It's all conclusions with no actual data. I might be impressed if you could link to a site that shows photos of all the tree cross sections and which rings match to which in an 8000 year sequence. It should also show any statistical methods used to justify a match. Until you can show the data, we don't have to believe a word you say. I would probably actually be interested in the actual data. But I have NO interest in prepackaged slanted conclusions.
On ice cores, we want to see ALL the raw data online, with all the assumptions, and all the mathematics that went into it. Then we will draw our own conclusions.
Did you happen to notice all those little citation and link thingies in the OP? Where RAZD links back to articles and actual studies where you can see the evidence supporting his position for yourself?
Now that you've been directed to all the actual data as you requested, I'm sure you'll actually go read it and come back here with
real arguments that address the points in the OP. All you've tried to do here is hand-wave them away and pretend they aren't good enough for you. Either refute the arguments presented with evidence
at least as good or expect to be laughed at; although I suspect you're used to that by now.