Ice core dating is analogous to dating using tree rings. Heavier water molecules (H2 180) precipitate more readily than lighter (H2 160) molecules, and the process is temperature dependant, and varies with the seasons. In the winter the precipitation at the poles is more enriched in H2 !60 water molecules, resulting in a 'ring type pattern'. Reading these rings at greater depths is more difficult as the weight of the ice sheets compresses the rings progressively more the deeper one drills, and so companion techniques are employed to supplement the standard methods. Nevertheless, this dating technique gives an age for the ice sheets much greater than the 6000 years that would be preferred by Biblical Creation Scientists. Furthermore, ice core dating must also be considered not in isolation (divide and conquer) but also in the light of radio isotope and isochron dating techniques, the evidence presented by the fossil record and the red shift, the speed of light, and the great size and age of the universe this evidence presents, as well as in the light of an analysis of the Bible itself as an historical document, and all this evidence comes together to suggest that a literal conservative evangelical drive to discredit any and all scientific methods in order to prop up Christian apologetic doctrines is erroneous.
It would seem that the standard techniques of Creation Scientists are employed in an attempt to dispose of ice core evidence. Known processes at work today give us ice sheets that are close to a hundred thousand years old, and the waters of Noah's Flood would have been sufficient to float the polar glaciers off the poles and destroy them. Scientifically undemonstrable and unprovable speculations are introduced to suggest that the processes we see at work today were not constant processes, but rather the weather of the world was clearly disturbed after the time of Noah's flood, resulting in increased temperatures and varying patterns of precipitation over the poles, and accounting for the rapid build up of the polar ice caps quickly after the flood. The only reason one must assume that current natural processes were not at work a few thousand years ago is that to consider these processes to be the same today as they were just a few thousand years ago would destroy the efforts of conservative evangelism and traditional conservative dogmas, and therefore it must be insisted that natural processes were different in the recent past. This is pure speculation and impossible to justify, and when you consider that the assertion is done in the service of conservative apologetics, it brings into question the need to consider such sheer speculation as evidence worthy of the consideration of science.
When concocting theories of huge population growth if the world was any older than Adam, creation scientists insist that the natural processes we see at work today were constant. When speculating about the decay of the magnetic field, a few readings of flux in the magnetic field are used and then under the assumption that this field decay must have been constant, it is suggested that if the world was any older than Adam, the field would have been impossibly strong in the not so distant past. These are fine examples of constants being employed by Christian apologists who have invaded the field of science for ideological reasons. In the case of ice core dating, however, this assertion of constants is disposed of, since if the natural processes we see at work today in laying down ice cores, and that can be demonstrated to have been at work through recorded history was indeed a natural constant, then the world is at least a hundred thousand years old, and that is unacceptable in terms of fundamentalist theology, therefore the natural forces must not have been constant. Ice core dating gives accurate measurements of the dates of volcanic eruptions, for example, showing that only in the time of Noah were the forces at work in nature any different than they are known to have been throughout recorded history. In any case the assertion that natural forces have changed is unprovable and really, in the end, is just a speculation invented in the service of traditional conservative dogma, and as such, is merely another tool in the attempt of right wing evangelism to impose the ideology and world view of an ancient totalitarian theocracy upon modern society. It certainly isn't science.
A Unified Field Theory
The Unified Field Theory
is also available as a zip file -> unified.zip
Introduction :The Pioneer Effect and the New Physics. A brief description of the new physics required to explain the 'Pioneer Effect', which is the constant deceleration of space craft as they fly through space.