samedi 20 février 2021

FB Censors CMI


This post can't be shared
In response to Australian government legislation, Facebook restricts the posting of news links and all posts from news Pages in Australia. Globally, the posting and sharing of news links from Australian publications is restricted.


I tried to share:

CMI : Comparison of morphology-based and genomics-based baraminology methods
by Matthew Cserhati and Joel Tay | This article is from
Journal of Creation 33(3):49–54, December 2019
https://creation.com/baraminology-methods


The actual context is a debate on whether Robert Sungenis was right to criticise "Cardinal" Schönborn from a standpoint of species fixism, or whether he would profit from an approach like "baraminology". Hardly any kind of news of the day link.

I suppose this is an abuse of an actual legislation, but don't know exactly what that legislation is, since FB notification window cited above with button OK doesn't tell!/HGL

(Testing with a link to ABC, it's not just CMI!/HGL)

mercredi 17 février 2021

Gavin Cox, Egypt, C14


How to fit "mythical kings" in Turin King List with pre-Flood patriarchs, I think Gavin Cox may know more than I:

CMI : The search for Adam, Eve, Noah and the Flood—in Ancient Egypt?
Published: 13 February 2021 (GMT+10)
by Gavin Cox, Feedback 2021
https://creation.com/adam-eve-noah-flood-ancient-egypt


Now, what about the pyramids, C14?

CMI : Time fears the pyramids?
by Gavin Cox | This article is from
Creation 42(1):18–20, January 2020
https://creation.com/pyramids-of-egypt-age


First, one more area of agreement:

... secular dating for the oldest of Egypt’s pyramids presents no threat to the accuracy of biblical history. The dates offered for these monuments are themselves questioned by the experts who calculate them—which are in turn based upon their worldview, which rejects any notion of the global Flood as a real event in history. In reality, the oldest of Egypt’s pyramids fit comfortably within biblical history and timescale as post-Flood and post-Babel monuments. They were built by the descendants of Noah, through Ham, Mizraim, and their offspring.


Now, where we differ is in technical detail.

However, it is the Flood which would have had the major effect on the carbon ratio. This becomes increasingly significant the closer the sample’s true age is to the time of the Flood. This is because the Flood buried huge amounts of 12C in vegetation, but the amount of 14C being produced is unaffected by this. This would significantly increase the post-Flood 14C/12C ratio compared to the pre-Flood times,7 thus giving an inflated age to any sample from the pre-Flood world.8


Footnote 7
Because the carbon dating calibration is based on the post-Flood world. See also: Cox, G., How old? When archaeology conflicts with the Bible, 1 Nov 2018; creation.com/archaeology-conflicts.

Footnote 8
Easily found within the list of articles in ref. 5.
See Radiometric Dating Questions and Answers; creation.com/dating .

Yes, the radiometric calibration is based on the post-Flood and indeed very recent such world.

But, we have a problem ... supposing the 12C before in atmosphere and in living things before the Flood were twice the present, and nothing else were different between the atmospheres this would imply that the stable 14C ratio would be half the one we have. However, there is no need to think that it was ever reached. There is no need to think the world was created with one already existing 14C ratio at pre-Flood version of 100 pmC, rather than created with virtually no 14C and just one 14N atom (or some few more) in creation week went 14C when Sun and stars were created. This means, the main reason pre-Flood things have highly inflated carbon dates is the incompletion of any kind of rise to any kind of 100 pmC or stable 14C/12C ratio. This means, after the Flood, 14C could rise quicker than before, since it was rising in relation to 12C, of which there was less (I think there were some other reasons 14C rose slower before the Flood too), but it would have still been rising, since still at no stable 14C/12C ratio, where 14C production and decay match.

But there is one more reason that not just pre-Flood, but also early post-Flood dates are inflated. While after the Flood, 14C production would affect proportionally the 14C/12C ratio as quickly as now, the 14C production was quicker than now. And yes, otherwise we would have had a still rising 14C/12C ratio and this would mean calibrating against different dates in the past would give different half lives and each of them would be very much shorter than the real one.

I have actually been challenged on this faster buildup, someone stating that it would have left all vertebrate life dead and only spiders surviving that holocaust of radiation. I then did check exactly how much, on different assumptions, the production would be faster. The fastest one I need right now is, for the c. 350 years from Flood to beginning of Babel and < 51 years from beginning to end of Babel is just about ten times faster production than now. But this also gives a scale of calibration.*

Let's take the Giza pyramids, the things said by Gavin Cox here:

The Giza pyramids were all built in the Fourth Dynasty, the ‘golden age’ of the Old Kingdom of Egypt. Secular archaeologists date their building between 2589–2504 BC, which allows 85 years for their construction. ... The dates were obtained from 14C found in wood, reed and straw left by the pyramid builders. In 1984, dates were obtained by the David H. Koch Pyramids Radiocarbon Project for the Giza pyramids that made the pyramids 374 years older than they expected.


So, let's add up to get carbon dates ... 2589+374 = 2963 BC. Real date? Well, it would have been after Abraham's visit to the Pharao (Genesis 14 occurring in c. 1935 BC is connected to reed mats of En Gedi evacuation dated to 3500 BC), but before Joseph in Egypt (supposing Djoser as Joseph's Pharao, his coffin being carbon dated to 2800 uncalibrated, which is comparable to c. 1725 BC. Or even a bit later, since Joseph's Pharao didn't die immediately on arrival of Jacob and of Joseph's brethren.

1935 BC
82.73 pmC, so dated as 3485 BC

1778 BC
85.9766 pmC, so dated as 3028 BC

"2963 BC"

1756 BC
86.4346 pmC, so dated as 2956 BC

1711 BC
87.3468 pmC, so dated as 2811 BC


This is then a date between the real dates 1778 and 1756 BC. But how long did it take?

Secular archaeologists date their building between 2589–2504 BC, which allows 85 years for their construction. ... These dates were based on the 14C dating method, which obtained a wider-than-predicted range of dates for the various materials tested, namely 400 years.


The carbon date range for Göbekli Tepe is 9600 to 8600 BC. If this was Babel, it is probable that the real range of dates is c. 40 years, these taking up the majority of the years between 350 and 401 after the Flood (death of Noah to birth of Peleg). The 14C/12C still rising means, the dates are more inflated for the earlier than for the later real date, which prolongs the span beyond its real measure. It may be mentioned that I use a version of the LXX chronology, that of the Roman Martyrology for Christmas Day.**

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Ash Wednesday
17.II.2021

* My latest scale of calibration is:
Creation vs. Evolution : New Tables
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

As I take Babel = Göbekli Tepe, I argue this, among other articles, here:
Creation vs. Evolution : Work Ethic in the Neolithic and Genesis 11
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2021/02/work-ethic-in-neolithic-and-genesis-11.html

** Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Background to Christmas Martyrology
http://filolohika.blogspot.com/2019/02/background-to-christmas-martyrology.html

samedi 13 février 2021

Work Ethic in the Neolithic and Genesis 11


Creation vs. Evolution: What a Few Lines from Gilgamesh Epic Tell us of the Errors in Babylonian Theology · Aberrations of Protestant Work Ethic · Work Ethic in the Neolithic and Genesis 11 · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Denying Adam's Individuality : Babylonian · back to Creation vs. Evolution: Did Samuel Noah Kramer Prove the Ziggurat of Ur was the Tower of Babel?

It would seem, a certain group of people, sufficiently universal around the grandsons and greatgrandsons of Noah, and their chosen leader, were up to some work load heavy projects.

I leave the word to Graham Hancock who instead of surviving a Flood and getting from landing place to the West to Shinar (which Göbekli Tepe is part of, if it is Mesopotamia) imagines the people who commanded came from Atlantis and went to the East through most of the Mediterranean:

THE MYSTERY OF GÖBEKLI TEPE - Graham Hancock on London Real
London Real | 19th Sept. 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K5NvCiYGEI


Graham Hancock says the total of Göbekli Tepe (most not yet excavated) was 50 times bigger than Stonehenge. The outer and older circle of Stonehenge has, according to German wiki, a diameter of 115 meters. Does he mean 50 times that diameter or 50 times the surface covered by it? The first is less probable, but easier to calculate : 115*50 = 5750 meters. This would mean, 5750*5750*pi/4 = 25 967 226.777 sq meters or 25.9 sq kilometers, larger than strictly urban area of Paris. On the other hand, we can try 50 times the surface of Stonehenge. 115*115*pi/4 = 10 386.891 sq m, this times 50 = 519 344.536 sq m, making Göbekli Tepe half a sq km. With a radius of sqrt(50)*115 = 813.173 meters, nearly one km in diameter.

But he also says: "involving bringing a labour force, and organising that labour force, and feeding and watering them to create the world's first" 2:19 - 2:23 "perfectly North-South aligned building which involves accurate astronomy to do all of that and at the same time to invent" 2:23 - 2:32 "agriculture ..."

I would say, a mighty hunter of men was not allowing hs labour force to amble.

As this post will be the certain number I'll calculate below, I sign here before giving the gematria of his name./HGL

PS, at 3:10 he also states "their civilisation did not quite work" - if you look at Genesis 11:8 you will find that confirmed, as well as next verse agreeing with further words of Graham Hancock./HGL

So, what was the name and patronymic of this man? Nimrod Ben Kush, right? But all vowels are short, so are not marked. N(i)MR(o)D B(e)N K(u)SH. Let's take the levels hundreds, decades, units.
N(i)MR(o)D B(e)N K(u)SH - Resh, Shin, 200+300 = 500
N(i)MR(o)D B(e)N K(u)SH - Nun, Mem, Nun, Kaph, 50+40+50+20 = 160
N(i)MR(o)D B(e)N K(u)SH - Daleth, Beth, 4+2 = 6

mardi 9 février 2021

What Does My Calibration Mean for pre-Bronze Greece?


I will not take into account all of the Greek area, since the first link I give is for South Greece only, actually even Franchthi only.

Dartmouth : The Southern Greek Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic Sequence at Franchthi
https://www.dartmouth.edu/~prehistory/aegean/?page_id=107


Paleolithic (ca. 20,000 – 8300 b.c.)

No certain gathering of plant foods is attested before ca. 11,000 b.c., although large numbers of seeds of the Boraginaceae family may come from plants gathered to furnish soft “bedding” or for the dye which their roots may have supplied. First appearing at ca. 11,000 b.c. are lentils, vetch, pistachios, and almonds. Then ca. 10,500 b.c. and still well within the Upper Paleolithic period appear a few very rare seeds of wild oats and wild barley.


Mesolithic (ca. 8300 – 6000b.c.)

The plant remains are much the same as those of the preceding Paleolithic period, with the exceptions that wild pears and a few peas begin to appear ca. 7300 b.c. and that wild oats and barley become common after 7000 b.c. The disappearance of the equid and caprine bones from the faunal assemblage and of seeds of the Boraginaceae family from the botanical assemblage, as well as an increase in the number of pistachios, all taking place ca. 8000 b.c., suggest a change of environment to open forests.

... Analysis of the human bone from elsewhere in the cave produced evidence for at least one other Mesolithic burial, this of the Upper Mesolithic phase, in another location, in addition to fragments of another 6 to 25 individuals sprinkled throughout Mesolithic strata within the cave. These bones represent individuals of all age groups (adults, adolescents, infants, neonates) and hence would appear to make the conclusion inescapable that the human groups that occupied the cave during the Mesolithic did so on a permanent basis. Otherwise, the existence of what amounts to a genuine cemetery here, one which accommodated the full spectrum of the social group occupying the cave, is difficult to explain.


Early Neolithic (ca. 6000 – 5000 b.c.) / Middle Neolithic (ca. 5000 – 4500 b.c.) / Late Neolithic (ca. 4500 – 400[0] b.c.) / Final Neolithic (ca. 4000 – 3000 b.c.)

Next link is about Mesolithic.

The Early Neolithic in Greece : 2 - The Mesolithic background
Catherine Perlès, Université de Paris X | Print publication year: 2001 | Online publication date: December 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/the-early-neolithic-in-greece/the-mesolithic-background/A200E08DC42F5A46626FF54590D64A1B


Here, I shall use the term Mesolithic in its chronological sense, to designate early Holocene hunter-gatherer assemblages. The period under consideration spans between c. 9500 and 8000 BP uncalibrated, or c. 8700 to 7000 BC in calendar years. Detailed data-oriented presentations have been offered elsewhere (Perlès 1990a, 1995; Runnels 1995), so I shall focus on issues directly relevant to the problem of the origins of the Neolithic.

The most salient characteristic of the Mesolithic in Greece is how poorly it is known, and how few sites are recorded.


The Neolithic civilization (6800-3300 BC)
https://www.greek-thesaurus.gr/Neolithic-civilization-Greece.html


Neolithic Civilization is the long era, the main characteristics of which are farming , stock-breeding , permanent installation and the extensive use of stone , as well. ... [It] lasted more than three thousand years and is divided into five main phases, the Aceramic (6800-6500 BC) , the Early Neolithic (6500-5800 BC) ,the Middle Neolithic (5300-4500 BC) and the Late Neolithic or Chalcolithic (4500-3300 BC).


So, what are our dates ... uniformitarian ones. For Catherine Perlès, I'll assume that uncalibrated means Cambridge halflife and go with that. This means, I may be double interpreting the 7300 and 7000 BC in previous link.

2867 B.C.
90 years after Flood
11.9246 pmC, so dated as 20 467 B.C.

"20,000 BC"

2845 B.C.
14.5681 pmC, so dated as 18 745 B.C.

2666 B.C.
35.4608 pmC, so dated as 11 216 B.C.

"11,000 BC"

2644 B.C.
38.0408 pmC, so dated as 10 644 B.C.

"10,500 BC"

2621 B.C.
40.6138 pmC, so dated as 10 071 B.C.

2607 B.C.
Beginning of Babel
42.8224 pmC, so dated as 9607 B.C.

"9500 BC"

2585 B.C.
45.483 pmC, so dated as 9085 B.C.

2556 B.C.
End of Babel
48.1415 pmC, so dated as 8606 B.C.
2534 B.C.
49.4539 pmC, so dated as 8334 B.C.

"8300 BC"

2511 B.C.
50.7242 pmC, so dated as 8111 B.C.

"8000 BC"

2444 B.C.
54.5151 pmC, so dated as 7444 B.C.

"7300 BC"

2422 B.C.
55.7737 pmC, so dated as 7272 B.C.
2399 B.C.
57.0291 pmC, so dated as 7049 B.C.

"7000 BC"

2377 B.C.
58.4214 pmC, so dated as 6827 B.C.

"6800 BC"

2355 B.C.
59.6678 pmC, so dated as 6605 B.C.

"6500 BC"

2332 B.C.
60.9109 pmC, so dated as 6432 B.C.

2265 B.C.
64.6199 pmC, so dated as 5865 B.C.

"5800 BC"

2220 B.C.
68.0023 pmC, so dated as 5420 B.C.

"5300 BC ?"

2198 B.C.
69.2256 pmC, so dated as 5248 B.C.

2086 B.C.
74.3062 pmC, so dated as 4536 B.C.

"4500 BC"

2019 B.C.
77.8962 pmC, so dated as 4069 B.C.

"4000 BC"

1935 B.C.
Genesis 14
82.73 pmC, so dated as 3485 B.C.

1868 B.C.
84.1262 pmC, so dated as 3318 B.C.

"3300 BC"


I have here used the tables from this work:

New Tables
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html


For the dates between Flood and Babel, I have not yet taken into account Mezzena man as either pre-or post-Flood. Either way, the carbon date 20 000 BC is a different time after the Flood than just 90 years, since either the Flood date is younger than 40 000 BP, and 2870 BC is dated as "19 870 BC", or there was after the Flood a longer time before radical rise in C14 occurred, and if 35000 BP is on 90 after Flood, 20000 BC is later.

All stone ages in Greece from Palaeolithic to Chalcolithic: 16 700 carbon years for 999 real years.

Neolithic only, Aceramic to Chalcolithic : 3500 carbon years for 509 real years.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Cyril of Alexandria
9.II.2021

PS: I came to look this up over Greece in "6000 BC" being mentioned in 6000 BCE: Life in Greece & The Balkans - Neolithic Europe Documentary by Stefan Milo. As evidence of armed conflict abound, we must conclude that carbon dated 6000 BC came after Babel, when mankind was already divided into diverse communities sometimes in conflict with each other. One more reason to prefer Göbekli Tepe over Eridu's Abzu as Genesis 11 Babel (my table uses the Göbekli Tepe identification for reasons I had known before this video)./HGL

mardi 2 février 2021

Aberrations of Protestant Work Ethic


Creation vs. Evolution: What a Few Lines from Gilgamesh Epic Tell us of the Errors in Babylonian Theology · Aberrations of Protestant Work Ethic · Work Ethic in the Neolithic and Genesis 11 · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Denying Adam's Individuality : Babylonian · back to Creation vs. Evolution: Did Samuel Noah Kramer Prove the Ziggurat of Ur was the Tower of Babel?

According to God's law, how many days a year should you rest?

52* days, like each Sunday, or if you are a Jew Sabbath?

52 days, plus 18 to 21 more as per Sabbaths and Mosaic feasts (each taking 8 days, one or two of which will be on a Sabbath and therefore doesn't add)?

Or more?

Even in the Old Testament itself, two more feasts of eight days each were added onto the Mosaic ones : Purim and Hanukkah. Why? Because God had granted some very notable benefits to the Jewish people, there was an addition of feasts. This addition means that there was an addition of rest as well.

Note also, while it seems to have been never applied, the law actually postulated a Sabbatical year and a year of Jubilee. The probable reason is, Israelites were always dealing with enemies, and were probably afraid to apply it, least the enemies take advantage and rob them of all. This means, we see "sabbath year" only in the law, and also in II Esdras (aka Nehemiah), but here weakened to only imply non-claim of debts. It is not certain how long the disposition lasted effectively, but it is certain Hillel (since there are in fact 2 Hillel, it's Hillel I**) invented a way to get around the non-claim of debts in Sabbath years.

This is of cours important for the new law. Feasts are centred on the life of Christ and the Blessed Virgin, but also other benefits of God. In fact, it can vary from diocese to diocese how many days are festive. Like, most dioceses in the world, you would not need to get a day off for St. Botulf, but if you are in a parish within Iken in Suffolk, Boston in Lincolnshire, perhaps even the archdiocese of Boston Massachusetts, you would take a day off on 17th or 25th of June.

In the Middle Ages, the average number of days off in a country like France equalled the 20th Century, except that in the 20th C. you would typically have a longer Summer vacation, while in the Middle Ages, those days would be spread around the year. In the 17th C., in France, bishops were starting to abolish feast days, and met with opposition from farmers. The reason for the one is, towns and cities were growing bigger, and the farming population had to support besides themselves more non-farmers. The reason for the other is, this was of course a great deal more work and a great deal less fun for the farming population. When tractors and so on came, after World War I, this did not mean farmers got back free time, it means farms grew bigger and lots of ex-farmers had to look for jobs in factories or become bums. Those who remained became lonelier and these days suicide is a concern with French farmers (it obviously also has to do with growing secularism, since Christianity restrains a man from killing himself).

But in Protestant countries, the Reformers had already done that about a century earlier - less among Anglicans and Lutherans, more among Calvinists and Anabaptists, but either way much more than the French bishops did in the 17th C. Who liked the Reformation? Well, nobles and other landowners who could run their peasants harder, as well as getting the lands taken away from monasteries, as these were abolished. Businessmen both artisans and traders in the cities, who could run their apprentices and journeymen harder. The lower classes were given reasons to like it too, as irksome fasts and restraints on drunkenness were taken away. Work ethic to a journeyman age 14 in Saxony or Sweden would have changed from "work hard, rest well" to "work hard, drink hard, work hard again". There is a reason why Protestant countries were those having the issues with drunkenness that "second awakening" and all that were trying to deal with.

Why am I doing this on Creation versus Evolution, and not on my main blog or my Philology blog? Or on Great Bishop of Geneva? Well, besides my contributions to Creation science, this is also the blog where I face some rare but not non-extant aberrations on the part of CMI. Here is Marc Ambler:

The work ethic / Forged in Genesis
by Marc Ambler | Published: 2 February 2021 (GMT+10)
https://creation.com/work-ethic


He is treating the merely physical capacity for ambling*** - going slow - as the sin of idleness. Now, this is bad theology, as all trades are not such as require quick and large actions by the arms and legs, like his present occupation of speaking and writing.

Now, I do not think ambling is a thing to repent of - I think it is a thing to take into account when you chose your trade. I have chosen mine, as writing. It works better if you do amble. So does poetry, so does musical composition, and so do a lot of other things. If CMI thinks I will "repent of my sins including laziness" when it comes to ambling ... no, I am not that sluggish about learning theology!

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Candlemass
2.II.2021

Update next day : by too little ambling, too much hurry, I did not garble the theological content of the essay, but did so with the mathematical content of a footnote. The 0.2425 days per year or 97 leapdays in 400 years, are, per year, 5 hours indeed, but not 15 minutes, but 49 minutes and 12 seconds. Why did I go wrong? I saw that one twentyfifth of "it all" was replaced by a quarter of itself, but forgot that "it all" was not the 24 hours of a day-and-night, but the six hours of a fourth such. Now, this means, instead of approximating to 1 hour, as I did, I need to find 1/25 of 6 hours and then take that away and then add back a quarter as much. This is 14.4 minutes away and then 3.6 minutes back. 360 - 14.4 = 345.6. 345.6 + 3.6 = 349.2 minutes, that is five hours, 49 minutes and 1/5 of a minute which is 12 seconds. Or I count leapseconds in 400 years, 97*24*60*60, 8 380 800 seconds, dividing which by 400 comes like dividing 83 808 seconds by 4, which is 20 952 seconds each year, and in 20 900 I take away 300*60, or 18 000, in 2 900 I take away 40*60 or 2 400, in the remaining 552 I take away 9*60 which is 540 and that leaves 12 seconds. The 349 minutes are obviously 5 hours and 49 minutes.

As a bonus, "ambler" would comme from "ambuleur" and ultimately from "ambulator" = stroller. When a medical practitioner does the round in a hospital, being a stroller is very much not being a sluggard. Going quietly from patient to patient, taking time to talk with each, calms, cheers, and allows a better view of their medical status than rushing on./HGL

Update later : Marc Ambler made a follow up, here:

CMI : Why should a Christian ‘labour and toil’?
20 February 2021 (GMT+10) (Feedback)
https://creation.com/christian-labour-toil


It is mainly very sound, only, this takes away the connection to the Reformation. The Reformers and people in their wake were not so sound./HGL

PS to second update : it also takes away any reason for Marc Ambler to be ashamed of ambling. Because being slow does allow for certain types of productivity which are otherwise fairly inaccessible./HGL

* Yes, I know, a Hebrew year is never ever 52 weeks plus one or two days. It's either a few weeks shorter, like twelve lunar months, or a few weeks longer, like thirteen lunar months, with a repeat of Adar. However, as the limit from Adar to Nisan goes by the maturity of sheaves of wheat, which is linked to the solar cycle on average, so on average Jewish years will be same as Gregorian ones, namely 365.2425 days per year. 52 weeks, 1 day, 5 hours and 15 minutes 49 minutes, 12 seconds. ** Hillel II actually lived after Christ, and it is to his credit or discredit that the Hebrew year is not strictly by on the spot astronomical and vegetational observation, but claculated in advance. In the time of Christ, it could theoretically happen that the month of Nisan started on different days due to different observers, as recently it happened to Muslims with Ramadan. And obviously with any other months each of these calendars. As to Nisan, I suspect this is a reason why Christ had His seder on Maundy Thursday, and Jews (enemies of Christ, when narrator uses the word in the Gospel of St. John) had theirs on Good Friday. *** Defined by Mark Ambler : "I am inclined to ‘move slowly’, a diplomatic way of saying I am naturally lazy. As a teenager and young adult, I was a grifter who put in the minimum amount of effort to get by."

jeudi 28 janvier 2021

Not quite like this, no


In the Beginning grew out of a request that Osamu Tezuka received from the Vatican by way of RAI in 1984, requesting that Tezuka produce an animated version of the Old Testament. Tezuka spent two years working on a pilot film for the project based on the story of Noah's Ark, both writing the scenario for the film and working in the production of the animation itself. However, Tezuka died in 1989 before the film was finished. The remainder of the production for the pilot film and the subsequent 26-episode television series was supervised by director Osamu Dezaki.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Beginning:_The_Bible_Stories

Watching Tower of Babel episode:

In the beginning - Episode 4 - The Tower of Babel
11th Apr. 2016 | Kids TV English
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s6VvqoPK1I


Nothing in Genesis 11 says the Tower of Babel was either a ziggurat or a temple to an idol.

Genesis 1–11 doesn’t explicitly mention any idolatry. Idolatry is mentioned everywhere in the Bible, even in Genesis (e.g. Genesis 31:19, 35:2). ... none of it is expressly represented as idolatry (whether strictly considering the use of images in the worship of God or a false deity, or even just considering the more general notion of the worship of false deities with or without images). Perhaps the closest anything comes to it is in the Tower of Babel incident. ... Idolatry seems to be absent even there. ... It seems that idolatry (at least the sort of idolatry prevalent throughout the Old Testament) arose after Babel.


Shaun Doyle made this feedback, published here:

Christianity and the origin of religion
Published: 23 January 2021 (GMT+10), feedback
https://creation.com/origin-of-religion-and-chrisitanity


Indeed, there seems to be a clue on when it arose ... Joshua 24:2

And he spoke thus to the people: Thus saith the Lord the God of Israel: Your fathers dwelt of old on the other side of the river, Thare the father of Abraham, and Nachor: and they served strange gods.

But Peleg was born when Babel ended, and Thare and Nachor are some generations later.

Sem, Arphaxad, (Second Cainan, if he existed), Sale, Heber, Phaleg ...

And to Heber were born two sons: the name of the one was Phaleg, because in his days the earth was divided: and his brother's name Jectan. Genesis 10:25

This fixes Phaleg's birth - 401 or 529 after the Flood, according to LXX readings without and with the Second Cainan - to the incident next chapter when the world was divided.

... Phaleg, Reu, Sarug, Nachor, Thare, Abraham with his siblings Nachor and Aran.

Abraham is born 942 or 1070 after the Flood. We can see Nachor would be the grandfather, not the brother of Abraham, since Joshua says "your fathers".

Now, let's go to a LXX to find out when between Babel's end / Phaleg's birth Nachor and then Thare were born:

18 And Phaleg lived and hundred and thirty years, and begot Ragau. 19 And Phaleg lived after he had begotten Ragau, two hundred and nine years, and begot sons and daughters, and died. 20 And Ragau lived and hundred thirty and two years, and begot Seruch. 21 And Ragau lived after he had begotten Seruch, two hundred and seven years, and begot sons and daughters, and died. 22 And Seruch lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot Nachor. 23 And Seruch lived after he had begotten Nachor, two hundred years, and begot sons and daughters, and died. 24 And Nachor lived a hundred and seventy-nine years, and begot Tharrha. 25 And Nachor lived after he had begotten Tharrha, an hundred and twenty-five years, and begot sons and daughters, and he died. 26 And Tharrha lived seventy years, and begot Abram, and Nachor, and Arrhan.

Genesis 11, page 2 and page 3.

We will reconstitute 79 for 179 for when Nachor begat Thare. Otherwise we might be getting 1042 and 1170 years between Flood and Abraham, which neither Roman Martyrology nor Syncellus has.

 without II C. with II C.
 
Phaleg 401 529
Reu 531 659
Sarug 663 791
Nachor 793 921
Thare 872 1000
Ab / Nach / Ar 942 1070


Restate in BC terms*:

 without II C. with II C.
 
Phaleg 2556 2737
Reu 2426 2607
Sarug 2294 2475
Nachor 2164 2345
Thare 2085 2266
Ab / Nach / Ar 2015 2196


Now, I'll insert - for Roman Martyrology only - the carbon calibration from my New tables:

Phaleg
2556 B. Chr.
48.1415 pmC, so dated as 8606 B. Chr.
2534 B. Chr.
49.4539 pmC, so dated as 8334 B. Chr.
2511 B. Chr.
50.7242 pmC, so dated as 8111 B. Chr.
2489 B. Chr.
51.9918 pmC, so dated as 7889 B. Chr.
2466 B. Chr.
53.2551 pmC, so dated as 7666 B. Chr.
2444 B. Chr.
54.5151pmC , so dated as 7444 B. Chr.
Reu
2426
2422 B. Chr.
55.7737 pmC, so dated as 7272 B. Chr.
2399 B. Chr.
57.0291 pmC, so dated as 7049 B. Chr.
2377 B. Chr.
58.4214 pmC, so dated as 6827 B. Chr.
2355 B. Chr.
59.6678 pmC, so dated as 6605 B. Chr.
2332 B. Chr.
60.9109 pmC, so dated as 6432 B. Chr.
2309 B. Chr.
62.1506 pmC, so dated as 6259 B. Chr.
Sarug
2294
2287 B. Chr.
63.387 pmC, so dated as 6037 B. Chr.
2265 B. Chr.
64.6199 pmC, so dated as 5865 B. Chr.
2243 B. Chr.
65.7496 pmC, so dated as 5693 B. Chr.
2220 B. Chr.
68.0023 pmC, so dated as 5420 B. Chr.
2198 B. Chr.
69.2256 pmC, so dated as 5248 B. Chr.
2175 B. Chr.
69.4483 pmC, so dated as 5175 B. Chr.
Nachor
2164
2153 B. Chr.
70.6677 pmC, so dated as 5003 B. Chr.
2131 B. Chr.
71.8838 pmC, so dated as 4881 B. Chr.
2108 B. Chr.
73.0966 pmC, so dated as 4708 B. Chr.
2086 B. Chr.
74.3062 pmC, so dated as 4536 B. Chr.
Thare
2085
2064 B. Chr.
75.4934 pmC, so dated as 4364 B. Chr.
2041 B. Chr.
76.6964 pmC, so dated as 4241 B. Chr.
2019 B. Chr.
77.8962 pmC, so dated as 4069 B. Chr.
Ab / Nach / Ar
2015
1996 B. Chr.
79.0927 pmC, so dated as 3946 B. Chr.


If we consider Nachor and Thare as beginning their error when Thare was born, this is around carbon dated 4536 BC.

Let's check when two diverse cults began to be used:

Inanna was worshiped in Sumer at least as early as the Uruk period (c. 4000 BC – c. 3100 BC), but she had little cult prior to the conquest of Sargon of Akkad.

The main temple to Enki was called E-abzu, meaning "abzu temple" (also E-en-gur-a, meaning "house of the subterranean waters"), a ziggurat temple surrounded by Euphratean marshlands near the ancient Persian Gulf coastline at Eridu. It was the first temple known to have been built in Southern Iraq. Four separate excavations at the site of Eridu have demonstrated the existence of a shrine dating back to the earliest Ubaid period, more than 6,500 years ago. Over the following 4,500 years, the temple was expanded 18 times, until it was abandoned during the Persian period.[8] Footnote = file:/-Enki-Ea-Peeter-Espak.pdf accessed 31 August 2014


In other words, the Enki temple, not the Inanna cult, began around when Thare was born. So, rather than putting Ziggurat of Eridu as Babel, and Babel as origin of idolatry, I put Ziggurat of Eridu 470 years in real time and 4070 carbon years in uniformitarian dating after the cessation of Babel. Those who have been around this blog for some time know already that I think we have Göbekli Tepe as the real Babel.

But the dating of idolatry to Nachor and Thare, by Joshua, is one more reason to believe this.

And there was no prophet trying to tell people to stop both idolatry and building of Babel, nothing in the Bible says there was one. God also did not speak to Lamech.** That was before the Flood, this was before the confusion of tongues. The Flood was a fairly harsh punishment, the confusion of tongues a gentle one. It involved new languages (something dear to us philologists) and also cessation of a hard work project (something dear to syndicalists and even unorganised workers). There is no reason to believe a giant idol was wrecking the stones of a ziggurat gone skyscraper endangering everyone.

If I am right that the "tower" itself was meant to be a rocket, and that it would have been fired with uranium, God was by interrupting the project before take off sparing mankind a major disaster, not inflicting one.

I will not reveal the end note of the video, it is beautiful, as are many other things in it, despite what I take to be grave factual errors.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Peter Nolascus
28.I.2021

PS, the Biblical advice for the episode or whole series was by Luciano Pacomio and Emilio Gandolfo. Tezuka productions did not start this project on their own, as mentioned. The Vatican was involved, and it was so under anti-Pope "John Paul II"./HGL

* I use Roman Martyrology for without II Cainan, Syncellus for with II Cainan. The diverse Flood dates are not just dependent on different numbers of years between Flood and Abraham. They are 2957 BC and 3266 BC. ** Mentioned at this video Who were the Descendants of Cain - Generation 3 to 8 by Periodic Table of History, https://youtu.be/vw92MZ0z2nU

samedi 23 janvier 2021

Alternative as between Flood and Babel


I saw one article where a man with a Neanderthal mother (something we don't see these post-Flood days) was carbon dated 35 000 BC or if it was 35 000 BP.

I checked with another article weeks later, seems to be the same guy:

Pour la Science : Un néandertalien métis
FRANÇOIS SAVATIER | 27 mars 2013
https://www.pourlascience.fr/sd/archeologie/un-neandertalien-metis-11597.php


Comment les chercheurs sont-ils certains que l’individu de Mezzena est bien un Néandertalien ? Ils le sont en fait depuis sa découverte, puisque ce fragment humain vieux de quelque 35 000 ans a été retrouvé dans une couche pleine d’outils moustériens – des outils en pierre fabriqués uniquement par les Néandertaliens (entre 300 000 ans et 30 000 ans avant le présent). ... Chose rare, ils sont en effet parvenus à extraire du collagène de la mandibule et, dans cette substance que l'on rencontre entre les cellules de tous les animaux, ils ont retrouvé des traces d'ADN mitochondrial. Contenu dans les mitochondries, organites qui, dans les cellules, produisent l'énergie, cet ADN est transmis seulement par la mère. Or, une fois amplifié et séquencé, cet ADN mitochondrial s’est révélé contenir un motif caractéristique des Néandertaliens (retrouvé aussi dans 30 fossiles néandertaliens dont on a pu extraire de l’ADN). Dès lors, plus aucun doute n’était permis : la mère de l'individu de Mezzena était néandertalienne.


So, this man found in Mezzena is arguably son of a Neanderthal woman and he is carbon dated to 35 000 BP. Or rather, the carbon date, according to another article is not from him:

Direct radiocarbon dating and genetic analyses on the purported Neanderthal mandible from the Monti Lessini (Italy)
Published online 2016 Jul 8. | Sahra Talamo et al.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4937366/


However, the evidence regarding the age of the material is based only on a single radiocarbon date (RTT-5578: 14C Age 34,540 ± 655; (68.2%) 39,870-38,420 calibrated years before present (cal BP); (95.4%) 40,780-37,480 cal BP) obtained on a bovid bone from layer III7. Unfortunately this faunal sample was not directly associated with the human remains of layer I, but came from the lowermost part of the Mezzena sequence.


And human remains?

As a whole, the radiocarbon dates of the three successful samples are surprisingly young for a Mousterian site, with two samples dating to around 5,500 and one to 25,530 ± 107 14C BP (Table 1). Moreover, the IGVR 203334 mandible with a non-acceptable C:N ratio, resulted in an age of 5,580 ± 26 14C BP, which overlaps in 1σ with the two cranial fragments (IGVR63017-15 and IGVR63017-2) around 5,500 14C BP, passing the isotopic criteria mentioned above. These three dates fall within the Neolithic time period.


But that was not from the mandible with the Neanderthal mitochondriae, right?

Welcome to the confused world of actually looking at scientific evidence for old ages!

Now, there are different conclusions possible from this as to my theory Neanderthals were pre-Flood.

  • one of Noah's daughters in law can have had Neanderthal mitochondriae, so these disappear later than overall Neanderthal genome and Y-chromosome.
  • Neanderthals are post-Flood. I was wrong.
  • or the different levels at Mezzena embody both pre- and post-Flood bones, and the man is pre-Flood, from around 34,540 BP.


34540  35 195
+ 655  -2 013
35195  33 182


This would push the Flood's carbon date closer, to 33 000 BC at least. Now, we don't know this is the case, but I will explore it as a possibility.

Carbon date - real date (BP or BC for both, not one for each) = initial extra years. Carbon level when sample was isolated from atmosphere = carbon level for extra years supposing initial level had been 100 pmC.

33 182 - 2957 = 30 225 extra years, 2.583 pmC at Flood.

At the same time, the value for beginning of Babel stands. 2607 BC 42.8224 pmC, so dated as 9607 BC.

In 350 years, the carbon 14 left is "95.854 pmC", so 95.854 % of whatever was there before, and this means a renewal of 4.146 pmC.

2.583 * 95.854 / 100 = 2.4759 pmC left
42.8224 - 2.4759 = 40.3465 pmC added net
40.3465 / 4.146 = 9.7314 times faster production.

We divide the period into four times 87.5 years. 98.947 % left, then 1.053 pmC added as per normal replacement but * 9.7314 for the faster factor, each time.*

2957 BC
2.583 pmC "33 157 BC"

2870
12.803 pmC "19 870 BC"

2782
22.915 pmC "14 982 BC"

2695
32.921 pmC "11 895 BC"

2607
42.822 pmC "9607 BC"


But, due to uncertainties about the Mezzena man, we cannot guarantee this is a correct replacement of the previous tables in their part I - II Deluge to death of Noah, beginning of Babel. These therefore can still stand.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Raymond of Peñafort
23.I.2021

PS, on the search for Mezzano man, I also found Oase 1 - "Les ossements ont été datés de – 37 000 à – 42 000 ans par la méthode de datation au carbone 14." While, on New Tables a Flood date at 35 000 BC would be too recent, if he's from 40 000 BC, this is in order./HGL

PPS, it seems his real dates if post-Flood would be a bit too early on for my taste in human post-Flood deaths : 2957 - 2935 BC, first 22 years after the Flood. Reservoir effect, ate lots of fish or sea food?/HGL

* If this sounds confused, I have each time applied the formulas:
n * 98.947 / 100 = intermediate n
intermediate n + 1.053*9.7314 = new n