Grip ice core dating

It is more likely that a subannual depth hoar layer formed by a storm would be counted as an annual signal, if the snowfall were significantly higher in the past, as in the Creation/Flood model for the middle and lower portions of the ice core.3132 Seely claims that dust variations are primarily seasonal, so that every dust band, whether counted visually or by LLS, are evidence for annual layers.Such dust bands are mainly responsible for the counting of annual layers from around 12,000 years to 110,000 years and even older in the uniformitarian timescale of the GISP2 ice core.The resulting difference in age-interpretation is a result of the starting paradigm; the data is the same and does not speak for itself. Seely superficially analyzes the main methods of counting annual layers.4 He concludes that my reinterpretation is invalid because the timescale has been corroborated by up to three independent annual measuring methods that agree with volcanic acidity spikes and deep-sea cores: ‘The first 110,000 annual layers of snow in that ice core (GISP2) have been visually counted and corroborated by two to three different and independent methods as well as by correlation with volcanic eruptions and other datable events.’5 However, contrary to what Seely believes, neither the annual layer counting methods nor the external correlation methods are independent, they are all tied to the same starting assumptions of deep time.The 110,000 annual layers are based on the assumptions that the Greenland Ice Sheet has been in equilibrium for several million years and that ice ages oscillate between glacials and interglacials with a period of 100,000 years based on the astronomical theory of the ice age (the Milankovitch mechanism).

ads advice dating email online personal writing

These depth hoar complexes, as they are called, can usually be counted as annual layers in the top portion of the GISP2 core.In contrast, in a creationist model, the annual layers in the middle and lower portion of the GISP2 ice core would be subannual layers due to sub-storm, storm or other cycles of weather lasting anywhere from days to months.To demonstrate that the astronomical theory biases all data sets and that annual layer counts can be adjusted to come close to expectations, all one has to do is read how the count of ‘annual’ layers below 2,300 metres was changed in the GISP2 core.The truth is exactly the opposite: LLS counting is used to correct the initial estimated thickness of the annual layers.’11 LLS (laser light scattering) is a method for counting dust bands by passing a laser beam through the ice.

Seely is technically correct, but generally incorrect.

On the other hand, uniformitarians start with an assumption of great age, generally stable conditions and Milankovitch orbital cycles to create ice ages.