The TRVE history of the Flood...

Another hoary PRATT: CD410: Airplanes Buried in Ice

quote:

---

Claim CD410:

​

Ice cores are claimed to have as many as 135,000 annual layers. Yet airplanes of the Lost Squadron were buried under 263 feet of ice in forty-eight years, or about 5.5 feet per year. This contradicts the presumption that the wafer-thin layers in the ice cores could be annual layers.

​

Source:

​

Vardiman, Larry. 1992. Ice cores and the age of the earth. Impact 226 (Apr.). The Institute for Creation Research

​

Response:

​

1. Ice layers are counted by different methods (mainly, visible layers of hoar frost, visible dust layers, and layers of differing electrical conductivity) which have nothing to do with thickness. These methods corroborate each other and match with other independently determined dates (Seely 2003).

​

2. The airplanes landed near the shore of Greenland, where snow accumulation is rapid, at about 2 m per year. Allowing for some compaction due to the weight of the snow, that accounts for the depth of snow under which they are buried. The planes are also on an active glacier and have moved about 2 km since landing. Ice core dating takes place on stable ice fields, not active glaciers. The interior of Greenland, where ice cores were taken, receives much less snow. In Antarctica, where ice cores dating back more than 100,000 years have been collected, the rate of snow accumulation is much less still.

​

3. A report of "many hundreds" of layers in the ice above the Lost Squadron may also be explained by the airplanes' location on Greenland. That location is relatively warm because it is low and more southerly; its surface gets repeatedly melted during the summer, creating multiple melt layers per year. At the site of the GISP2 ice core, melting occurs only about once every couple centuries. Melt layers are easily distinguished in ice cores. The more than 100,000 layers in ice cores are definitely not melt layers (Seely 2003).

​

Links:
Kuechmann, F. C., 2000. Creationist comedy. cretin comedy
References:

​

1. Seely, Paul H. 2003. The GISP2 ice core: Ultimate proof that Noah's flood was not global. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 55(4): 252-260. http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF12-03Seely.pdf

​

Further Reading:
Seely, Paul H. 2003. The GISP2 ice core: Ultimate proof that Noah's flood was not global. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 55(4): 252-260. http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF12-03Seely.pdf

​

Brinkman, Matt, 1995. Ice core dating. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/icecores.html

---

There are also differences in the ratio of ¹⁸O to ¹⁶O that indicate different climate, similar to the way the width of tree rings indicates different climate.

quote:

---

Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1Message 7: http://www.gsf.fi/esf_holivar/johnsen.pdf (4)

​

quote:

---

Combined with highly advanced measuring techniques (Fuhrer et al. 1993; Hammer et al. 1985; Rthlisberger et al. 2000) the resolution of the Greenland ice-core records can frequently be finer than a year, and potentially this degree of temporal resolution extends back to before 100 thousand years before present. ...

​

The 8.2 k cold event was originally dated in the Dye-3 core (Hammer et al. 1986) using the
strong d18O annual cycle. The Dye-3 chronology was subsequently transferred to the GRIP ice core by correlating volcanic events. The absolute age of the Younger Dryas/Preboreal transition in the GRIP core (11.500 BP) was obtained by counting annual cycles in high resolution Ca and ammonium ion records (Fuhrer et al. 1993) starting at the 8.2k cold event. ... and ii) by counting annual cycles in a continuous dust record back to 60 ka (Hammer et al. in press,1999?)

​

references
(4) Johnsen, Sigfs J. "The Greenland ice core records" ESF -- HOLIVAR workshop, Lammi Finland, April 17-20th 2002 Disscussion Paper. accessed 10 Jan 2007 from http://www.gsf.fi/esf_holivar/johnsen.pdf

---

---

Dust doesn't happen in the winter months, snow doesn't fall in the summer months, so dust layers indicate annual layers ... 60,000 of them countable (before the layers get too compressed). This is known as a "Hide-the-Pea" lie -- a favorite deception used by creationists --by ignoring the indicators of annual cycles to concentrate on a non-sequitur red-herring. Perpetrators of lies and misinformation which is intentional or they would have corrected their information when told how false and ignorant it is.Food for the gullible. Easily falsified with a little research.Enjoy

Already posted by others.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Ice cores are not counted by guess-work. As well as visible layers, chemical determinations are done which include Ca, Na, nitrate, and sulphite. Comparisons are made with other cores and land and sea cores, which are many - I would appreciate it anyone has an idea of just how many there are.Lead is seen to increase about 2500 years ago when it was starting to be used in Greece, increasing at first then decreasing during the Middle Ages, to increase with the Industrial Revolution.With no obvious difference in the earlier layers there is no reason to think different conditions such as a Flood caused the earlier layers.In three Greenland cores alone - DYE3, GRIP, and NGRIP, totalling 5700m of ice, counted to about 60,000 layers, 175,000 isotope determinations and more than 1,000,000 chemical test were done. This is a fair bit of work to miss the fact that they are looking at storm layers!I have not seen any evidence that CMI or AIG went along to help with their testing, but I expect the researchers would appreciate being shown where they are getting it wrong.
Volcanic signatures can also be seen.

The ash from individual volcanic eruptions often has distinctive suites of minerals,allowing its identification in deposits.Mt Mazama eruption has a RC date of 7680+/-10 and is found in ice core at 7676 years.Toba volcano in Indonesia had the biggest eruption in the last 100,000 years, RM date 74,000, and there is a major sulphate spike in cores at 74,000 years.Further with Toba :
Cores from Lake Malawi show increasing RC date with depth to its limit of 50.000 years. About half as far again is a layer of Toba ash at 28m depth. There are 500m more of lake deposit before reaching sedimentary rock.These findings, with different methods giving similar results, to me are good evidence that RC and RM dating, and ice core counts, are reliable.What alternative conclusion is there?Edited by Pollux, : sulphite changed to sulphate

As you can see by reading earlier posts in this thread, some posters feel that belief and scripture supersede scientific evidence.

This is the consilience of information from multiple sources, multiple ways of dating, that somehow -- laden with the errors endemic to all scientific studies -- all result in the same information. It must be magical coincidence ... or just plain reality.Enjoy

A couple of pretty nice messages there, but I would be nice if you cite/link to source materials. Without such, the messages rather fall into the "unsupported assertions" category.Not just you, this happens a lot around here. In general, most messages should also contain one or more references (links, if from on-line).No replies to this message, in this message. Replies (and I would love to see a discussion of this matter) should go to General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List').There are also specific topic(s) concerning the need for references in messages, somewhere at this forum.Adminnemooseus

Information from http;Research at Centre for Ice and Climate — University of Copenhagen at the Neils Bohr institute, though I am not sure now where it is buried there.

I think I have been pwned on this one. I'll have to do more research on this topic.

That's a great resource for my next set of revisions on the age of the earth series. Bookmarked.Thanks.

Toba and its record in ice and lake cores is covered in articles at Naturalis Historia , which site has many interesting entries.For those unfamiliar with Toba, its 2800 cubic km of volcanic product is 100 times that of Krakatoa. Human artefacts are found above and below its up to metre of ash placed on India, and signs of cooling for decades or more are seen in ice cores, and altered pollens in India indicate cooling.This is of course excellent evidence that humans have been around for more than 74,000 years, and there was no Flood in that time.Interestingly, there seemed to be little climate change in Africa with similar pollens above and below its deposit.

Faith seems to have gone strangely quiet in this thread but I have been thinking it would be good to look in some detail at her claims the strata support a recent Flood.There are 10 major geological systems from Cambrian to Cenozoic or Tertiary. Their limits are defined by the appearance or disappearance of particular fossils, and were worked out in early 19th century. The ends of some, particularly Permian and Cretaceous, are marked by a serious extinction event with the vanishing of large numbers of species, genera and families, followed by a time of gradual diversification of the survivors.In addition to the five big extinctions there are several smaller ones.Even without these major events, the fossil record often shows the arising of a type of plant or animal, its spreading and diversification, and eventual decline and maybe disappearance.The trilobites as mentioned by RAZD are an example.Ecological zonation as put forward by Creationists, that thy fossil record shows different area being successively overcome by the Flood can not explain this, especially with the earliest critters all being in the sea.Faith et al have been repeatedly asked to produce a mechanism whereby the Flood could do this sorting, to no avail. It is a problem admitted by the SDA Geoscience Research Institute which was set up to find evidence for the Flood.Also remember the earliest geologists were creationists who went looking for evidence to support the Flood, and could not find it.So explaining the major geological divisions seems a well nigh intractable problem for Floodists, YEC or OEC.But wait, there is more!

One of the funny things I have noticed is despite the creationist compulsion to list famous scientists who were creationists I don't remember ever seeing them list those early geologists as support for creationism. They seem to think that those lists lend some support for their argument, but the creationists who actually tried to find evidence of the flood and came to the conclusion based on the evidence that there was no flood are pointedly ignored. I wonder why?

The simple obvious appearance of the strata is of one layer deposited over another continuously, not of "systems" or any such conceit. Time periods are impossible: these are ROCKS that cover great areas of geography containing dead things. The idea that those dead things ever lived on the surface now covered by that rock, let alone on the rock itself, takes a wild imagination that misses the reality of the situation. The separate sediments speak of continuous water deposition. We don't need to know HOW the creatures were sorted, all we need to know is that the imputing of long ages to a slab of rock assumes a ridiculous impossibility. The "extinctions" are nothing but layers that didn't carry a particular creature. For the sciences of the past the scientists are sure a bunch of gullible dreamers.There's nothing strange about my leaving this thread. I've said it all many times over, there's no more to say. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The SDA GRI has been around for over 50 years without coming up with a Flood model to explain the evidence, Faith's protestations notwithstanding. In their early days they had some frank articles addressing YEC problems, and had 2 on early geologists being Creationists with difficulty finding evidence.In fact some of their articles helped me on my journey away from YEC.