Common objects older than 10,000 years

I believe any non-volcanic rock you are likely to find will be much much older than 10,000 years. 10,000 years is a mere blip in geological history.

where do you attend the school? If its in North America and you can give us an idea of which state or province, I think we can give you some ideas so you can go and collect a specimen or two and give some reasons why these specimens are >10K years old . One of the best things would be if youre nr an area that was "visited" by several of the Glacial epochs. There are places in New England and the Midwest where one glacier has gouged out older glacial sediment nd then coverd the "Gouge area" with later moraine. And all this "Glacial junk" can be shown to be made of the country rock from less than 100 miles North of the gl;acial deposits. Without involving magnetics or radioactive age dating (or another "Fancy" test), its hard to argue dates. However, seeing that time was expended to deposit, cut, and redopisit sediments, and all of these sediments can be seen to contain even older rocks from the North, that makes a very POWERFUL argument about the relative pssge of time.

Another, would be a hunk of meteorite glass from a meteorite hit that affected the Chesapeake Bay. However, that would require your class to accept a scientific hunk of data that relies upon radioactive decay of specific isotopes.

Another would be a certain type of early American artifact from a known site where age dating takes us back to at most 16500 years. Here you could go to a museum and get a photo of the artifact.

However, I personally like to compound all my evidence by loading the Ice Age evidence , and, using your skills in making a convincing tlk, youll at last have enough data that is hard to refute. (Creationists don't like to stipulate to the physics of radioactive decay as a fixed rate phenom, so youd be on the defensive if your unfamiliar with the technique

If you have an identical twin, sketch that.

You mean... Like my shadow?

That's not that bad of an idea.

Shadows represent ignorance.

Formlessness.

Non-physical features.

Weightlessness.

The foreshadowing of what "can be".

Good job, Glitterbag!

I'm in the upstate of South Carolina, in Clemson. I don't necessarily need an object that I can use to argue that the earth is old, just an example of an everyday object that is older than 10,000 years.

This planet is 4.5 billion years old. Show it's natural beauty.

From Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

Also,
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

Good luck; you'll need it.

You could also forget about geology and just show them a glass of water. 30% to 40% of the water on this planet (and in every glass of drinking water) is not only older than 10,000 years, but it's older than the earth and the sun.

Here's an article from the Christian Science Monitor:
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2014/0926/Earth-s-water-is-pretty-old.-Does-that-make-alien-life-more-likely-video

If the date of >10K years is important to your argument. Id look for some of the "PaleoIndian sites" of South Carolina and find some artifcts from a museum and, using the museums evidence, show the dates are no younger than... 10000 years old.

Another thing would be pollen data from depths of bog sediments along the PeeDee or some other boggy terrains. There are some fossil deposits in limestone cave and sinkholes that contain elephant fossils and some other megafauna that were common in the late Plesitocene)

making the argument that the fossils, pollen, or artifcts ARE greater than 10000 years is where the tricky part comes in , especially if this may become a controversy within your college class.
________
"cicerone Imposter" is a beer expert so he's feisty and loves arguments. YOU, on the other hand, must approach this problem with a bit of tact. I would not present anything of great geologic age because I think youd merely be confronted with "YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE WE CAN ACCEPT"

THE very best data would be tree ring data. Tree ring are so easy to understand, that even a judge or attornies would have to understand how they work. However, because the SC climate has been humid an temperate through the past Ice Age to the present, I don't think thered be any available construction for which e could count on doing cross indexing of overlapping tree rings. (South Carolina had a climate similar to that of Maine during the height of the Wisconin glaciation and there are NO glacial deposits in SC., so your best age bearing data would be cultural).

There are some geologic events that could be used (like several earthquakes from the present to the mid Pleistocene), but , again, youd be vulnerable to discuss how you arrive at the dates and if you have no dealings in geology, youd lose the argument.

Would your class Instructor accept anything that would be based on radioisotope dating or magnetic dating? Or would that merely leave you vulnerable to "prove it"?

South Carolina hs nice deposits of organic mats and clays from transgressing nd regeressing seas (seas come in and seas go out) over time. Nice deposits on the Peedee and around Charleston exist so that C14 hs been done on depper and deeper layers (I was just thinking, Biblical ARcheologists do accept C14 data for Broze age and Neolithic
sites). If that is thecase, then they would hve to dispense with any "proof of age" issues.
O< I changed my mind, you should use some of the C14 data and the pollen. (See Clemsons geo department, and USC)

Heres a bit of news of how C14 Is used in lake layershttp://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32886/title/Refining-Carbon-Dating/

These might be of interest to you and they may be easier for your class to the understand and accept. Just about everyone has experience with propagation by rooting cuttings from a mother plant. You could even have the class do their own root cuttings to make your presentation interactive.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonal_colony

What is it?


"A clonal colony or genet is a group of genetically identical individuals, such as plants, fungi, or bacteria, that have grown in a given location, all originating vegetatively, not sexually, from a single ancestor. In plants, an individual in such a population is referred to as a ramet. In fungi, "individuals" typically refers to the visible fruiting bodies or mushrooms that develop from a common mycelium which, although spread over a large area, is otherwise hidden in the soil. Clonal colonies are common in many plant species. Although many plants reproduce sexually through the production of seed, reproduction occurs by underground stolons or rhizomes in some plants. Above ground, these plants appear to be distinct individuals, but underground they remain interconnected and are all clones of the same plant. However, it is not always easy to recognize a clonal colony especially if it spreads underground and is also sexually reproducing."

These are two of the oldest on the list.

"A group of 47,000 Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides) trees (nicknamed "Pando") in the Wasatch Mountains, Utah, USA, has been shown to be a single clone connected by the root system. It is sometimes considered the world's largest organism by mass, covering 106 acres (43 ha). It is possible that other unknown clonal colonies of trees rival or exceed its size.

The only known plant of King's Lomatia (Lomatia tasmanica) in Tasmania is a clonal colony estimated to be 43,600 years old.[1] Another possible candidate for oldest organism on earth is a stand of the marine plant Posidonia oceanica in the Mediterranean Sea, which could be up to 100,000 years of age.[2]"

From amnh.org.

Greenland Ice core data (Im so embarrassed ), is EXCELLENT. Ive attached a NOAA (NGRIP) core from (I believe) Richard Alley of Penn State.
This is as easily presented as tree ring data and its regional for a large wedge of ice on the Greenland Ice sheet.
In Greenland, its still the Pleistocene.

.

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/ngrip/gicc05-60ka-20yr.txt

I also have read someplace that ice core readings have been done in the South Pole.

Cis, given that there may be more planets than stars, intuition suggests that not all of them are as well-provided as our Earth. For instance I feel most sorry for in habitants of any that don't have hops

and grape vines.

..and then of course there's barley

Barley is what you grow when you are too far north for grapes.

You need hops, too.