Ice Cores

The use of ice cores to show evidence of hundreds of millions of years of ice accumulation is a frequently used argument around here. Frequently dismissed, also. For educational purposes, I have a link to post that shows how climate data is gleaned from these ice cores. I also have a related link the talks about an ice core that, so far there is more ice down there, stretches back 3/4 of a million years.

I don't really think there is anything in here to change anyone's minds, but since it comes up frequently ithought you might at least be interested. I would at least like to add that if you think that these ice layers were layed down in short periods during catastrophic events, then why would you expect layers from different sample locations to show similar histories? If the event were catastrophic, would you not expect some pretty wild variation in what happened at different locations?

http://www.sciam.com/askexpert_question.cfm?articleID=00001580-C282-1148-828283414B7F012B&catID=3&chanID=sa005

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleid=000352EA-658A-10C7-A58A83414B7F0000

 

Here is another article some might be interested in. Some will not be.

http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/072.htm

If you read through it, you will see how well ice core data from various parts of the world match up with each other and with data from other geologic dates. Besides counting annual layers, there are many other techniques that can be used to judge the date of a given layer in an ice core including radiometrically determined dates in the past other than the C14 dating that can be done to many layers.

Many YEers like to suggest that many layers could have been layed down in a short period of time. It seems unlikely that such chaotic weather would have bothered to put the same layers (with the same atmospheric concentrations, oxygen isotopic ratios, carbon isotoic ratios, volcanic dust layers and so on) in different parts of the earth.

 

Another thread to be refreshed. Anyone got a theory of how to match alll of the ice core data with a young earth?

I am going to add one more thing here to explain.

http://130.92.227.10/download/qsr2000-papers/beer.pdf

There are patterns in the ice cores concentrations of various gasses that change exactly as parameters of earth's orbit have been measured to change. For example, the poles of the earth precess (wobble like a top) over a period of 23,000 years. This changes with time during what part of the orbit that the northern hemisphere's pole is pointed more towards the sun. This changes the amount of energy from sunlight to these areas. When more energy is reaching the surface, the concentration of methane goes up because of the increased plant activity in wetlands.

The ice cores measure changes in methane in lock step with the changes due to precession. Other gaoes and other orbital features also match up.

Any alternative explanation for the ice sheets must address how these gasses change with such regularity.

 

This topic came up in another thread. The request was made that the thread not be taken off topic. So I am bumping this thread to contiue the discussion.

Helen said "4. Layerings in ice cores which are annual now were formerly the result of storm waves, expecially after the tilt of the earth and its correction in 2345BC as documented by South Australian government astronomer George Dodwell."

It would be interesting to see how storms could deposit layers that appear to be annual, that match up with events seen in layers from diverse locations, where the annual assumption is suppoerted by radiometric dating, and where the annual layers assumption is supported by matches to periodic changes in the earth's orbital parameters.

 

We recently had this topic come up on another thread, so I thought I'd transfer that mention to here where it might could be discussed alone rather than in the chaos of an unrelated thread. I posted a link to here over there.

Start here to see the context - http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/2959/21.html#000309

Paul of Eugene -
"Well, there is evidence against a universal flood. There are annual layers laid down in the ice at Greenland going back over 200,000 years; likewise in Antarctica. Ice would never have survived a world wide flood, as you know."

Faith, Fact & Feeling -
"I know of this problem. And if you are honest you know that the past climates have to be assumed to recognize them in the layers. This is circular reasoning. We use the layers to determine the climates, but we assume things about that caused the rings, like annual warming cycles. Therefore a forced presumption is already in place to confirm the experimental data. The fact is that we cannot be reasonably sure about these things. I have a buddy that is a Paleoclimatologist with ORNL, and trust me, his is more adamant about this than you are, but still cedes I have valid points in this arena."

Ute -
"There is much more to it than just counting the layers. There are ways to crosscheck the data. Some layers can be dated directly through other means. Some layers show, say, ash from a volcano eruption that can then be checked against the same ask in other ice cores from diverse locations."

Paul of Eugene -
"A reasonably honest opposition to the idea that these things are truly annual layers would take note of the cross checks that real scientists use to verify the count. Thinks like radio carbon dating of inclusions, correlating with ashes found in certain layers from known volcanic eruptions, the degree of agreement between the widely separated cores of the Antarctica and Greenland as to the climate variations (which also correlate with other findings about the length and timing of ice ages, while providing much better resolution)

Then the honest opposition would show an alternative explanation for these checks that explains why they didn't work. Lacking such, the evidence would be allowed to stand.

I've never seen anything like that. Perhaps you can help me out?"

Faith, Fact & Feeling -
"Thanks for directing me to this. I'm meeting with a paleoclimatologist with ORNL at lunch tomorrow, so we should have a lively discussion."