Well, I've seen a lot of claims here and a lot of "logical" deductions from those claims, but I see no compelling reason to think any of them are actually true since logic is only good when you reason from facts and not assumptions.
The facts are the 14C concentrations in relation to ring count, varve count, and ice layer count. They all correlate with each other. Those are the facts. You are throwing out the facts because they are inconvenient and contradictory to your religious beliefs.
just try to make off with any piece of bristlecone, and you may end up in jail.
Not if you ask for permission.
What is most telling about those who fall into these propaganda's is their official lack of respect for anyone who differs.
Lack of respect as in claiming that those who disagree with you are fudging their data?
Like I said, ONLY first hand evidence, or what we can agree IS first hand evidence is a valid basis for making deductions that must be logically true.
Science works through inference, not deduction. Also, would you throw out all forensic evidence in a murder case if there is no eyewitness? I wouldn't think you would, but this is exactly what you are arguing for.
I have often be the victum of uncritically accepting some piece of "evidence" only to find that it led to inconsistency, and later have to come back to question it and succeed in finding hole in it.
You haven't offered one solid reason why we should throw out this data. You haven't been able to explain why the tree ring, lake varve, and ice layer records give us the same exact data. You have not given us a mechanism that would cause all three of these records to be wrong in the same way. You have not been able to tell us how tree rings from two different continents produce the same data. YOu have not been able to tell us why lake varves from different continents produce the same data. You have not been able to tell us how ice layers from two different continents produce the same data.
Your only response is to act as if the data does not exist. That's not an honest way to go about things.
You will see that research if you follow the link to my online book on biblical chrononlogy, where I show the TOTAL CORRELATION of all the biblical chronology, and then do the probability calculations showing that the probability of achieving such a correlation is less than 1 in 10^50.
I could invent a chronology right now that is 100% correlative with another made up chronology. So what? What we are talking about is something not written by men.