CMI Don't Have an Office in Sweden, So, I Looked for One of AiG ... and Found Sth Else

Google search:

answers in genesis sweden

Hit:

Oldest Living Tree Located In Sweden
on April 19, 2008 | [someone on AiG]
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/oldest-living-tree-in-sweden/

It's about Old Tjikko. I've written about Old Tjikko previously, appropriately on my Swedish Blog:

På Svenska og på Dansk på Antimodernism: Huru gammal är Old Tjikko?
https://danskantimodernism.blogspot.com/2017/02/huru-gammal-ar-old-tjikko.html

Now, 9550 BP I got to somewhat after Babel, but with an old table. I'll recalibrate with my most recent one:

9550 - 1950 = 7600 BC

2511 BC

54.143 pmC, dated as 7583 BC

A very important part of the difference is, back in early 2017 I hadn't yet made the connection that if Jesus is born 2957 after the Flood and 2015 after the Birth of Abraham, as this means Abraham was born 942 after the Flood, it must also mean Peleg was born (and Babel ended) 401 after the Flood. It's Septuagint without the Second Cainan. And back in early February 2017, I hadn't figured that out. Hence the confusion on this old post:

If Göbekli Tepe is Tower of Babel ...

Of which the above linked post on Old Tjikko depends.

However, let's go to my newest version, appropriately (considering what chronology I use) from Christmas:

Newer Tables, Flood to Joseph in Egypt

That's where you find above quote. The old post means Old Tjikko's oldest surviving root is somewhat after Babel. My new calibration means it is from 45 years after Babel.

Now, there is a real good takeaway from the AiG post:

Did you note that the variable wasn't ¹⁴C decay rate (as per Setterfield), but ¹⁴C production rate, which I agree with? Nice, as a sudoku solver says when solving and solving and solving ...

Some persons from Sweden need to get on board with (or leave me alone) that "total content of consensus science" does not equal "observed fact". Any school (including the ones that now carry near consensus among scientists) will produce results depending on observed fact, logic, some kind of world view or ideology. It follows that the results of any school can be wrong, not from insufficient observation, nor necessarily even from bad logic, but from badness of world view assumptions. And since world views don't necessarily improve as facts accumulate, that can equally be the case for the school which at present carries consensus.

Someone growing up in Sweden now will arguably know that Marco Polo knew of pasta even before visiting China. But he will have a scarier overall worldview than I had. The cure isn't to curb the flow of facts on the internet, it's to fight back on the world view issues, and that takes the internet to get things done, mostly these days. Though I'd prefer my writings were available in print as well, which could earn me money and make access less dependent on the whims of internet censors.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Augulus of ...?
7.II.2025

Augustae, cui nunc Londini nomen, in Britannia, natalis beati Auguli Episcopi, qui, aetitis cursu per martyrium expleto, aeterna praemia suscipere meruit.

Someone Has Decided My Apologetics Blogs Cannot Be Shared on FB Walls, own, a friend's or a group's.

Now, the censorship takes different forms.

One is, the URL for this blog infringes on Community Standards.

The next time, it was seen as "looks like spam" ...

Incidentally, and I hope this is really incidental, there are some positions in CMI and in AiG that I don't share, and I say so.

"Neanderthals can't be Nephelim because the Flood wiped all away" ...

God wiped away men who were on the face, i e above surface of the earth. A Neanderthal that's buried was already below earth's surface, so no longer on the face of the earth, when the Flood came. Therefore God didn't wipe those people out. He did wipe the people out who were still walking. Neanderthals, Denisovans, reg'lar post-Flood guys.

I'd probably agree Neanderthals per se aren't Nephelim, because Denisovan / Heidelbergian / Antecessor seems a better candidate. Homo erectus may be a kind of very ugly and stupid Nephelim, or a kind of ugly and stupid person bred to serve the Nephelim in brutality. I base the ugly part on cannibalism of Trinil. And also on the 1922 reconstruction (which however was based on a skull cap, so, the facial features were fantasy). I base the stupid part on the estimate that the average brain size of a Homo erectus was that of a ten year old child. Or an ear which is basically a human ear, but one with a slight tendency to an ape ear's greater thickness, so that a Homo erectus may have heard consonants like K and CH, but not the shriller consonants P and T. A dangerous combination with a more than normally human strength. And if they didn't have the difformity as a punishment to their angelic fathers, as in them being Nephelim, they may certainly have had it as a kind of deliberate breeding of supersoldiers by the Nephelim.

Now, CMI and AiG seem to put great stock on this idea that we have NO human bones from before the Flood, which I see as a misreading of Genesis 6:7, and this means, as long as they do this, they cannot afford to accept my recalibration of carbon dating. It says squarely that if a skeleton is dated to 40 000 BP or earlier, it is pre-Flood. As all Neanderthal skeleta and also Denny (Denisovan) are carbon dated to older* than 40 000 BP, this makes them pre-Flood. Hence, they need to put more doubts on carbon dating than really needed.

Connected to this is the idea, there was no spread of mankind before Babel. "They" in Genesis 11:2 = (according to them) "all the earth" in Genesis 11:1. No spread before Babel allowed, which means that a post-Babel Palaeolithic can be explained by technology loss when some of the groups splitting off from Babel hadn't been specialising in farming.

My view of Babel is, it is Göbekli Tepe and during the period or just after it, farming becomes commonplace. But this obviously means there is a geographic spread of mankind before Babel, which they wrongly think contradicts Genesis 11:1,2. Incidentally, they are Protestants, and Protestants generally misread Matthew 6:7, and incidentally, Luke 11:1,2 is a parallel passage.

Can I really hope they have not been meddling with links to this blog, by reporting it as spam or as against community standards? I'm not sure, but alas, there are other candidates. One could theoretically state that a Secularist, heavily allergic to everything Creation science did it, and I cannot disprove that. On the other hand, if it were the case, and if CMI / AiG were not into a kind of gate keeping (like Judaism about Isaias 53), well, why haven't they made any move to accept my offers of publication and why haven't they defended my freedom of speech at least? Including, in freedom of information, the freedom of others to find me on FB? Perhaps I haven't clearly enough asked for it, but now I do. I hope this is clear.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Conversion of St. Paul
25.I.2025

* The observation only applies to those that are carbon dated, which is not all of them.

Joy to the World

Yes, He will one day give us New Heavens and a New Earth, but on this old one, there are thorns for a reason. However, Someone was born to end them:

No more let sins and sorrows grow,
Nor thorns infest the ground;
He comes to make His blessings flow
Far as the curse is found,
Far as the curse is found,
Far as, far as, the curse is found.

Joy to the World | Isaac Watts
https://library.timelesstruths.org/music/Joy_to_the_World/

Hat tip to Calvin Smith:

This Video About Christmas Will OPEN Your Eyes
Answers in Genesis Canada | 21 Dec. 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC6i-cFX-RA

When was the Upper Palaeolithic? Flood to Babel or post-Babel?

Origen has a few sermons on Genesis. The one on the Flood states that the words of Lamech about Noah (in Genesis 5:29), namely:

And he called his name Noe, saying: This same shall comfort us from the works and labours of our hands on the earth, which the Lord hath cursed.

... are only fulfilled typologically, in Christ, it is impossible to have them fulfilled in the son of Lamech back then.

In fact not. The Palaeolithic means the society of hunter-gatherers. And hunter-gatherers do in fact repose from agriculture.

So, was the Palaeolithic (after the démise of Neanderthals at least) post-Flood or post-Babel?

Kent Hovind compares the post-Flood situation to a Gilligan's Island scenario. CMI and AiG seem to have a preference for putting this Palaeolithic (and even the Neanderthals) post-Babel. Technology loss due to populations splitting up.

And I think the answer is given : it was Noah, not Nimrod, who brought repose from agricultural pursuits./HGL

Cave Art

Shem the Cave Painter? Or Japheth? · Cave Art · Evolutionists have a war problem

LiveScience

Low oxygen levels would have caused hallucinations, but where the oxygen levels were higher, they found other means, that's how cave art was done, folks!

Answers in Genesis

Says who?

Me:

"40 000 BP" = actual year 2957 BC, namely the Flood. "14 000 BP / 12 000 BC" =* ...

2711 B. Chr.

0.302799 pmC/100, so dated as 12 611 B. Chr.

2688 B. Chr.

0.328739 pmC/100, so dated as 11 888 B. Chr.

(12 611 + 11 888)/2 = 12 249.5 BC = roughly = 12 000 BC
(2711 + 2688)/2 = 2699.5 BC, or 2700 BC, Noah had about a century left to live.

So, whoever started the trend must have been on the Ark.

Altered states of mind? Well, the Ark doing some rollings (without capsizing!) might have had a somewhat hypnotic effect, so, maybe there was some kind of nostalgia or craving for this ... and drawing animals, certainly spending c. 1 year on very close terms with animals would make such drawings a fairly nostalgic moment.

As I think Babel ended at birth of Phalec, 401 after the Flood, I also think it began c. 50 years earlier, when Noah died.

This makes the carbon ages mentioned - and my lineup is fairly useless for non-carbon uniformitarian ones** - into the time when Noah was still alive.

On previous tables, I put it into the time when Shem was still alive, but since then I obviously revised when exactly Babel / Göbekli Tepe fits into the Biblical timeline. If it was Shem's contemporary Japheth, why didn't Japheth or his wife continue?

* Using my famous New Tables:
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

** So, it says nothing about thermoluminiscence age of 40 000 BP for Mungo woman, but it says sth about the carbon age for her, c. 20 000 BP, depending on what tissue.