which is quite a bit more than the one time TV weather man Oard has.

 

[RickG]

It does not matter to me. The nanodiamond layer is right where I need it to be.

That's because you hammering a square peg into a round hole, no matter how much it doesn't fit. The nanodiamond layer you keep pounding on is real, the event you associate with it is make believe.

You say the volcanoes line up where they should be. So I guess there is no problem.

I didn't say that, Loudmouth did and he is correct. Also volcanic ash can be dated radiometrically, which agrees quite well with where it should be in the ice cores.

 

[Jamin4422]

The nanodiamond layer you keep pounding on is real, the event you associate with it is make believe.

I do not associate any event with the comet itself. It is just a marker. Just like[FONT=arial, sans-serif] Apophis is a marker. This helps me to establish that the dates we are using are correct. But by all means you tell me, when do you think the Holocene extinction took place and when do you think what they call the Neolithic Revolution began?[/FONT] For me 12,900 years ago is as good of a time as any for one era to come to an end and a new era to begin.

Actually if you look at the Gobekli Tepe: The World's First Temple. What date do you want to use. When do you believe they first built that Temple. Even though it was rebuilt and made bigger over the years. Still there was a beginning. Or is that perhaps the problem that you do not believe in the beginning and the end. Because then you would have to accept that Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega. The first and the last, the beginning and the end.

 

[razeontherock]

No, I just want folks to understand that there are several ways in which chronologies and paleo data are obtained and that those methods are so robust that even seasons can be distinguished.

More to the teaser AV. CFA = continuous flow analysis.

What does this reveal about the paleo diet?



I'm just busting yer chops; interesting stuff!

 

[SkyWriting]

No, I just want folks to understand that there are several ways in which chronologies and paleo data are obtained and that those methods are so robust that even seasons can be distinguished.

More to the teaser AV. CFA = continuous flow analysis.

There is nothing robust about it. Take the time to read an entire report, and you'l learn that the process is very difficult. I'm not suggesting anything is faked. I'm telling you that it's a long and difficult journey to figure out what layers one is looking at and how they got there. There is a lot of mingling, and layers removed, and layers moved, and it's a mess. The odds of a second person coming up with the the same results are slim.
But don't take my word for it. No, the word "robust" is used to identify THOUSAND YEAR warming cycles. Not identifying seasons.

 

[SkyWriting]

This is a reference to the ancient bristlecone pine.

On vacation, I found that tree, cut out a chunk and made a plant stand out of it.

 

[Loudmouth]

Answers in genesis seems to deal with all of that. So what is the problem?

Exactly. What is the problem? Why can't ice layers be used to evidence hundreds of thousands of years of ice accumulation in both Antarctica and Greenland?

 

[RickG]

I do not associate any event with the comet itself. It is just a marker. Just like[FONT=arial, sans-serif] Apophis is a marker. This helps me to establish that the dates we are using are correct. But by all means you tell me, when do you think the Holocene extinction took place and when do you think what they call the Neolithic Revolution began?[/FONT] For me 12,900 years ago is as good of a time as any for one era to come to an end and a new era to begin.

In that context I understand what you mean. Perhaps I have misunderstood what you have meant about it in previous posts.

 

[RickG]

What does this reveal about the paleo diet?



I'm just busting yer chops; interesting stuff!

You should try the frozen mammoth. I hear its really good and low in cholesterol.

 

[RickG]

There is nothing robust about it.

Sky, I am specifically talking about "Continuous Flow Analysis", which is a high resolution method recently made possible with instrumentation made specifically for analyzing ice cores. It is extremely robust.

Take the time to read an entire report, and you'l learn that the process is very difficult. I'm not suggesting anything is faked. I'm telling you that it's a long and difficult journey to figure out what layers one is looking at and how they got there. There is a lot of mingling, and layers removed, and layers moved, and it's a mess.

Well, for starters, I know you haven't read any of the reports you linked because that is nothing more than a list of abstracts of papers presented at a conference. Furthermore, none of the abstracts/papers you linked to support the conclusion you arbitrarily manufactured pretending you actually are familiar with paleoclimate methods and processes. True there are areas of non-conformity in all ice cores, that however does not render them a mess by any stretch of the imagination.

The odds of a second person coming up with the the same results are slim.

Careful, your ignorance on the subject is showing.

But don't take my word for it. No, the word "robust" is used to identify THOUSAND YEAR warming cycles. Not identifying seasons.

Again, you are demonstrating you know little to nothing about the subject. NOAA is an excellent source for information, but your NOAA link does not support your idea that robust resolution is exclusive to D.O. Events by any stretch of the imagination. CFA yields extremely sensitive measurements of ion concentrations on the order of parts per billion (ppb). Conversely to what you are suggesting many annual layers can and are resolved into seasonal divisions, even without CFA. Seasons are determined by ion rations which are unique to specific seasons as well as organic matter such as pollen and conductivity and acidity.

 

[Jamin4422]

In that context I understand what you mean. Perhaps I have misunderstood what you have meant about it in previous posts.

It would be a lot easier to establish a date for something like the Clovis Culture because you have an artifact to work with that can be carbon dated. Or in the Middle East clearly you have a date for Gobeki Tepe. But the Holocene extinction is going to be a lot more difficult. Even some believe this was a slow gradual extinction over two or three thousand years. The Bible and dispensationalism demands a lot more precision then science does. Although the ice cores do seem to be able to give us the needed precision.

 

[Jamin4422]

You should try the frozen mammoth.

Make sure you cook it real good because the bacteria may very well come back to life after being dormant all that time.

 

[RickG]

It would be a lot easier to establish a date for something like the Clovis Culture because you have an artifact to work with that can be carbon dated. Or in the Middle East clearly you have a date for Gobeki Tepe. But the Holocene extinction is going to be a lot more difficult. Even some believe this was a slow gradual extinction over two or three thousand years. The Bible and dispensationalism demands a lot more precision then science does. Although the ice cores do seem to be able to give us the needed precision.

Just to clarify, it is the organic material associated with the clovis points that is carbon dated, not the points themselves which are of cryptocrystalline quartz (chalcedony).

 

[RickG]

For SkyWriting:

An Improved Continous Flow Analysis System for High-Resolution Field Measurements on Ice Cores. Kaufmann, et al., Environmental Science & Technology, Dec., 2008.

"With our improved CFA system, a section from the North
Greenland Ice Core Project (NGRIP (24)) was measured. It
comprises stratigraphic layers of an age of about 10.15 kyr
BP (Figure FS3 in the Supporting Information). Clear annual
cycles can be observed in most of the species. The reproducibility
of theCFAhas been tested by analyzing two parallel
ice stripes of 0.55meach (Figure 3). The measurement of the
second stripe was performed in reverse direction to visualize
potential effects of the nonsymmetric dispersion of the
sample in the system. The measurements show a very good
agreement reproducing the cm-scale variations present in
ice core records; the seasonal chronology with high concentrations
ofNH4+ in summer,Ca2+ and dustpeaks in spring,
and high Na+ in winter is apparent."

Emphasis mine.

 

[Jamin4422]

Just to clarify, it is the organic material associated with the clovis points that is carbon dated, not the points themselves which are of cryptocrystalline quartz (chalcedony).

So are you confident of the date assigned to them which is: "Archaeologists' most precise determinations at present suggest that this radiocarbon age is equal to roughly 13,500 to 13,000 calendar years ago." Because that is VERY close to my date of 12,982 years ago for the Nanodiamond layer found in the Greenland Ice Core Samples. Of course the comet is just a marker or a sign. It may not have any significance in and of itself. Although NASA is working on a theory that life came here to the planet earth on comets. I have not done anything with that. I think that is one of Hawkins theorys also.

 

[RickG]

So are you confident of the date assigned to them which is: "Archaeologists' most precise determinations at present suggest that this radiocarbon age is equal to roughly 13,500 to 13,000 calendar years ago." Because that is VERY close to my date of 12,982 years ago for the Nanodiamond layer found in the Greenland Ice Core Samples. Of course the comet is just a marker or a sign. It may not have any significance in and of itself. Although NASA is working on a theory that life came here to the planet earth on comets. I have not done anything with that. I think that is one of Hawkins theorys also.

I'm certainly no authority on the subject, but there is no doubt that all the substances necessary for life were already here a little over 4 billion years ago. I do not think life originated from a single organism either, rather from many places at different times and I see no reason why new life cannot still be rising through ongoing abiogenesis.

 

[SkyWriting]

Sky, I am specifically talking about "Continuous Flow Analysis", which is a high resolution method recently made possible with instrumentation made specifically for analyzing ice cores. It is extremely robust.

And I am talking about the ability to sequence the layers in a linear fashion. Very difficult.

Well, for starters, I know you haven't read any of the reports you linked because that is nothing more than a list of abstracts of papers presented at a conference. Furthermore, none of the abstracts/papers you linked to support the conclusion you arbitrarily manufactured pretending you actually are familiar with paleoclimate methods and processes. True there are areas of non-conformity in all ice cores, that however does not render them a mess by any stretch of the imagination. Careful, your ignorance on the subject is showing.

I have no cause to be careful. Blunders are the best way to learn new information.

Again, you are demonstrating you know little to nothing about the subject.

Only what I read.

NOAA is an excellent source for information, but your NOAA link does not support your idea that robust resolution is exclusive to D.O. Events by any stretch of the imagination. CFA yields extremely sensitive measurements of ion concentrations on the order of parts per billion (ppb). Conversely to what you are suggesting many annual layers can and are resolved into seasonal divisions, even without CFA. Seasons are determined by ion rations which are unique to specific seasons as well as organic matter such as pollen and conductivity and acidity.

The sequence is difficult to discern. I'll dig out the report details if I get a chance.