# data[].attributes.body
I found the counting of the varves to be very inaccurate and also very exhausting. It was hard to get an accurate number because the lines were so close together. But, I do feel like it could work if done correctly.

# data[].attributes.body
Counting the varves was very tedious, but it also seemed unreliable. It is difficult to get an accurate number of layers because it is easy to lose count. There are some layers that are very small and hard for a person to see. In some cases, I couldn't tell if there were multiple lines in one section, which did not give me accurate results. It was a long, difficult process, and I don't think it proved to be the best method of absolute dating.

# data[].attributes.body
Counting varies does not seem very reliable. Somebody in the group might count something different than the other people in the group. Not only that, but it was very easy to lose track of the amount of layers.

# data[].attributes.body
The method of counting all the varves seems pretty unreliable and it's extremely tedious to count all the individual layers, so it's really time consuming as well. It's also really hard to tell how many layers are in the really dark spots, some people just counted one layer and some people took the time to count them all so everyone got really different answers.

# data[].attributes.body
The absolute dating method of counting varves is not necessarily the most reliable and trustworthy method of dating because different peoples answers and data will vary depending on how many layers they had counted. If anything Varve counting should be used to get more of an estimate on how old these rocks are, instead of trying to find the exact age.

# data[].attributes.body
The layers were somewhat unclear when examining the pictures. Every person interpreted and counted the varves differently. We seem to be especially inaccurate when counting the layers in the thicker, dark layers. Some count more and some count less than the actual amount. So, I believe that this method is not very reliable.

# data[].attributes.body
At first I thought that the activity was difficult because I was unsure of how to count the layers. I felt like I was doing something wrong because everybody seemed to be getting different amounts. I felt like this was a little frustrating because there is no exact amount and everybody had different answers so to me it seemed to be a somewhat inaccurate method.

# data[].attributes.body
The varve counting was difficult because it was hard to see all of the lines. Also, because i didn't know the dark lines were made of multiple lines.

# data[].attributes.body
The carve counting was a very hard task. Since there were so many lines that were inside of other lines it got a little confusing. The cards we counted off of in class only represented a small centimeter of a rock. I think carve counting would be a very long process for someone to do. I would not like to take all that time to do that because it will probably get frustrating. I don't think this is a good way to absolute date rocks because there is a chance you might have to count over and over again to see if you counted correctly.

# data[].attributes.body
The varve counting was difficult because of the dark lines. The reason this was difficult was because i didn't know if the dark ones were multiple layers or not.

# data[].attributes.body
When doing the varve counting activity It was a little confusing at times. I had a hard time knowing what was a layer and what wasn't. Everyone in the class got different results. I don't think that this dating method is that accurate. The varves were not easy to see.

# data[].attributes.body
The varve counting was somewhat difficult but slowly became uncomplicated when I figured out a certain way of how i wanted to determine how many layers there were. It was tedious but not as much as i expected.

# data[].attributes.body
When doing this activity, I found this dating method to be unreliable and unpractical. In the field when a geologist goes out to measure the date of a rock, the varves are so tiny and they cannot be seen with the normal human eye. It seems tedious and has no real value when compared to the other methods of dating. The only value the varves have is the fact they contain very detailed fossils. It can be considered useful to assign a numerical date because if you do happen to count the varves, each one has 2 layers, dark and light. Both of those add up to form 1 year per varve. Because you can apply an absolute date, it is considered a method of dating.

# data[].attributes.body
Looking back on participating in the varve counting, I thought this method could be very accurate if done right. I personally did not enjoy counting these lines but if a geologist were to count each section more than once to make sure the section of rock is accurately dated. It was hard to see every single little layer but in the end it could turn out to be more accurate than most methods.

# data[].attributes.body
The Absolute Dating method of varve counting isn't the most reliable. While going through with this the counting of the varves aren't the most accurate. Everyone views them differently because not everyone sees them the same way as everyone else. They also vary in size and some aren't the easiest to see so this method isn't that great.

# data[].attributes.body
When our group was participating, we found out that when we counted the layers they were all different. It was very difficult because some of the varves were not visible to the eye.

# data[].attributes.body
While participating in the Absolute dating method I noticed that everyone get different answers because some people counted the varves differently. Another issue is that the varves are different sizes so it can be quite complicated to count. It is considered a method because it helps scientist date fossils.