Ice Cores and C14 Used in Calculating Age of the Earth
Photo by Lonnie Thompson, Byrd Polar Research Center, Ohio State University. - http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/gallery.html public domain Wikipedia online 1-1-18
"Creation scientists Larry Vardiman and Michael Oard have constructed their own flow models—models that assume the ice sheets began forming shortly after the Flood about 4,500 years ago. In a creation-Flood glacial-flow model, one would expect that such drastic thinning with depth would be absent. In fact, in creation-Flood ice flow models, these lower layers might actually be quite thick..."
"But skeptics might counter that the old-earth assumptions are still justified because hundreds of thousands of annual layers have supposedly been counted, seemingly independent of any questionable model assumptions. The GISP2 core from Greenland is frequently mentioned, since the ice at a depth of 2,800 meters in this core is said to be 110,000 years old. One critic goes so far as to claim that the GISP2 core is the “ultimate proof” that a global, worldwide flood could not have occurred. But the critics are mistaken. Even the deep GISP2 core does not demand long ages, and this topic is the subject of a future article." See Links to articles below by Dr Jake Hebert:
"But skeptics might counter that the old-earth assumptions are still justified because hundreds of thousands of annual layers have supposedly been counted, seemingly independent of any questionable model assumptions. The GISP2 core from Greenland is frequently mentioned, since the ice at a depth of 2,800 meters in this core is said to be 110,000 years old. One critic goes so far as to claim that the GISP2 core is the “ultimate proof” that a global, worldwide flood could not have occurred. But the critics are mistaken. Even the deep GISP2 core does not demand long ages, and this topic is the subject of a future article." See Links to articles below by Dr Jake Hebert:
C14 Dating
"The RATE radiocarbon research first focused on demonstrating that significant detectable levels of carbon-14 are present in ancient coal beds. Ten samples from U.S. coal beds, conventionally dated at 40–320 million years old, were found to contain carbon-14 equivalent to ages of around 48,000–50,000 years. The laboratory did repeat analyses and confirmed that this carbon-14 in the coals was not due to any contamination either in situ in the samples or added to the samples in the laboratory. Of course, these would not be the true ages of these coal beds, because these 48,000–50,000 year ages are calculated at the present-day level and production rate of radiocarbon. The fact that all these coal beds yield radiocarbon ages in the same “ballpark” is consistent with them all having been formed at the same time in a recent catastrophic event...research next checked for carbon-14 in diamonds. Diamonds are the hardest known natural substance and resist physical abrasion. Also, the chemical bonding of the carbon in diamonds makes them highly resistant to chemical corrosion and weathering. Diamonds also repel and exclude water from adhering to their surfaces, which would eliminate any possibility of the carbon in the diamonds becoming contaminated. Sure enough, the diamonds submitted for radiocarbon analyses did contain detectable, significant levels of carbon-14, equivalent to an age of around 55,000 years."
There have been some who have contested that the C14 in diamonds was a contaminant. Dr John Baumgardner, astro-physicist, has repeatedly argued against this view and for the C14 coming from the diamond samples themselves. See one discussion at link below.