5. The Evidence for the Theory is Irrefutable ==>
   5.1. Direct Evidence ==>
     5.1.1. Fossil Evidence ==>
       5.1.1.8. Age of Fossils * ==>
         5.1.1.8.4. Non-Radiometric Dating Techniques ==>
           5.1.1.8.4.2. Tree Ring Dating ==>

5.1.1.8.4.2.1. Creationsts Acknowledge Validity of Tree Ring Dating
*(One does not have to understand anything presented on this page.
The point is, there ARE people who DO understand this
AND it is FUNDAMENTAL to their discipline).

John Woodmorappe is the pen name of an author who has published several articles and books with the creation science groups http://answersingenesis.org Answers in Genesis</a target="_blank">> and the http://icr.org Institute for Creation Research</a>. His main works are Noahs Ark: A Feasibility Study and The Mythology of Modern Dating Methods. He has also written several articles in creationist journals.

Therefore, among biblical literalists, he is an oft quoted "expert". However even this apologist is stumped on how to "explain" away the tree-ring evidence. Here's some of his musings on the topic:

A literal understanding of the biblical chronologies places the Flood no earlier than about 2,500 B.C. and the creation no earlier than about 6,000 B.C. (Allowance for unlisted names in the biblical chronologies pushes back these dates, but not much). Yet the Bristlecone Pine (hereafter BCP) long chronology, comprised of hundreds of live and dead trees, is over 8,000 years long. The presence of fossiliferous sediment under the BCPs rules out any of them being pre-Flood. So, unless we choose to push the Flood back many thousands of years, effectively disregarding biblical chronologies, how can the conflicting chronologies be reconciled? I have studied this question for many years.

Woodmorappe's conclusion:

The 8,000-year-long BCP chronology appears to be correctly crossmatched, and there is no evidence that bristlecone pines can put on more than one ring per year. The best approach for collapsing this chronology, one that takes into the account the evidence from C-14 dates, is one that factors the existence of migrating ring-disturbing events. Much more must be learned about this phenomenon before this hypothesis can be developed further.

You can bet that this moron WILL suddenly determine that there HAVE been migrating ring-disturbing events .

 

See the full creationist article at Answers In Genesis

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v4/n1/biblical-chronology-bristlecone-pine Biblical Chronology and the 8,000-Year-Long Bristlecone Pine Tree-Ring Chronology</a>