News you won't see in controlled mainstream media.

Linda,

Excellent picture, which of course completely refutes SoSick's argument.

What she means is that there is no recognition of facts that refute arguments by those that are involved with cognitive dissonance issues.

The fact that we have dust storms in tibet and china is not enough to refute that there are dust layers on the ice in tibet, you need to show that they do not match the seasonal pattern of summer dust and winter ice. Without such information means the dust storms just add validity to the fact that there are dust layers alternating with ice layers, one summer and one winter, thus creating annual layers that are easy to distinguish with the naked eye. This is also correlated with the do18 and do16 ratios that validate annual processes before the layers are counted.

As always it is the correlations of all the different pieces of information that show that

(1) there are several methods of measuring annual ages of evidence
(2) these pieces of evidence also preserve evidence of climate change from year to year
(3) those climate changes also have extremes that are simultaneously recorded in each of the annual systems, some of which are known from historical records (the little ice age, the medieval warm period) and some of which record the same event at the same time.

What does she teach? I bet she finds it is very difficult to teach those that do not want to learn, that do not want to challenge their ideas with evidence.

Enjoy.
[color:"green"]
Note: my time is limited, so I only choose threads of particular interest to me and I cannot guarantee a reply to all responses (particularly if they do not discuss the issue/s), and I expect other people to do the same. Thank you for your consideration.[/color]