You're kidding me, you mean the airplanes were not in the same spot the ice cores were drilled from? And you mean to tell me that ice accumulates differently in different areas of a country? So shocked, one would think that would be common knowlege and an obvious solution to the varying data, but I guess I overestimated common knowledge.
If I may use the original article to say what I'd like to say here:
Hovind looked him in the eye. "Aren't you assuming those are annual rings?"
Somebody's either ignorant, or lying.
Absolutely, someone is ignorant. Hovind is INCREDIBLY ignorant. It seems talk origins had the explanation covered. Had he known enough about ecology (as he said he taught in High School) then he wouldn't have even had the question, he would've compared the two sites. Ignorance is bliss though.
As for:
If the earth is not old we didnt have time to evolve.
If you know anything about evolution you know it's not always a slow gradual mutation it can be a short fast one. For instance if the current crop of bears have a population with 98% short fur, 1% long fur and 1% split ends then a drastic event occurs to shift the climate to a lower temperature where the long haired and split-end haired bear survive greater then it won't be a long time before the entire population of bears have long fur. Then the animals with the thicker fur coat and longer fur coat will be better suited to survive and more sought out by females. That could be a span of a couple generations. If you think evolution takes time look up the Italian Wall Lizard where in a span of 30 years it grew a cecal valve to digest vegitation.
Observation from selective evidence doesn't make evolution wrong, it just makes you ignorant.