ONE) Evolutionists had originally predicted that galaxies would become rarer the further out they were. Like the starlight from out there would be coming from a time before the galaxies formed.
Creationists, picking up on this, predicted, no, God created all stars at the same time, galaxies were ready on day four, so, galaxies shouldn't become rarer further out.
They, the Creationists, have been confirmed.
Is that confirmation compatible with Geocentrism? Yes. To a man like Dr. Jason Lisle, the Andromeda Galaxy actually is 2.5
million light years away and then there are galaxies 13
billion light years away too. To me, the Andromeda spiral nebula is 1 light day away, and so are those other spiral nebulas. So, the jubilation of Dr. Jason Lisle doesn't disturb me, I'm just not impressed by the distance measures.
TWO) So, a Deep Timer, not sure if Evolutionist or if Progressive Creationist, stated in 2015 that if carbon 14 had exploded in the atmosphere from very low levels (like an original 3.125 pmC, giving the mirage of five halflives and therefore adding in the carbon date 28 650 extra years back to the real — BC — date and that then rising to our c. 100 pmC, on average no extra years), then this explosion would have needed so much cosmic radiation (or whatever other source of radioactivity that produced the carbon 14 that fast) that "all life except spiders would be fried" ...
As I held that carbon 14 levels really had been low, I predicted, no, the radioactivity
wouldn't have been frying all life except spiders. This logically involves predictions about how fast the carbon 14 formed (like it didn't go from 3.125 pmC to 100 pmC in one day, not even in 1 or 10 years) and also what levels of cosmic radiation are needed for a certain rapidity of formation of carbon 14 (like 10 times faster doesn't take 1000 times more radiation, which would involve a "spider paradise" with no vertebrates left: 1000 * 0.34 milliSievert per year would be 340 milliSievert per year, and that would be fatal ... 0.34 is the
part of the background radiation that on average inhabited height* corresponds to the cosmic radiation).
Let's take the second prediction first. It's probably the more important one. I tried to find a ratio between "how much more radiation" and "how much faster carbon 14 is produced" and there isn't one. I found a source saying "it goes from a square ratio to a cube ratio" in this particular range of variation, and this obviously means that the hypothetic ratio per se is neither square nor cube. By a certain exchange, years ago, I feel confident that I need not worry that a ten times faster production of carbon 14, for instance at Babel, necessitates a thousand times higher milliSievert level (like 340 per year). But first, radiation limits.
Recommended limit for radiation workers every five years: 100.00 [milliSievert].
Radiation exposure: a quick guide to what each level means
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/mar/15/radiation-exposure-levels-guide
100 per five years = 20 per year.
If the ratio is square, 0.34 milliSievert would in ten times faster involve 100 times more milliSievert, so 34 per year. Not fatal, perhaps, but not comfy, just perhaps one reason for diminishing life spans (over Genesis 11). However, I came to realise that the incoming radiation is not the only factor. Here is a quote from my exchange (I was coming to it) with Ilya Usoskin:
Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl: Other Check on Carbon Buildup
https://correspondentia-ioannis-georgii.blogspot.com/2017/11/other-check-on-carbon-buildup.html
- Ilya Usoskin to me
- 10/30/17 at 11:32 AM
- Re: Cosmic Radiation and C14 Production, a Q
- Dear Hans-Georg (sorry for misspelling your name earlier),
Thanks for the clarification. I think I start understanding your question.
Although indeed, more 14C corresponds to higher radiation dose at Earth, there is no one-to-one relation between 14C production and cosmic radiation dose at the surface.
Exact relation should be calculated using detailed models which do exist but I am not aware of a precise calculation of what you ask.
The problem is that 14C is produced globally, in the entire atmosphere, while radiation is local and at the surface. Their exact relation may depend on many factors, most important being the energy spectrum of cosmic rays (the solar modulation) and the Earth's magnetic field which vary independently of each other. Therefore, the same amount of 14C produced in the atmosphere may correspond to different doses at a given location.
Best regards,
Ilya
So, neither radiation dose is a function of carbon 14 production, nor carbon 14 production of radiation dose. Both are functions of a multifactorial.
This being so, my prediction that 10 times faster production does not necessitate 1000 times higher radiation dose, pending further calculation in these models, holds. Note, I only got this confirmation a bit more than 2 years after the challenge started my research.
So, on the question how much faster carbon 14 was forming, I started out taking my "level at the Flood" from CMI's "ballpark" of carbon dates ranging 20 000 to 50 000 years.** I also started out taking 500 BC as the date when the level reached 100 pmC. AND I started my very first table allowing the carbon 14 level to rise in even portions, like 50 pmC reached halfway between Flood and 500 BC and so on. I quickly found out, this doesn't really work. If Abraham is carbon dated to 10 000 BC or so, how is he contemporary with Pharaos? But the idea of this, plus a memory of a Jewish or Muslim legend of Abraham being tormented by Nimrod (in manners parallelling Daniel by Nebuchadnezzar) stuck. It
could be the carbon date of Babel.
A few months into the research, I carefully based a model on fractioning the surplus speed of production into "units" that I fit into a Fibonacci series, with the maximum speed the closest to the beginning. And in January 2017, I tried to find out how much leeway I had outside the "Fibonacci table" and ended up making a refined version of it:
Table modifiée, analysée par convergence avec l'a priori
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2017/02/table-modifiee-analysee-par-convergence.html
If Göbekli Tepe is Tower of Babel ...
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2017/02/if-gobekli-tepe-is-tower-of-babel.html
So, I'm going to make a "prediction" or two after the findings. But the predictions
could have been made. I started my tables without doing so, using anchor points where a probable archaeological or palaeontological carbon datable item is a match for a Biblical (or otherwise historical) dated event.
- I) A rise in carbon 14 is more rapid at the beginning, just after the Flood, than at the end, just before it reaches 100 pmC. Corrollary: the carbon 14 line of dates needs more reduction near the beginning and less near the end. In my calibration anchor points, the earlier ones will have a greater distance in carbon years from each other (proportional to distance in real years) and from the real years than the later ones.
- II) A rise of equal amount (counted in pmC units) will be more important in time implications and therefore range of extra years the earlier on it is. Rising from 1 pmC to 4 pmC measures two halflives, from 3 pmC to 6 pmC just one halflife, from 6 pmC to 9 pmC, less than one halflife.*** Corrollary, same as previous.
- III) This will match the less well documented earlier periods either being not recorded at all, or recorded with more distortions.
- IV) Atmospheric carbon 14 levels will line up with population increase after the Flood. 10 years after the Flood, you can't have more than 8 adults, so if 30 adults or so died together, and the reading of my calibration says 10 years after the Flood, it has to be later and there has to be a case for the reservoir effect. Even later, you cannot have a genetically identified father and son where my recalibration reduces the generation gap to 10 years.
How are these doing now?
I+II ... Corrollary: the carbon 14 line of dates needs more reduction near the beginning and less near the end. In my calibration anchor points, the earlier ones will have a greater distance in carbon years from each other (proportional to distance in real years) and from the real years than the later ones.
The current anchor points are: I) 2957 BC, Flood, carbon dated 37 000 BC; II) 2607 BC, death of Noah, (close to) beginning of Babel, carbon dated 9500 BC; III) 2556 BC, birth of Peleg, (close to) end of Babel, carbon dated 8000 BC; IV) 1935 BC, Genesis 14 (with a leeway of five years either way), carbon dated 6500 BC; V) 1700 BC (approximated) death of Joseph's Pharao, identified with Djoser, carbon dated (raw dates) c. 2800 BC; VI) 1590 BC, Moses born, (just before) death of the child killing Pharao, identified with Sesostris III, carbon dated 1830 BC; VII) 1470 BC, fall of Jericho, carbon dated 1550 BC; VIII) 1179 BC, fall of Troy, also carbon dated 1179 BC.
III) This will match the less well documented earlier periods either being not recorded at all, or recorded with more distortions.
We have no contemporary books from the Upper Palaeolithic, and the Egyptian records that contradict the Biblical timeline are way later than the pharaos, contradict each other, within the Old and Middle Kingdoms.
IV) Atmospheric carbon 14 levels will line up with population increase after the Flood. 10 years after the Flood, you can't have more than 8 adults, so if 30 adults or so died together, and the reading of my calibration says 10 years after the Flood, it has to be later and there has to be a case for the reservoir effect. Even later, you cannot have a genetically identified father and son where my recalibration reduces the generation gap to 10 years.
Test cases.
A) Mladeč Caves' skeleta° (about 30 individuals) in my previous calibration were so close to the Flood that I found a reservoir effect necessary. Then I divided the I—II table somewhat arbitrarily at I/II with a first part having a carbon 14 build up relatively slower and the second part having a speed of 20 times the present one. As these skeleta fall within the earlier part with slower carbon build up, they can now be sth like 80 years after the Flood and still dated that old.
Plot twist. The 39 000 BP date for the Flood was actually not the uncalibrated carbon date of Campi Phlegrei, but the Argon-Argon date, used to calibrate the carbon date. The raw carbon date for the Flood would be more like 34 500 BP. The skeleta from Mladeč would probably again be within too close to the Flood, so would again need the reservoir effect. Fortunately, they are calcar caves, and this means, they involved lots of carbon from the Flood.
B) The Frälsegården pedigree from the research of Kristian Kristiansson.°° Here is my comment:
When I have went out to archaeologists to see if they had found things disproving my calibration, it was not just rhetoric. If this research had given a pedigree guaranteed of six degrees from "farfars farfars far" to "sonsons sonsons son" as they would call it in Swedish, and my recalibration for the dates had given 10 years per generation, a total of 60 years, rather than 119 or as we see 119 +, this would obviously have proven my recalibration wrong, at least in this part.
Some supplementary observations and corresponding predictions.
- V) Neanderthals and Denisovans are pre-Flood races. All that's left of their genome came through the Ark, but no one on the Ark needs to have been full blood Neanderthal, and the persons in or before the Ark that could be so are a) Noah's mother, b) Noah's wife, c) any father of any daughter in law. Corrollary: any full blood Neanderthal needs to have a carbon date before that of the Flood.
- VI) Göbekli Tepe is Babel. Corrollary: any trace of what could be writing should be mono-lingual before the carbon date of GT, and plurilingual according to places or limited to certain places after.
- VII) Nimrod was active at Babel. Corrollary: the period of GT should also be a period to which one could trace potential signs of tyranny.
How does this hold up?
V ... Corrollary: any full blood Neanderthal needs to have a carbon date before that of the Flood.
The obvious objection is Gorham Cave, Gibraltar. 28 000 BP is later than the Flood date. However, what's carbon dated isn't any Neanderthal. It's charcoal. The only things that tie Gorham Cave to Neanderthals are: a) actual Neanderthal skeleta in nearby caves (one was dated 47 000 BP, earlier than the Flood date); b) the cave itself contains stone tools of Mousterian style, a culture that when found with skeleta typically is found with Neanderthal such.
My hypothesis about Gorham Cave is, Noah's family paid a visit, lit a fire, some time after the Flood. Perhaps pious, for providing decent burials. Perhaps impious, if Nimrod (or someone like him) was already born and tried out the evil practise of incubation, in order to become a kind of post-Flood Nephelim.
There recently was a news story about the Neanderthal nicknamed Thorin (by archaeologists who were also Tolkien fans, no doubt) and he's carbon dated to 42 000 BP. A carbon date falling in the pre-Flood range.
VI ... Corrollary: any trace of what could be writing should be mono-lingual before the carbon date of GT, and plurilingual according to places or limited to certain places after.
Genevieve von Petzinger documented 32 signs all over the Upper Palaeolithic, plus one of them, a hashtag, found in a Neanderthal cave (and in her reckoning, with carbon dates pretty much accepted as they are, this is a very unparallelled cultural constancy over tens of thousands of years). Her geographic range for them was from Spain to Indonesia. They are not younger than (or even as young as) carbon dated 10 000 BC. So, they are older than Babel.
The
Vinča symbols are limited to:
found on artifacts from the Neolithic Vinča culture and other "Old European" cultures of Central and Southeast Europe.
The
Indus script is limited to the Indus valley and (in its early phase) to:
Early examples of the Indus script have been found on pottery inscriptions and clay impressions of inscribed Harappan seals dating to around c. 2800–2600 BCE during the Early Harappan period, and emerging alongside administrative objects such as seals and standardised weights during the Kot Diji phase of this period. However, excavations at Harappa have demonstrated the development of some symbols from potter's marks and graffiti belonging to the earlier Ravi phase from c. 3500–2800 BCE.
Genevieve von Petzinger would certainly not classify the Vinča symbols and the Indus script as the same set of symbols, unlike "her own" 32 signs. If the earliest Indus script and latest Vinča symbols coincide in time with Genesis 14 (carbon dated 3500 BC), the very earliest Vinča symbols ...
with the symbols on the Tărtăria clay tablets possibly dating back to around 5,300 BC (controversially dated by association).
Which is a carbon date younger than Babel. About the time that Peleg died.
Göbekli Tepe also fits the geographic criteria. In Upper Mesopotamia. West of a candidate of the landing place (a candidate in the mountains of Armenia), whether you prefer Durupınar or Mount Judi or even "Mount Ararat". It's on the Northern border and Western half of the Northern border of a squareish plain (the Harran plain) that is within Mesopotamia, rather than surrounding it.
VII ... Corrollary: the period of GT should also be a period to which one could trace potential signs of tyranny.
In Göbekli Tepe, one has found skulls taken off the human bodies. One has found a "birdman" which can be interpreted as a headless man lying and the place of the missing head covered, along with shoulders, by the vulture. In "nearby"°°° and slightly later Çatal Höyyük, one has found ceramics depicting headless mean and flying vultures approaching.
One can reconstruct this as, with recalcitrants, Nimrod beheaded them, taking the head for his skull collection and giving the body to the vultures.
In other words, I think my own theories have stood up amply to the test of "fulfilled predictions".
Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Genevieve
3.I.2026
Lutetiae Parisiorum sanctae Genovefae Virginis, quae, a beato Germano, Antisiodorensi Episcopo, Christo dicata, admirandis virtutibus et miraculis claruit.
Online documentation of the predictions.
ONE, THEIRS:
We Predicted This. When It Happened, It Left Evolutionists STUNNED.
Answers in Genesis | 30 May 2025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZ3ktKR8KZw
TWO, MINE: Here and
Newer Tables: Preliminaries ·
Flood to Joseph in Egypt ·
Joseph in Egypt to Fall of Troy.
* Alpine tops have more radiation from the cosmos, a Dutch polder less. Not sure by how much.
** Quote and source:
A sample purporting to be from the Flood era would not be expected to give a ‘radiocarbon age’ of about 5,000 years, but rather 20,000–50,000 years.
[Footnote 1 of] CMI : Radiocarbon in dino bones
International conference result censored
by Carl Wieland | Published: 22 January 2013 (GMT+10)
https://creation.com/c14-dinos
*** 1 pmC = 38 100 extra years, 4 pmC = 26 600 extra years, 38 100 - 26 600 = 11 500 (2*5730 = 11 460, but the values given are rounded by Earth Science Australia
Carbon 14 Dating Calculator). 3 pmC = 29 000 extra years, 6 pmC = 23 250 extra years, 29 000 - 23 250 = 5750 (dito). 9 pmC = 19 900 extra years. 23 250 - 19 900 = 3350.
°
Mladeč caves
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2022/09/mladec-caves.html
°°
Has Kristian Kristiansen at Gothenburg University Disproven My Calibration?
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2024/07/has-kristian-kristiansen-at-gothenburg.html
°°° 697 km on E90. Less than the distance from Pamplona to Santiago, which took me 50 days walk.
