The evidence against a recent creation is overwhelming.
There is perhaps no greater attack on science than Young Earth creationism (YEC).
From this limited amount of information, and through assumptions about the accumulation history (sedimentation rate, hiatuses), the ages of all depths of a core need to be estimated somehow (age-depth modelling).
21,000 years, the Int Cal04 calibration curve (Reimer et al.
These techniques can be grouped as numerical, relative dating, and correlation.
Numerical techniques are best, but datable materials are often lacking, and in these cases age estimation must be made using relative-dating or correlation techniques.
In organic material, after waiting 5568 years (the half-life of in the EPD Dating tables), and consisting of bulk sediments.
The AMS technique can handle much smaller samples, and can thus do with thinner sediment slices (more precise/accurate age estimates).
the intersection between the wave cut platform and the former cliff), an uncertainty of 3m is usually attributed to it as a sea level indicator.
If the inner margin is masked by subsequent marine or continental deposition, it is evidenced by a break in slope, and the uncertainty associated to the past sea level is higher.
This article collects evidences that place a lower limit on the age of the Universe beyond the 6,000 to 10,000 years asserted by most Young Earth creationists (YECs) and the literalist Ussher chronology.
All of this evidence supports deep time: the idea, considered credible by scientists since the early 1800s, that the Earth (and the Universe) is millions or billions of years old.
In environments with significant tectonic or isostatic uplift, marine terraces can develop in a series of steps, each corresponding to the sea level at a given time.
In case of lower uplift rates, marine terraces can have a polycyclic origin because shorelines of different interglacials could to be superimposed if their eustatic levels were similar.