What About Gary Bates?

What About Gary Bates? · I forgot one objection he could have ... still on Göbekli Tepe

He wrote a movie review about The 7 Churches of Revelation, Times of Fire, which I have not seen. I can't comment on the review as a review.

But it has a longish intro with two passages relevant to my work ...

We often receive many inquiries about alleged archaeological sites such as Göbekli Tepe, whose assigned ‘secular’ date would actually precede the biblical date of Creation (this, of course, cannot be true!).

I agree wholeheartedly that the carbon date taken at face value cannot be correct. 9600 BC, carbon date for beginning of GT, is not a date. Neither is 8600 BC, carbon date for the end of GT.

However, I have a solution about these carbon dates. If CMI gets so many inquiries, why are they not even mentioning my solution?

A bit less than one halflife ago, the atmosphere had a bit less than 50 "percent modern Carbon" - a term that means how the concentration of C14 in C12 in samples is lower and in previous states of the atmosphere could vary. With a bit less than 50 pmC, and a bit less than a half life, you can get around 25 pmC, which is what one would expect after two halflives (a timespan that has not occurred, ever).

But the problem with this is, my calibration for C14 places GT between 350 and 401 after the Flood, between death of Noah and birth of Peleg according to the Biblical chronology of the Roman martyrology (based on a text like LXX without second Cainan). That is, I identify GT with Babel.

Now, there is a little further problem here, Gary Bates uses the term "alleged archaeological sites" - as if there were any doubt that GT were a genuine archaeological site.

It is certainly more recently discovered than Ur as excavated by Woolley.

European archaeologists did not identify Tell el-Muqayyar as the site of Ur until Henry Rawlinson successfully deciphered some bricks from that location, brought to England by William Loftus in 1849 ... The site was first excavated in 1853 and 1854, on behalf of the British Museum and with instructions from the Foreign Office, by John George Taylor [namesake, btw] ... Excavations from 1922 to 1934 were funded by the British Museum and the University of Pennsylvania and led by the archaeologist Sir Charles Leonard Woolley.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur#Archaeology

In October 1994,[93] German archaeologist Klaus Schmidt, who had previously been working at Nevalı Çori, was looking for evidence of similar sites in the area and decided to re-examine the location described by the Chicago researchers in 1963.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe#Research_history

And after that, it was more than 15 years before I heard of it. Perhaps Gary Bates heard of it so late in his life, he had lost curiosity and decided to write it off as an unfounded rumour - I didn't. Or perhaps Gary Bates still prefers his the idea (see his book ... wait, it was Michael and Beverly Oard's ... Life in the Great Ice Age) that Babel happened before Upper Palaeolithic. Before carbon dated 40 000 BP. When Neanderthals were still around.

By contrast, Douglas Petrovich puts Babel into the very late Neolithic, in carbon dated 5000 BC.

Let's put end of Babel in 2556, 401 years after the Flood, uniformly, for comparison.

"38 000 BC" - 2556 BC = 35444 extra years. 1.374 pmC in the atmosphere.
"5000 BC" - 2556 BC = 2444 extra years. 74.405 pmC in the atmosphere.
"8600 BC" - 2556 BC = 6044 extra years. 48.136 pmC in the atmosphere.

Let's take an average of the first two. (1.374 pmC + 74.405 pmC) / 2 = 37.8895 pmC. Using Göbekli Tepe, which at the end, if Babel, would have had 48.136 pmC in the atmosphere is a fair compromise between two extremes. The levels by putting the beginning of Upper Palaeolithic earlier (at the Flood) and base at Eridu later (between Babel and Abraham) would be close to the ones given, and this discrepancy resolves as carbon 14 levels rising quicker between Flood and Babel than between Babel and Abraham.

And if we have a look at the beheadings in Göbekli Tepe, it gives a very fair view of why God stopped Babel.

Now, suppose Gary Bates had said "never heard of GT" - I suppose he could have used that as an explanation why he refuses to look at my option. Suppose again he had good arguments against GT being Babel - "not in Mesopotamia" (true of Tell Qaramel, unless Aleppo river was previously an arm of Euphrates, but not of GT), "not the right direction away from landing place" (true of anything near Classic Babylon, including Ur and Eridu, but not of GT, where "they removed from the east" is spot on), not the right geographic surrounding (true if it had said "found a land in the plains of Shinar" but it says "found a plain in the land of Shinar" so we would prefer where Mesopotamia is overall hilly but has a plain in it), "spoke a post-Babel language" (but we have no linguistic traces from GT or from Jericho which started at same time, neither grammophone records nor even writing) ... he would obviously have been free to dispute my finding as unfounded. I used to have a weak answer for one objection "this was before bricks and mortar" when recently I found that floors in Jericho used the material "terrazzo" ... and that Jericho was contemporary with GT.

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : Jericho and Babel Contemporary?
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2021/09/jericho-and-babel-contemporary.html

He prefers to act like a gate-keeper, whether because he seeks an uncritic adept before doing business, or because he is afraid I'm an UFO-logist, while I have more than once said, I don't believe in "Ancient Alien Astronauts" like Graham Hancock believes, but in "Ancient Aspiring Astronauts" like Nimrod would have been one.

The other passage is:

Similarly, there are many conventional dates assigned to well-known artefacts in ancient Egypt that would predate the biblical Flood.

Well, take the Burial Ship of Djoser ... carbon dates go all the way back to 2800 BC, if Imhotep was Joseph, Djoser would have been Joseph's pharao, and we would be looking at the time of Joseph in Egypt. 2800 BC - 1728 BC = 1072 extra years or 87.838 pmC in the atmosphere.

While it is true that uniformitarians do assign whether or not use a carbon date, in the case of Djoser they preferred 2600 BC over it, the carbon date in and of itself is not assigned, it is calculated. On the assumption, which we agree is wrong, that the carbon level was close to 100 pmC. In other words, the one methodological error is (for objects from that far back) to assume the now remaining pmC in a sample equals or is close to the percentage of C14 remaining from when it is from, which is what a uniform c. 100 pmC in the atmosphere would let you expect. Use my correction, and the dates will fall into place.

Between the archaeological date of GT and that of Djoser's we have "3500 BC" as carbon date of reed mats from En-Gedi's evacuation after Chalcolithic settlement. I credit Osgood with pointing out there was such a thing, and that it matches facts from Genesis 14 - when Abraham was c. 80 (between 75 and 86) years old.

"3500 BC" - 1935 BC = 1565 extra years, a level of 82.753 pmC in the atmosphere (the reed mats would have been made of reed having breathed the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere of very closely preceding years, if not perhaps uniquely from last year.

2957 BC		2607 BC		2556 BC		1935 BC		1700 BC*
1.2788 pmC		42.8224 pmC		48.1415 pmC		82.73 pmC		87.575 pmC

This gives a fairly good - even - rise for the C14 level, and therefore explains the erroneous carbon dates while also offering a correction to them.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Venceslas of Bohemia
28.IX.2021

* Creation vs. Evolution : New Tables
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

What Am I Doing with "How Much Faster" Calculations?

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Debating CMI's video with Roger M Pearlman · Creation vs. Evolution: Carbon 14 Speeds for Diverse Creationist Scenarios · Ice Age Maximum, 500 After the Flood? · Flood to Genesis 14, Roman Martyrology's Chronology, Two Scenarios (Technical) · What Am I Doing with "How Much Faster" Calculations?

I'll cite the last such one on my own theory:

2556 B. Chr.
48.1415 pmC
1935 B. Chr.
82.73 pmC

2556 - 1935 = 621
92.763 % left
7.237 pmC points replacement
92.763 * 48.1415 / 100 = 44.6575
82.73 - 44.6575 = 38.0725
38.0725 / 7.237 = 5.2608 times as fast

This is short for:

In the real year 2556 B. Chr.
the carbon level was 48.1415 percent (of) modern Carbon14 (level in relation to Carbon 12)
leading to 6050 extra years, so that the carbon date is 6050 + 2556 = "8606 BC"

In the real year 1935 B. Chr.
the carbon level was 82.73 pmC
leading to 1550 extra years, so that the carbon date is 1550 + 1935 = "3485 BC"

Between the real years 2556 - 1935 BC
you have a real time span of = 621 (real) years
after which 92.763 % is left of the original content of C14 (in sample or in atmosphere)
which would now be compensated by the 7.237 pmC points normal replacement in the time span

To check the speed of the carbon 14 production in relation to now, I do these further calculations:

What was left in 1935 BC of the C14 present in 2556?
92.763 * 48.1415 / 100 = 44.6575 pmC

What has therefore been added to get to the actual level of C14 in 1935 BC?
82.73 - 44.6575 = 38.0725 pmC points have been added.

How much faster was C14 produced during this time span?

Actual addition per addition of the now normal production:
38.0725 / 7.237

So, carbon 14 was produced ...
= 5.2608 times as fast as it is now.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Matthew Apostle
21.IX.2021

Centaurs Revisited

A Ramble, Centaurs and Andromeda · Centaurs Revisited

I take it that Hercules and Iason lived before the Trojan War, which occurred around 1180 BC. This is not fool proof, since one of the more common distortions of a tradition are reworking the chronology. I think Mahabharata is pre-Flood and Ramayana early post-Flood, but to Hindoos, Ramayana takes places 1000 or 10 000 years before the Mahabharata, I forget which. The German legend of "Rabenschlacht" involves a battle of Ravenna where Theoderic faces Ermaneric, while the real Ermaneric lived c. 100 years before Theoderic. This same Theoderic the Great also introdes into the times when Attila mangled Gondicarius in the Nibelungen-Lied, since Gondicarius died in 434 but Theoderic was born in 454, after Attila died, even. But Hercules and Iason could have lived before the Trojan war, as the chronology of Greek heroic legend (sometimes called "mythology" along with Hesiod's Theogony) would have it.

Could Cheiron have been simply a rider?

If so, a somewhat exotic one, according to this article:

The Secondary Products Revolution, Horse-Riding, and Mounted Warfare
David W. Anthony & Dorcas R. Brown
Journal of World Prehistory volume 24, Article number: 131 (2011)
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10963-011-9051-9

I will cite the free preview, I don't have access to the article:

Current evidence indicates that horses were domesticated in the steppes of Kazakhstan and Russia, certainly by 3500 BC and possibly by 4500 BC. Tribal raiding on horseback could be almost that old, but organized cavalry appeared only after 1000 BC.

So, whatever Hercules and Iason saw of Cheiron, their contemporaries would likely have been ignorant it was possible to mount a horse rather than to put it before a wagon, with other horses.

Riding might initially have been more important for increasing the productivity and efficiency of sheep and cattle pastoralism in the western Eurasian steppes.

Not in Greece, though.

The earliest (so far) direct evidence for riding consists of pathologies on the teeth and jaw associated with bitting, found at Botai and Kozhai 1. Recent developments and debates in the study of bit-related pathologies are reviewed and the reliability of bit wear as a diagnostic indicator of riding and driving is defended.

Ah, riding and driving ... this doesn't mean the bit wear shows which of the two it was.

If you cite me Bellerophon riding Pegasus, that could have been a fairytale. In Homer, Pegasus is not mentioned, only the slaying of Chimaera (and the letter, "semata lugra").

Amazons are of course involved in Hercules and in Trojan War ... but earliest vase depiction of an Amazon riding would so far be 550 BC. Iliad VI.186 and III.189 do not mention them as riding. Sources about Hercules are later than Homer. However, riding on horseback is mentioned in Hesiod's Shield of Hercules - for which the Hesiodean authorship is disputed.

The whole town was filled with mirth and dance and festivity. [285] Others again were mounted on horseback and galloping before the town. And there were ploughmen breaking up the good soil, clothed in tunics girt up.

πᾶσαν δὲ πόλιν θαλίαι τε χοροί τε
ἀγλαΐαι τ᾽ εἶχον. τοὶ δ᾽ αὖ προπάροιθε πόληος
νῶθ᾽ ἵππων ἐπιβάντες ἐθύνεον. οἱ δ᾽ ἀροτῆρες
ἤρεικον χθόνα δῖαν, ἐπιστολάδην δὲ χιτῶνας
ἐστάλατ᾽.

Does this refer to riding, or to the kind of acrobatics also done on bulls in Cretan depictions?

Choirs / dance ? (θαλίαι τε χοροί τε) and mirth (ἀγλαΐαι τ᾽) were having (εἶχον) the whole town (πᾶσαν δὲ πόλιν). Others again (τοὶ δ᾽ αὖ) in front of the town (προπάροιθε πόληος) "were mounted on horseback and galloping" ("νῶθ᾽ ἵππων ἐπιβάντες ἐθύνεον"). But the ploughmen (οἱ δ᾽ ἀροτῆρες) "were breaking up the good soil," ("ἤρεικον χθόνα δῖαν,"), ??? (ἐπιστολάδην δὲ) tunics (χιτῶνας) ??? (ἐστάλατ᾽).

It remains to be verified with a better Grecist (I left off Greek studies in 1993, OK, my Greek is rusty!) whether it is the first ??? that's "clothed" and the second that's "girt up" or some other configuration. It seems ἐθύνεον means "were darting" while ἐπιβάντες means in NT Bible "boarding" (a ship) so here would mean "mounting" (a horse), etymologically it means "going on" (sth - whether the back of a horse or the boards of a ship).

It would seem, this very early description of riding on horseback could well be describing acrobatic riding. The kind of thing Hayley Ganzel does, when putting one foot on each back of each horse, not the thing riders normally do.

At the line I was expecting an Amazon's shield dance from references, I find no Amazons, no shield dance, and no horseback riding, I do find chariots more than once around there.

So, if Cheiron was a rider, two generations before the Trojan War, no one in Greece may have known what that was. Hence the mistake of considering him and his horse one creature (a mistake Hercules and Iason would not have made). But if Cheiron was not a rider, it is possible he, like the Centaur seen by St. Anthony the Great, was a spiritual manifestation.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
XVIIth Sunday after Pentecost
19.IX.2021

Did riding exist in the time of King David? According to above, it shouldn't have. So, I looked for the Latin case forms of "equus" in the psalms:

These, first of all, have no relation unambiguously to riding:

Nolite fieri sicut equus et mulus, quibus non est intellectus. In camo et freno maxillas eorum constringe, qui non approximant ad te.
[Psalms 31:9]

Fallax equus ad salutem; in abundantia autem virtutis suae non salvabitur.
[Psalms 32:17]

Non in fortitudine equi voluntatem habebit, nec in tibiis viri beneplacitum erit ei.
[Psalms 146:10]

Hi in curribus, et hi in equis; nos autem in nomine Domini Dei nostri invocabimus.
[Psalms 19:8]

This one, of course, does:

Ab increpatione tua, Deus Jacob, dormitaverunt qui ascenderunt equos.
[Psalms 75:7]

But : In finem, in laudibus. Psalmus Asaph, canticum ad Assyrios. It's not a psalm of David, but one of Asaph.

But didn't Absalom ride when his hair got stuck in a tree?

And it happened that Absalom met the servants of David, riding on a mule: and as the mule went under a thick and large oak, his head stuck in the oak: and while he hung between the heaven and the earth, the mule on which he rode passed on.
[II Kings 18:9]

He rode a mule, not a horse. Mule riding and donkey riding is older and it is not used in battle./HGL

Flood to Genesis 14, Roman Martyrology's Chronology, Two Scenarios (Technical)

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Debating CMI's video with Roger M Pearlman · Creation vs. Evolution: Carbon 14 Speeds for Diverse Creationist Scenarios · Ice Age Maximum, 500 After the Flood? · Flood to Genesis 14, Roman Martyrology's Chronology, Two Scenarios (Technical) · What Am I Doing with "How Much Faster" Calculations?

I'll put them side by side:

My own, New Tables:		My extrapolation from claim on CMI, using this chronology, not their Ussher based one, as per previous it is impossible:
2957 B. Chr. 1.2788 pmC 2607 B. Chr. 42.8224 pmC 2556 B. Chr. 48.1415 pmC 1935 B. Chr. 82.73 pmC		2957 B. Chr. 1.2788 pmC 2457 BC 15.256 pmC 1935 B. Chr. 82.73 pmC
2957 - 2607 = 350 95.854 % left 4.146 pmC points replacement in today's rhythm 95.854 * 1.2788 / 100 = 1.22578 42.8224 - 1.22578 = 41.59662 41.59662 / 4.146 = 10.03295 times as fast		2957 - 2457 = 500 94.131 % left 5.869 pmC points replacement 94.131 * 1.2788 / 100 = 1.2037 15.256 - 1.2037 = 14.0523 14.0523 / 5.869 = 2.3943 times as fast
2607 - 2556 = 51 99.385 % left 0.615 pmC points replacement 99.385 * 42.8224 / 100 = 42.559 48.1415 - 42.559 = 5.5825 5.5825 / 0.615 = 9.0772 times as fast		2457 - 1935 = 522 93.881 % left 6.119 pmC points replacement 93.881 * 15.256 / 100 = 14.322 82.73 - 14.322 = 68.408 68.408 / 6.119 = 11.1796 times as fast
2556 - 1935 = 621 92.763 % left 7.237 pmC points replacement 92.763 * 48.1415 / 100 = 44.6575 82.73 - 44.6575 = 38.0725 38.0725 / 7.237 = 5.2608 times as fast

Bonus, their date for Babel's end (the carbon date Mesopotamian archaeologers should look for):

2957 - 2556 BC = 401 years
95.265 % left
4.735 pmC points replacement
4.735 * 2.3943 = 11.337
95.265 * 1.2788 / 100 = 1.218
11.337 + 1.218 = 12.555 pmC

2556 BC
12.555 pmC > 17150 extra years
17150 + 2556 = "19706 BC"

I'll stick to Göbekli Tepe and put the Glacial Maximum into the pre-Babel time when Noah was living after the Flood, thank you!

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Ember Saturday
of Autumn
18.IX.2021

Ice Age Maximum, 500 After the Flood?

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Debating CMI's video with Roger M Pearlman · Creation vs. Evolution: Carbon 14 Speeds for Diverse Creationist Scenarios · Ice Age Maximum, 500 After the Flood? · Flood to Genesis 14, Roman Martyrology's Chronology, Two Scenarios (Technical) · What Am I Doing with "How Much Faster" Calculations?

This claim is made around 1:35 in this video:

How Did Kangaroos Hop from Ararat to Australia?
3rd Dec. 2020 | Creation Ministries International
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7B5yJjH4J4I

Now, what would this imply? I know from elsewhere that the Glacial Maximum is supposed to have the c arbon date 20 000 BP (memory from CMI, Tas Walker, I think).

With Ussher's time line we get, Abraham 80 years and presumable date for Genesis 14 in 1975 BC, carbon dated as 3500 BC, as per archaeology of En Geddi. However, glacial maximum would be 1848 BC on that view, and therefore the extra years would suddenly have augmented from 1525 to 16 152 in 127 years. With no new C14 formed, the content would go down to 98.475 %, not from 83.154 pmC all the way down to 14.172 pmC.

In other words, impossible.

With a full LXX chronology, we would have carbon dated 20 000 BP before Babel's end, as Peleg would have been born 529 after Babel. Not so im^possible, perhaps, but contradicts their idea of Neanderthal's, carbon dated (when so dated) to between 40 000 and 50 000 BP, perhaps further back too being post-Babel.

What about the reduced LXX chronology of the Roman Martyrology?

Glacial maximum would be at around 2457 BC, 15 543 extra years, 15.256 pmC in the atmosphere of that year.

Genesis 14 would as usual be in 1935 BC, 1565 extra years, 82.753 pmC.

The distance would be 2457 - 1935 = 522 years, leaving 93.881 %. Normal carbon 14 production in that time would be 6.119 pmC points, 6.119 % of what is now the fairly stable 100 pmC.

15.256 pmC * 93.881 % / 100 = 14.322 pmC left

And 82.753 - 14.322 = 68.431 pmC points added, in the time usually available for 6.119 pmC points. It would be 11.183 times as fast.

On that view also it would be hard to have Neanderthals spread right after Babel, right?/HGL

What Can Tolkien's Vision Tell Us About Old Earth Compromise?

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Laketown, but not Esgaroth · Creation vs. Evolution: What Can Tolkien's Vision Tell Us About Old Earth Compromise?

I was just watching

The Blue Wizards and the East | Tolkien Explained
12th Dec. 2020 | Nerd of the Rings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ckCj7UguUw

Part of the deal is Tolkien putting the Blue Wizards as supporting men who rebelled against ... devilworship.

With very long ages, it seems Tolkien had one particular idea on why the genealogies are so short - same reason why four generations are left out of Matthew, these being evil generations.

Now, suppose mankind had existed for some 40 to 60 000 years. Suppose also, good generations are preserved in the genealogies, evil ones are left out. This would explain the shortness of generation add up in Genesis 5 and 11 between first men and Abraham. But only if mankind for most of the time had been in very utter darkness, if idolatry and cannibalism were thousands of years older than Abraham.

That there can have been pre-Flood cannibalism, I agree.

But I do not agree with the idea of a human history dominated by cannibalism, magic, idol worship and in which only rare glimpses of truth were preserved only regionally, and this not just from Abraham on, but for millennia before him.

Whether or not you believe Dei Verbum is from a real council, here is a paragraph saner than that:

3. God, who through the Word creates all things (see John 1:3) and keeps them in existence, gives men an enduring witness to Himself in created realities (see Rom. 1:19-20). Planning to make known the way of heavenly salvation, He went further and from the start manifested Himself to our first parents. Then after their fall His promise of redemption aroused in them the hope of being saved (see Gen. 3:15) and from that time on He ceaselessly kept the human race in His care, to give eternal life to those who perseveringly do good in search of salvation (see Rom. 2:6-7). Then, at the time He had appointed He called Abraham in order to make of him a great nation (see Gen. 12:2). Through the patriarchs, and after them through Moses and the prophets, He taught this people to acknowledge Himself the one living and true God, provident father and just judge, and to wait for the Savior promised by Him, and in this manner prepared the way for the Gospel down through the centuries.

Note, it says "the human race" and not small islands with shifting configurations like Hebrews but in other parts before Abraham. The one predecessor of Hebrews was the entire human race ... and if Noah had become one of a small remnant, this remnant was not based on nations before the Flood, as both Seth and Cain contributed to the Ark. The evil before the Flood may have involved some worship of fallen spirits, but this was not as far as I can see, a state religion in most places - it was just highly fashionable.

And after the Flood, idolatry doesn't resurge, but get invented in the time of Sarug, with Nachor and Thare getting involved in it, but not enough generations to completely hide the truth from Abraham. Serug 663 – 993, Abraham 942 – 1117 counted in years after the Flood. He could know a great-grandfather who was never idolater, and who, like a François de Thonon could tell his son François de Sales he had seen Calvinism born, so also could tell his great-grandson Abraham he had seen idolatry born.

But if we accept Old Earth, we get human sacrifice in Ur 500 years before Abraham, and that not even the start of idolatry:

NYT : At Ur, Ritual Deaths That Were Anything but Serene
By John Noble Wilford, Oct. 26, 2009
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/27/science/27ur.html

The exact kind of thing Tolkien was envisaging ... in other words, he paid a price for his episcopate (Catholic Bishops of England and Wales) accepting Old Earth compromise while he was alive.

His vision is intensely poetic, but fortunately it is also wrong. I do not mean fictional, that's a matter of course, but as to the general background that his fiction is supposed to flesh out.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Maurilius of Angers
13.IX.2021

CMI Site Down for Maintenance

This website creation.com/ is currently offline. Cloudflare's Always Online™ shows a snapshot of this web page from the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. To check for the live version, click Refresh.

When I do this, this happens, omitting the logo:

Under Maintenance
Sorry, our site is down for maintenance right now. It should be back up in a few minutes.

If this lasts longer than approximately 10 minutes, please let us know on our contact page or email us at web@creation.info.

In the meantime, why not check out our videos and podcasts?

Ray ID: 68bf8b0e2fcb4248
Your IP address: 176.158.169.217
Error reference number: 502
Cloudflare Location: Amsterdam

Please note, the IP is not of my own computer, I don't have one, so hacking it won't put me offline.

Meanwhile, was CMI trying to, or are they rebooting the site to include or exclude something, or was their site hacked? I don't know./HGL

Carbon 14 Speeds for Diverse Creationist Scenarios

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Debating CMI's video with Roger M Pearlman · Creation vs. Evolution: Carbon 14 Speeds for Diverse Creationist Scenarios · Ice Age Maximum, 500 After the Flood? · Flood to Genesis 14, Roman Martyrology's Chronology, Two Scenarios (Technical) · What Am I Doing with "How Much Faster" Calculations?

For Old Earthers, this is not a problem, the 100 percent of modern carbon, that is the ratio of carbon 14 to carbon 12 that we find in the modern atmosphere or would find in it if it were corrected to pre-industrial, somewhat higher levels, was reached well before the Biblical history "started coming into focus".

For Young Earthers, I started my quest on making good calibrations between carbon dating and real Biblical dates due to the challenge that we would automatically run into a problem of the speed of carbon 14 production on our scenarios corresponding to a level of radioactivity that would fry us to death, that is that would already have done so.

I don't think this problem disproves Young Earth, I am responding to it.

My own scenario, as you know from New Tables or rather from the French series it links back to, which includes Implications des vitesses de production, my highest speed is 10.275 times as fast as the modern production, namely between beginning and end of Babel identified as Göbekli Tepe. I have on other occasions with more possibility of acriby by online calculators, had as much as 11 times the modern production. From Flood to Babel is lower then 10 times faster, but not much lower than that. Between Babel and Genesis 14, my scenario goes to between 6 and 5.2 times as fast depending on diverse calculations I make for it.

Gary Bates claims that the cohabitation of Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon (carbon dated to 40 - 45 000 BP) occurred after Babel.

All of CMI has a Biblical chronology of the Masoretic type.

Now, let's see what Gary Bates' view implies.

Babel would have been anytime between 101 to 340 after the Flood, and the Genesis 14 event would be 292 + 80 = 372 after the Flood. I will here presume that Babel occurs early on (even if that implies difficulties for how Neanderthals could have developed so fast), and therefore give him as long a time as possible between carbon dated 45 000 BP and carbon dated 3500 BC, the carbon age of reed mats when Amorrheans left Asason Tamar or En Gedi.

2400 BC = Flood
2299 BC = Babel, carbon date 45 000 BP
2028 BC = Genesis 14, carbon date 3500 BC.

Now, 45 000 BP = 43 000 BC.

43 000 - 2299 = 40 701 extra years => 0.727 pmC
3500 - 2028 = 1472 extra years => 83.689 pmC

2299 - 2028 = 271 actual years => decay to 96.775 % of original level (same calculator as if for 96.775 pmC), and therefore normal present production would compensate that with 3.225 pmC points.

0.727 pmC * 96.775 % / 100 = 0.70355425 pmC
83.689 - 0.70355425 = 82.98544575 pmC points produced
82.98544575 / 3.225 = 25.73192116279 times as fast.

Putting Babel in Eridu would make it at 23.97599078514 times as fast, as noted about Douglas Petrovich here:

Creation vs. Evolution : Babel in Eridu?
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/07/babel-in-eridu.html

This is obviously incompatible with putting Neanderthals after Babel, when the last Neanderthal skeleton is carbon dated to 40 000 BP.

But Roger M Pearlman gets even hardier. 40 KYA = end of ice age, beginning of Abraham = rise from 1.45 pmC to 82.753 pmC in just 80 years. A speed of 84.427 times as quick production of C14 as now is normal.

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS : Debating CMI's video with Roger M Pearlman
https://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2021/09/debating-cmis-video-with-roger-m.html

It can be noted, the now normal production corresponds to a cosmic radiation of 0.34 milliSievert per year on medium height of inhabited places. It can also be noted, we can't exactly tell whether the radioactivity involved from the cosmos comes to linear, square or cubic relation to the carbon 14 production speed.

I tried to get an answer from Ilya Usoskin, and he refused to charge the computer program with parameters chosen so that 10 times as fast production were possible.

Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : Other Check on Carbon Buildup
http://correspondentia-ioannis-georgii.blogspot.com/2017/11/other-check-on-carbon-buildup.html

I think, so far, my scenario for carbon build up after the Flood is the most feasible one./HGL

CMI Again Against Geocentrism ...

"Did the V838 Monocerotis explode faster than light?" - Geocentric Solution Overlooked Again · Mechanism for Light Echo Proposed · Answering Shubinski on Proofs for Orbiting Earth · CMI Again Against Geocentrism ...

It begins to look a little like nagging ... but it's worse they are wrong.

Here is the background:

The Antikythera Mechanism / Testament to ancient human genius
by Gavin Cox | This article is from
Creation 43(4):17–19, October 2021
https://creation.com/antikythera-mechanism

Most learned Greeks at the time of the mechanism’s manufacture believed in a geocentric cosmos (with the earth stationary at the centre). Some did not; some two centuries before the Roman shipwreck off Antikythera, Greek astronomer Aristarchus of Samos argued that the earth rotates and moves around the sun. But without a detailed model nor explanation of why the earth moved, his idea was not widely accepted. So the Antikythera Mechanism reflects the then widely accepted geocentric view of the heavens.

There is a detailed model and an explanation why heavenly bodies move in part in Tychonian orbits, and this means that "detailed model" and "explanation" don't automatically imply adhesion to an idea.

Now, here we come to a new ovation to Galileo, the fact box named "Epicycles, the Bible, and geocentrism".

Here we see a statement like:

The Bible does not teach either a heliocentric or a geocentric solar system. It uses ‘phenomenological’ (descriptive) language to refer to the movement of the sun, moon, and stars.

Examples conspicuously omit Joshua 10.

However, geocentrism was taught by influential Greek philosophers, and became the ‘settled science’ of the day. This later influenced the Roman Catholic Church at the time of Galileo Galilei (AD 1564–1642).

In Tycho's time, the full version of Aristotelic Geocentrism was no longer settled science, and he died in 1601, decades before both Galileo affairs were completed, about 15 years before the first one. One can safely dismiss the idea that Greek philosophy rather than Catholic thought and Bible exegesis was the driving matter in the Galileo affairs, notwithstanding Statham's article to which Gavin refers:

The truth about the Galileo affair
by Dominic Statham Published: 8 November 2018
https://creation.com/galileo-church

and which I already answered over here:

Creation vs. Evolution : Science vs Science, Exegesis vs Exegesis
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2018/11/science-vs-science-exegesis-vs-exegesis.html

It wasn’t until Isaac Newton (AD 1643–1727) that it was widely accepted that the earth as well as the planets really did orbit the sun.

The point is not just that he offered an explanation, he also overlooked the previously accepted one, angelic movers. And his theses were spread by the Masonic Master Desaguliers:

John Theophilus Desaguliers FRS (12 March 1683 – 29 February 1744) was a British natural philosopher, clergyman, engineer and freemason who was elected to the Royal Society in 1714 as experimental assistant to Isaac Newton. He had studied at Oxford and later popularized Newtonian theories and their practical applications in public lectures. Desaguliers's most important patron was James Brydges, 1st Duke of Chandos. As a Freemason, Desaguliers was instrumental in the success of the first Grand Lodge in London in the early 1720s and served as its third Grand Master.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Theophilus_Desaguliers

His father was a Huguenot, too. Not a good premonition, anymore than him being a Mason.

Back to Joshua 10, which was mentioned very specifically in the arguments around the first Galileo affair, when a book was condemned (Assayer?). I debated this with a certain Vy (no longer sure at all of his full name, this is how I anonymised him) over at FB:

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS : A "Biblical" Heliocentric Misciting Holy Scripture
http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2014/11/a-biblical-heliocentric-misciting-holy.html

And I wrote a whole essay to labour the point : when God ordered Sun and Moon to stand still, as Joshua ordered them, He made Himself a warrant for Sun and Moon being, as adressed by Joshua, the things (or at least among the things) that changed behaviour:

New blog on the kid : Columbus and Joshua (Imagine Christopher Columbus had worked a miracle)
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2014/11/columbus-and-joshua-imagine-christopher.html

Gavin Cox concludes his essay:

So the question they pose, as a potential objection to their conclusions, is: How could the ancient Greeks have achieved such precise manufacturing?

Given that they were Geocentric, and that Gavin thinks this erronous, he would have to admit that making precise achievements by Heliocentric assumptions (if operational at all) doesn't prove Heliocentrism.

Now, do Retrogrades do so?

The earth is orbiting faster than Mars and outer planets. When the earth overtakes these, the planets appear to move backwards. Think about what happens when you are in a car that overtakes a slower one. When you look out the window, the slower car seems to be moving backwards compared to you.

In the diagram, the numbers mean different times in the orbit of Earth and Mars. The curve on the right means the position of the planets as they appear against the background of the stars.

Fair enough, but with Tychonian orbits of the planets and angels making sure they don't get out of orbit, Earth standing still and Mars performing part of its oval around the Sun along with the general movement around Earth will have exactly the same effect.

So, do angelic movers make sense from the Bible? Yes, they do. CMI could rightly use Psalm 73:13 as a proof for dinos being eliminated (not necesarily all of them, but at least the biggest and most obnoxious ones) during the Flood. The genre poetry doesn't preclude literal truth of statements. Now, Judges 5 has a passage that only makes sense if either stars are alive - which would have the same effect for above argument - or stars (including in the then terminology planets) are moved by angels.

War from heaven was made against them, the stars remaining in their order and courses fought against Sisara.

Not to mention Job 38:7:

When the morning stars praised me together, and all the sons of God made a joyful melody?

Only living beings can be said to fight against Sisara or praise God together or be called "the sons of God". And only for heavenly bodies would one have "stars remaining in their order and courses".

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Giles
1.IX.221

In provincia Narbonensi sancti A[e]gidii, Abbatis et Confessoris, cujus nomine est appellatum oppidum, quod postea crevit in loco, ubi ipse monasterium erexerat et mortalis vitae cursum absolverat.