What tires me most is the arrogant scientist who claims that he holds all the cards, when his hypothesis won't even hold water. Darwinism is taught today without question as science, when it was written by a drop out theologian with no scientific background. His entire work behind the concept of evolution was based off the idea that varietals are separate species, when a species clearly includes all varietals capable of interbreeding and producing viable offspring.

Tell me how the lost squadron was found beneath some 250 feet of ice for the first bomber?
‘The Lost Squadron’ Life magazine 15(14):60–68, December 1992 and ‘Search for a Fork-Tailed Devil’ Compressed Air Magazine, pp. 30–36, March 1996.
How the flag, tent and sledge left at the South Pole by Antarctic explorer Amundsen in 1911 now being 40 feet under the ice?
Salt Lake Tribune, March 19, 1995 p. A12.
Or this summary of New Scientist, 139(1809):15, September 11, 1993.
In the frozen wastes of Siberia, an amazing salamander is able to survive in suspended animation for years, deep-frozen at temperatures as low as –50 oC, only to thaw out and run off afterwards. Scientists are not yet sure of the exact mechanism, but, like some other animals, they almost certainly produce ‘anti-freeze’ chemicals to replace water in their tissues and cells.

Some have been found buried in ice which is believed to be from the Pleistocene Age — 12,000 years ago by evolutionary reckoning. Yet they still recovered when thawed out! Though researchers have discussed the idea of radiocarbon dating to test the idea that they could possibly be that old, they say that the creatures ‘probably fell to this depth much later, through deep cracks in the permafrost’.

Whether so or not, the belief that ice layers only 14 metres (46 feet) down are many thousands of years old, in light of the ‘Lost Squadron’ experience, cannot be taken for granted.
I merely quote others in the scientific community, and out of deference to you and this community both I will say no more. Get off your hobby horse, soap box, and take off your 'genius' hat for just five seconds. Perhaps you need to take a deep breath and remember that all the wiles of scientific marvel are nothing when it comes to simple logic; you cannot accurately prove the exact age of the ice without traveling back in time to check your date. You may only guess, which may be educated or not. Regarding your rather offensive remarks towards the nature of my intelligence, beware where you are standing lest you trip and take a hard fall. I have yet to see any concrete proof of any sort, nor flawlessly accurate model of the earth present and past irrespective of age.

Nice to see an opinion taken as such, and shot down like a nuclear missile. Always good to see the boorish are still about.