News on C14 Front

• When it comes to carbon dates of millions of years old pretendedly things to 40,000 or sometimes even 20,000 years (depending on the presumption original carbon content was 100 pmc or so), I have heard a new argument from Evolutionists : carbon 14 could have formed due to background radiation in the object itself.
  
  When the object is coal, supposed to be 20,000 years old, I would think it would not have had any nitrogen left and therefore not be able to produce carbon 14 by background radiation. See here:
  
  http://creation.com/dating-in-conflict
  
  

  In the same rock, right alongside the fossil mussels, are fragments of coalified wood. ... So I arranged for this coalified wood to be radiocarbon ‘dated’ by the Physikalisches Institute of the University of Bern, Switzerland.2 I assumed that such a prestigious laboratory would take all necessary precautions to eliminate contamination, and allow for all other sources of error.3 The result: 36,440 years BP ± 330 years.

  
  
  Also, this would mean that the explanation nwould have to go for things as recent as dated by carbon 14 to 36,440 years BP, not just objects older than 40,000.
  
  
• Other item: I have extensively here used a fact from Osgood. Abraham must have been alive when Chalcolithic En Geddi was inhabited. I credited his article for the fact, but I had read it so hastily I first now had time to credit him for his detective work. I did it day before yesterday, and here is an article which already has 60 views:
  
  Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... Pyramids, Flood, Babel, LXX, Dead Sea Scrolls
  http://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2017/06/pyramids-flood-babel-lxx-dead-sea.html
  
  Citing which:
  
  

  The one place where I can't credit you [= Nathan Hoffman] with excellent detective work is accepting Saqqara pyramids as centuries before 2000 BC. Abraham lived around that time, and we should probably group him with Narmer in time. That is, Narmer, carbon dated raw date to 3400 BC or so, must have lived more like 2000 BC. Abraham coincides with sth else which requires carbon date 3400 BC, namely chalcolithic of En-Geddi. I failed to properly credit Dr A.J.M. Osgood for his detective work, but it was because I trusted him so much I didn't read all of the article carefully. I didn't even look up whether En-Geddi was mentioned in Genesis 14. Its synonym is: // As is often the case, the positive clue comes from the most insignificant portion of this passage. In Genesis 14:7 we are told that the kings of Mesapotamia attacked ‘the Amorites who dwelt in Hazezon-tamar’. Now 2 Chronicles 20:2 tells us that Hazezon-tamar is En-gedi, the oasis mentioned in Scripture a number of times on the western shore of the Dead Sea. // The Times of Abraham By Dr A.J.M. Osgood http://creation.com/the-times-of-abraham Great detective work, Osgood, even if you missed this has an implication for carbon levels - or didn't like the implication it had! In c. 2000 BC, the carbon level was so low that things from back then, if organic then, carbon date to c. 1400 years older than they are, i e to 3400 BC. A Masoretic reading making Abraham more recent would of course add even more extra years to make same apparent date. This means that Saqqara pyramids are too young to disprove the Masoretic text - but nice try!