DNA similarities ARE NOT proof of evolution

quote:

---

Your ICE AGE was 20,000 y.a. right? WRONG! All dates pertaining to the 'secular' ice age are based off of the same assumptions as the formation of the Grand Canyon: it has a small river in it, so geologists ASSUME that it took millions of years to form.

---

I fail to see what erosion in the Grand Canyon has to do with the dating of the ice age - and you fail to explain it.The ice age can be dated using a number of methods. Even using only one source of data - ice and permafost cores - dating can use a number of methods: counting of seasonal layers, whether temperature or irradation dependent; identification of milestone dates such as eruptions, and known climactic events; radioisotope dating of enclosed gases, and dendroglaciology.None of this has anything to do with dating the Grand Canyon from the observation that it "has a small river in it."

quote:

---

So, you are trying to say that the layers of clear and white ice indicate summer, winter, summer, winter, right?

---

No. I was referring in part to periodic changes in isotope concentrations, observed using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry.
As for the depth of ice, I'm surprised your approach is so naive. I suspect you have done no more than read of this on creationist websites rather than validating their arguments for yourself with background research. Had you done so you would know that the rate of firnification is neither constant or a reliable indicator of age.Shame you only have hearsay evidence for the layers from the lost squadron excavations - there are a number of interesting techniques which could be applied to Greenland ice cores.

quote:

---

I told you, I am full of anti-evolution evidence when it gets down to it.

---

you're certainly full of something.