As if this thread could get any more tedious, you quote Pathlights for us!
quote:
Varve dating. Certain sedimentary deposits are composed of extremely thin layers.
Not just 'extremely thin layers.' This is a gross oversimplification designed to confuse the layman such as yourself. Why not check into what varves exactly are rather than hitting the Pathlights line so hard?
quote:
Evolutionists theorize that each band must be exactly one year.
Nope. Each
set of bands is calibrated to known events that show they are annual deposits. Not much theory at all!
quote:
But any limnologist will tell you that a brief flooding into a lake will cause a varve, ...
No, though I give Pathlights credit for consistency. Varves are not caused by floods. And any sedimentologist will tell you that we can tell a flood deposit from a varve.
quote:
...which is a settling out of finer particles.
However, a flood does not just consist of settling of finer particles.
quote:
In addition, only a rapid laying down of sediments could produce the plant and animal fossils we find in varves.”p. 37.
No, once again. Rapid burial is nice to have but not an absolute necessity. Now, please document for us where macrofossils are found in varved sediments. I don't suppose that you thought to ask Pathlights this question...
quote:
Tree ring dating. Bristlecone pine rings indicate an apparent age somewhat older than that of the giant sequoias.
Ooops, Pathlights just screwed up and made an accurate statement!
quote:
But evidence reveals that more than one bristlecone ring can be laid down in a single year.
Laid down, eh? Interesting choice of words. Nevertheless, please ask Pathlights to document this and give us an idea of the range of error that this would cause in dating by tree rings.
™ Version 4.2