What Flood?

In response to a meme by Michael Spaulding, part 1:

1. Archaeology Shows Unbroken Human History:

Young Earth Creationists place the flood around 2350 BCE. A planetary extinction event at that time should leave an absolute break in human history worldwide, followed by a total cultural reset starting from eight people in the Middle East.

Instead, archaeology shows continuous human habitation through that exact window:

• Egypt: Scribes, pyramid builders, and royal dynasties maintained continuous administrative records straight through the 3rd millennium BCE with no evidence of a universal flood stratum.
• Mesopotamia: Cuneiform tax logs, legal codes, and trade records continue uninterrupted across major city-states.
• Indus Valley & China: Early urban centers show unbroken development in agriculture, pottery, and architecture.

Civilization was never wiped out across the globe 4,400 years ago.

Reply fairly simple. I have a different Flood date, though.

Key notions first:

• Carbon dates of archaeology are misleading.
• Chronicles attached to them are misleading, partly based on lies.
• Some of these lies were calibrated in chronological quantity by the Father of Lies who knew what 1700 BC (Joseph's pharao Djoser died) would look like in terms of carbon dating.

Point one:

Carbon dates of archaeology are misleading.

2350 BC in carbon dates means some date between 1656 and 1634 BC in real history.

1656 BC

91.353 pmC, dated as 2404 BC

1634 BC

93.251 pmC, dated as 2212 BC

The real history 2350 BC is carbon dated to 6254 BC:

2361 BC

Shelah died

2350 BC (!)

62.358 pmC, dated as 6254 BC

Let's take my Flood date instead, now. The Roman Martyrology says Jesus was born 2957 after the Flood, so the Flood was 2958 BC (Jesus was born 1 BC, while 1 AD starts with His circumcision).

Carbon dated 2958 BC means a date between 1759 and 1739 BC:

1759 BC

86.359 pmC, dated as 2971 BC

1739 BC

86.754 pmC, dated as 2914 BC

1736 BC

Isaac died

Real history 2958 BC means carbon dated 37 050 BC or 39 000 BP, and that's where my tables begin:

Starts out 2958 BC,

1.6277 pmC, dated as 37 000 BC

2956 BC

Arphaxad born

Point two:

Chronicles attached to them are misleading, partly based on lies.

Michael Spaulding flaunts the records by certain old cultures. Of the following three quotes, only the last one is free from writing from the period concerned:

"maintained continuous administrative records"
"tax logs, legal codes, and trade records continue uninterrupted across major city-states"
"Early urban centers show unbroken development in agriculture, pottery, and architecture"

Someone said, the Catholic Church gave us "the Calendar" ... if you mean a year that has 365 days 3/4 of most twenty year periods and 366 days 1/4, namely every 4th year, Julius Caesar did it (Gregory XIII changed "all twenty year periods" to "most" by excepting 1700, 1800, 1900, but not 1600 and 2000).

But the Catholic Church actually did give us the Anno Domini reckoning. It was universally accepted by 1100. Including by people aware of its shortcoming as to exact birthyear.

A scribe under Nebuchadnezzar II can't prove that Ur was founded 4000 BC. Do you know why? If we accept (which I'm somewhat sceptical of) that he came to power in 605 BC, then his fifth year would have been 600 BC. However, the scribe who made a date on a document would not state "3400 after the founding of Ur", but rather "sixth year of Nebuchadnezzar".

During the Assyrian chronicle, this was probably not a problem. However, before that, any king who wanted to magnify his predecessor could flatter him by stating his years were more than they were, any king who wanted to belittle his predecessor could instead shorten his reign, and any local ruler who gained the upper hand over another city could transpose all of its years to before the own city's hegemony or supposed such, or to before the current dynasty (for instance Ur III). Parallel rulers were serialised. In Mesopotamia, this is somewhat transparent and admitted by archaeologists, I'm certain it's an issue in Egypt too. Certainly, Egypt has divergent king lists that leave out or take in some dynasty or dynasties of some city prior to kings that both lists acknowledge.

So, the "continuous administrative record" or the "tax logs, legal codes" and so on only tell us there was continuity in that specific past, it cannot help to date that past. Some people think that Egyptian Pharaos and Sumerian Lugals would have as little chance to do so as 19th C. European kings. None of these could invent an extra century before their own, because all of these had real masses who could read, who were not depending on the palace, and who having known the previous year as 1815 would not have accepted to know the current year as 1916, since dating didn't start over again each new ruler.

Point three:

Some of these lies were calibrated in chronological quantity by the Father of Lies who knew what 1700 BC (Joseph's pharao Djoser died) would look like in terms of carbon dating.

That God and Satan have their deals and truces, where God permits Satan some of the things he wants to do, should be known from the Exorcism of Leo XIII.

One of these probably involved what God foretold through St. Paul:

And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity
[2 Thessalonians 2:10-11]

Bishop Challoner comments:

[10] "God shall send": That is God shall suffer them to be deceived by lying wonders, and false miracles, in punishment of their not entertaining the love of truth.

I would hold that a Pharao in Egypt (most of them) and a king (local or "of Sumer and Akkad") in Mesopotamia were even more under Satan's power than people in "Satan's century".

I would also hold that God had allowed Satan to prepare "his case" ... Satan in spreading error was not suddenly prompted these last two centuries by God, chosing nothing of his own, he was more like having been very eager all along, and when God loses him, given his known appatite for deception, that's equivalent to "sending" him, not like Moses sent spies into the Holy Land, but like Samson sent foxes into Philistine fields and vineyards. The foxes didn't need an order to try to escape the fire. They were very well equipped to run. Satan also knows he has limited time to deceive and get people damned, and is very well equipped to chose that. And was so while waiting too.

The amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere at a given point would have been easy to observe for any angel. God would have told both Satan and good angels what the level was going to be now and that carbon dating would exist. None of them would have had a hard time understanding it, no human technology can in principle add to the technological knowhow of angels. (However, in detail yes. Satan could not on his own have foreknown ASCII has 65 = upper case A or English has 26 letters, so Z gets 90 for upper cae, only God was able to show that to St. John).

Therefore Satan could adapt the vanity of rulers in displacing chronology to what he wanted uniformitarians to conclude from carbon 14 too. Not perfectly, but overall. If one king hadn't taken that temptation, Satan could try it on the next one.

The Bible, including in Genesis 5 and 11, is obviously not subject to Satan's deceptions, and especially the original LXX text, a translation from a Hebrew text older than the Proto-Masoretic or Masoretic versions. Therefore, we should rely on it rather than on Pagan rulers, especially when their words are supported by a carbon 14 dating that can pretty easily be skewed by rising carbon 14 levels, which were therefore lower than reckoned with before the rise to c. 100 pmC was complete.

2350 BC, the carbon 14 level wasn't 100 pmC, but 62.358 pmC. This gave objects from then an instant age of 3904 years. 3904 + 2350 = 6254 years.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Sts Simon and Jude
28.X.2026

PS, I was in a library where the time on the internet ended. So, I missed out on giving the martyrology reading, see my wishes on another blog : Bonum Festum Sanctorum Simon et Judae. I also missed out on sourcing the three posts from 2024 that I used: Newer Tables: Preliminaries · Flood to Joseph in Egypt · Joseph in Egypt to Fall of Troy..

Enjoy, and excuse me!/HGL

PPS, I forgot to actually state the answer in so many words. The carbon date for the Flood being 39 000 BP actually does involve a break for human population : all Neanderthals with skeleta or parts of skeleta that have been carbon dated are older than that in carbon, and obviously other dating methods give even older dates. If you heard "Gorham Cave, Gibraltar, 28 000 BP", the cave in question has charcoal dated that recently (real date not long after the Flood, when Neanderthals died out, between 2870 BC and 2848 BC). In a nearby cave a Neanderthal skeleton was dated to 47 000 BP, so prior to 39 000 BP./HGL

Literal Trees, a Hypothesis of "Mechanics"

Adam and Eve already had immortality as a charism. Not as simple part of human nature, the merely natural state of man, neither fallen nor hallowed, but as part of the holiness that was in their original justice.

They would have transmitted immortality and original justice to the posterity, at same conditions as themselves, so, with a free will still able to fall.

I think there could have been conflicts and the tree of knowledge would have put the one at fault, the one sinning into shame and into a state of beginning death.

Once that person had repented, Adam or whoever else would have been there, would have given them access to the tree of life, which Adam already had access to. Immortality would have been restored.

When Adam and Eve sinned, that is what happened to them. But they were not allowed an immediate restoration of immortality, since they were the ones who would have been judging posterity through the trees (and if my thesis is right, God would have revealed to them this proper use of the tree of knowledge later on when it was useful). So, being at fault, they were struck by the punishment of the tree, and ... in their case, immortality was not immediately restored.

The two trees were giving rise to saplings up to the time of Jesus. The Cross was made from wood of both trees. On Calvary, immortality is restored, with a delay, certainly, we do not most of us get to Heaven in our bodies, like Jesus and Mary already did, but this delay was the price for the judges being bad judges who sinned first before they had anyone to judge.

As Adam died the same "day" (i e lifetime of Adam, a bit less than "thousand years") as he had sinned, so Christ died "on the sixth day" not just of the week, Good Friday, but of the world (sixth millennium, sixth lifespan of Adam, both fit with either Roman Martyrology or George Syncellus). Like the day when Adam was created and according to some also sinned.

The sin is a bit like the son of a judge playing with an electric chair. Except this play was reparable, which getting electrocuted wouldn't be. Or the son of a Cohen playing with the Urim and Tummim, except in that case there would have been no automatic consequence at all of the outcome.

This is a hypothesis of mine, let the Church judge.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Raphael
24 Oct. 2026

Festum sancti Raphaelis Archangeli, cujus dignitas ac beneficia in sacro Tobiae libro celebrantur.

Are Neanderthal Y Chromosomes Still There?

The mystery of the disappearing Neanderthal Y chromosome
By Emily Cooke | Published May 17, 2024
https://www.livescience.com/health/genetics/the-mystery-of-the-disappearing-neanderthal-y-chromosome

However, there's one part of our genome that lacks any Neanderthal DNA: the Y chromosome. But why?

...

"We've never observed the Neanderthal Y chromosome DNA in any human sample ever tested," Carlos Bustamante, co-senior study author and a population geneticist at Stanford University, said in a statement at the time.

Interbreeding between archaic and modern humans
a linea: Mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interbreeding_between_archaic_and_modern_humans#Mitochondrial_DNA_and_Y_chromosome

No evidence of Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA has been found in modern humans.

...

However, the hypothesized incompatibility between Neanderthals and modern humans is contested by findings that suggest that the Y chromosome of Neanderthals was replaced by an extinct lineage of the modern human Y chromosome, which introgressed into Neanderthals between 100,000 and 370,000 years ago.

These two seem to indicate between them, that Neanderthals both have a distinct Y chromosome of their own, and have been found with that of modern humans. Not necessarily agreeing with the order of events suggested here. Uniformitarian timelines are convoluted by the difference of carbon dates, which are at least post-Flood on my view serially rising, and potassium argon dates, which would indicate the Flood.

Now, let's take Dr. Robert Carter's view:

Disappearing Neanderthals
By Dr Robert Carter | Published 14 Oct, 2026
https://creation.com/en/articles/disappearing-neanderthals

• The Neanderthal and modern human genomes are highly similar in general, but about 5% of the Neanderthal genome was identical to that of modern humans.
  
  
• The Neanderthal Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) were essentially identical to modern humans.3
  
  
• Neanderthals were more closely related to another archaic group, the Denisovans, than to modern humans, but the Denisovan Y and mitochondrial chromosomes are very different.

So, modern humans and Neanderthals are different genetically, but not in the Y chromosome or mtDNA. On the other hand, Neanderthals are similar to Denisovans, but not in the Y chromosome or mtDNA. In the meantime, modern humans and Denisovans are different in all these respects.

This one could be taken in two ways.

Either Dr. Carter says that the distinctive Neanderthal Y chromosome is much closer to modern human than the Denisovan, so that by comparison it is identic. Or he is just taking into account those Neanderhals who have the modern human version.

It's interesting that Denisovans are in both respects different from modern humans.

While once upon a time, I considered Neanderthals a candidate for Nephelim, I now consider Denisovans to be so.

As to the disappearance of the Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA and of the distinctive Neanderthal Y chromosome, and as admitted by Carter too, the ones of Denisovans, my solution is, neither Neanderthals nor Denisovans were post-Flood, let alone post-Babel. The contribution we have from their genomes are compatible with coming through lines of which the closest ones would be:

• Daughter in law had a Neanderthal father. He didn't transmit mitochondrial DNA, she didn't transmit Y chromosomes.
• Noah's wife had a Neanderthal mother or father. She didn't transmit Y chromosomes, and as to her mitochondrial DNA it ended with her three sons.
• Noah had a Neanderthal mother. She didn't hand him his Y chromosome, and he didn't transmit her mitochondrial DNA.

But this view of Carter makes Neanderthals kind of a mixed category with modern human (the majority gene pool of the Ark) and Denisovan, not fully, but still.

So, Denisovans were perhaps Nephelim, and Neanderthals perhaps a kind of half breed between normal Adamic and Nephelim. Or the normal stock from which Nephelim were taken.

But either way, the disappearance of their distinctive Y chromosomes and mitochondrial DNA argues that it was lost via a bottleneck like the Ark. This, along with the carbon dates, which I unlike Carter attribute to a basically only rising carbon 14 content, argue pretty persuasively to me, both of these were pre-Flood.

So, how exactly does this work?

Three types of DNA are more or less sex specific.

Everyone inherits an X chromosome from the mother, but from the father you inherit X or Y. Only girls get exactly one X from dad. Only boys (or nearly) get exactly one Y from dad. (The exception has to do with fetal development). Once a girl has two X chromosomes, as a mother she hands on either to either sons or daughters. I have my X chromosome from mother, and then I don't know if it's from grandfather or grandmother.

Mitochondriae are a bit more sex specific. Everone has mitochondriae. Only mothers give them. The one person who got mitochondriae from a male was Eve, she got Adam's. But her creation was miraculous.

And Y chromosomes are most sex specific, and this for males and only males have or hand them on.

How does this affect the scenarii? Using the specifically Neanderthal mitochondriae or Y chromosomes, as per El Sidrón genomes.

Daughter in law had a Neanderthal father.

We know the three daughters in law had modern human mothers. Hence modern human mitochondriae. But this doesn't preclude a Neanderthal father, since he would not be the source of mitochondriae anyway. He could hand on Y chromosomes, but not to a daughter.

Noah's wife had a Neanderthal mother or father.

Or even both.

If her father was a Neanderthal, she didn't get his Y chromosome, since female. If her mother was Neanderthal her sons, but not daughters in law or grandchildren had Neanderthal mitochondriae.

Noah had a Neanderthal mother.

And he didn't have the capacity to hand mitochondriae on. But his father had to have a modern human Y chromosome, since this is the post-Flood standard.

The three scenario are not mutually exclusive, and each admits the Neanderthal admixture of being more indirect. The Denisovan admixture would have lost Y chromosomes and mitochondriae by a similar process and would have involved fewer persons or more indirect sourcing.

So, why not post-Babel or (he half heartedly touches on spread before Babel, which I hold to) post-Flood?

Carbon dates is one reason. CMI would hold that Abraham was born 292 after the Flood and went to Egypt's court at age 75 or 76 or so. 368 after the Flood is too short a time to both develop and get rid of Neanderthals, and it has a carbon date of either early dynastic (3100 BC) or up to some centuries before that, in the sense that his pharao could have been Narmer, or that Hor-Aha surviving to 3100 BC carbon dated doesn't preclude his having lived at c. 3500 BC carbon dated. I'll use the calibration for a partly LXX based chronology, but the principle is the same:

2028 BC

78.316 pmC, dated as 4048 BC

2016 BC

Abraham born

1841 BC

Abraham died

1838 BC

84.77 pmC, dated as 3204 BC*

There is no way that atmospheric carbon 14 levels could have sunk from between 78.316 and 84.77 pmC down to a level admitting the misreading from low original level of "42 000 BP" (40 000 BC), which is Thorin, the most recent Neanderthal as per carbon dates so far. Putting the last Neanderthals even more recently compounds the problem.

Another, 2262 years or even just 1658 years of the pre-Flood world is more time for the divergence of Neanderthals than whatever small time the post-Flood era offers for the purpose. If Carter is right that Neanderthals could have diverged in the post-Flood or even just post-Babel era, I'm still right that the pre-Flood era would have been adequate. If Carter is wrong, I still at least could be right it was adequate. And if I'm wrong that the pre-Flood years would have been adequate, I'm right that Nephelim could account for the difference.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Raphael Archangel
after First Vespers
23—24.X.2026

Festum sancti Raphaelis Archangeli, cujus dignitas ac beneficia in sacro Tobiae libro celebrantur.

* Creation vs. Evolution: Newer Tables, Flood to Joseph in Egypt
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2024/12/newer-tables-flood-to-joseph-in-egypt.html

Danger Cave, Chronology

A video made me look up a wiki:

They Found an 11,000-Year-Sealed Cave in Utah—What Was Inside Rewrote the Desert West
Beneath the Field | 12 Sept. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nZBgRleZP8

Danger Cave is a North American archaeological site located in the Bonneville Basin of western Utah around the Great Salt Lakes region, that features artifacts of the Desert Culture from c. 9000 BC until c. 500 AD. Through carbon-14 dating, it has been determined that there is very little evidence of human life in the Danger Cave area c. 11,000 BP [9000 BC], but there is much evidence of human life by 9000 BP [7000 BC].[3]

Note:

Jennings, Jesse (1957). Danger Cave. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press Anthropological Papers, No. 27. ISBN 978-0874806120.

Article:

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

2634 BC

37.009 pmC, dated as 10,851 BC

...

2591 BC

46.223 pmC, dated as 8970 BC

Creation vs. Evolution: Newer Tables, Flood to Joseph in Egypt
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2024/12/newer-tables-flood-to-joseph-in-egypt.html

So, what are the comparisons between "normal" and Creationist (my own) calibration of carbon dating?

Period of "settling"?

2000 years vs 43 years (2634 BC to 2591 BC).

Period of sporadic use?

11 000 years vs 3091 years (2591 BC to 500 AD).

I hold there was geographic spread during Babel, just that a certain project made people gather inward to Shinar. The scattering when Peleg was born was not simply spread, but breaking of connections./HGL

Confirming Parts of My Identification

1) The video shows that Göbekli Tepe had domestic structures, making it a city.

OK, he uses the term "settlement" but still ... call a rose a bulbul, it still is fair, sorry, mean a gül, bulbul is a nightingale, and still as sweet singing. Call a city a settlement it can still have had crowds.

And as part of this some burials were found.

2) Dr. Hugh Thomas mentioned Mount Nemrut.

I check on the map, by car road it is 187 km, and it's north of Göbekli Tepe, but the map shows the road bending, so the geographic distance is shorter.

So, someone before me has associated the general area with Nimrod.

Archaeologists Just Found Burials at Göbekli Tepe
Dr Hugh Thomas | 17 Oct. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWZ0Jq0OqAE

On the other hand, the idea of deliberate burial and of deliberate removal of skulls has been given some alternative explanations.

These are obviously less convincing in a shorter timescale, making the pottery of Çatal Höyük pretty close on the end of Göbekli Tepe:

III, Peleg is born, end of Babel

2557 BC

51.766 pmC, dated as 8000 BC

2488 BC

55.327 pmC, dated as 7381 BC

Creation vs. Evolution: Newer Tables, Flood to Joseph in Egypt
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2024/12/newer-tables-flood-to-joseph-in-egypt.html

2557 - 2488 = 69 years. And Nimrod probably lived as long as Sale, namely, comparable, not identical span:

2826 BC

7.323 pmC, dated as 24,437 BC

2821 BC

Shelah born

2373 BC

61.194 pmC, dated as 6433 BC

2361 BC

Shelah died

ibid.

So, Nimrod was probably still alive when Çatal Höyük began, and probably doing some stuff he had done in Göbekli Tepe. Pottery from the site further West show stickfigure bodies lying on the ground without heads and stickfigure vultures hovering above them.

BUT the video mentions an alternative explanation for skulls found compared to that one. Just admitting in advance./HGL

Oral History and Physical Evidence

Some takeaways of this video:

New Breakthrough Fossils Are Rewriting the Story of Human Evolution
Hidden History / Today I Learned Science | 12 Oct. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmLXayZPt_4

1) Denisovans were bigger than we are on average, at least for every find so far (which by now includes leg bones, which are indicators of height).
2) This observation, from c. 15:13 on:

The oldest oral traditions anyone has managed to check against physical evidence are Aboriginal Australian stories about coastlines that drowned as sea levels rose. And those go back somewhere between 7,000 and 10,000 years, which is extraordinary, but it's not 45,000.

Youngest Denisovan presumably carbon dated to 43,000 BC. Which along with 37,000 BC for Campi Flegrei (during the Flood) indicates that Denisovans were pre-Flood.

The changes in the coastline took place somthing like 8000 to 5000 BC.

Now, these do not give an oral tradition of 10,000 or at least 7000 years.

2557 BC

III, Peleg is born, end of Babel

51.766 pmC, dated as 8000 BC

...

2189 BC

70.415 pmC, dated as 5089 BC

2187 BC

Eber died

2166 BC

71.553 pmC, dated as 4933 BC

So, the tradition has lasted 4583 down to c. 4213 years. Since Peleg was born or since around when Eber died. And the earliest parts of it were when people were living from 339 down to 208 years. That's Peleg, born when Peleg was born, or Nahor, Abraham's grandfather, born soon after Eber died. In our days, not sure one would have been able to ground a tradition as easily as that. Orally that is.

However, the tradition about giants would also be way shorter than 45,000 years. That would have been in Noah's lifetime. Noah met Eber. Eber met Serug. Serug met Abraham. Abraham could have written things down, since a caravan of Beduins could transport writing. And by his time, other traditions had come to transmit it elsewhere. So, 120 years before the Flood to Abraham's vocation, that's 1137 years, but definitely not as many transmissions no longer recheckable as that length of time would take now.

If the oral history Australian uniformitarians have to assume for the Coastlines are longer than those I presume, there is no sense in pretending the oral transmission I presume is implausible.

I made the same point about an AI generated video which ascribed false content to a tablet, I'm making it again, but this time over good source material.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Coloman of Stockerau
13.X.2026

Apud Stokeraviam, in Austria, sancti Colmanni Martyris.

It is also the memory of the miracle of the Sun in Fatima.

I Have Made the Archaeology of Ein Geddi Lift Some Weight

Now, Osgood and secular archaeologists agree that between the Calcholithic and the Iron age, Ein Gedi has no population.

The Chalcolithic temple of Ein Gedi is a Ghassulian public building dating from around 3500 BCE. It lies on a scarp above the oasis of Ein Gedi, on the western shore of the Dead Sea, within modern-day Israel. Archaeologist David Ussishkin has described the site as "a monumental edifice in terms of contemporary architecture".[2]

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

A Chalcolithic temple (ca. mid-fourth millennium BCE) belonging to the Ghassulian culture was excavated on the slope between two springs, Ein Shulamit and Ein Gedi. More Chalcolithic finds were made at the Moringa and Mikveh Caves.[4] The archaeologists did not discover a settlement associated with the temple. Roi Porat who discovered the Chaloclithic activity in Moringa Cave believes it to be indicative of a nearby settlement. However, David Ussishkin – who excavated at the temple – disagreed saying "had there been a Chalcolithic settlement in Ein Gedi, its remains would have been detected long ago".[5]

There is no evidence of Bronze Age settlement at Ein Gedi.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ein_Gedi_(archaeological_site)#Chalcolithic

Let's get to footnotes:

[1] to the former, lacks, I guess: Usishkin, David (1971). "The "Ghassulian" Temple in Ein Gedi and the Origin of the Hoard from Nahal Mishmar". The Biblical Archaeologist. 34 (1). American Schools of Oriental Research: 23–39.

[2] to the former:

Shanks (2008) = Shanks, Hershel (May–June 2008). "Ein Gedi's Archaeological Riches". Biblical Archaeology Review. 34 (3). Washington, D.C.: The Biblical Archaeology Society: 58–68.

[4] to the latter

Gošić Arama 2016, pp. 872–874. = Gošić Arama, Milena (2016). "Temples in the Ghassulian Culture: Terminology and social implications". Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology. 11 (3): 869–893. doi:10.21301/EAP.V11I3.11.

[5] to the latter

Ussishkin 2014, pp. 16, 21. = Ussishkin, David (2014). "The Chalcolithic temple in Ein Gedi: fifty years after its discovery". Near Eastern Archaeology. 77 (1): 15–26. doi:10.5615/neareastarch.77.1.0015.

[3] to the latter

Porath 2021, p. 3. = Porath, Yosef (2021). "The Synagogue at En-Gedi". Qedem. 64: III–237. ISSN 0333-5844. JSTOR 27123172.

That's a solid thing for secular archaeology. Osgood?

Happily for us. En-gedi has been excavated.5,6 The excavations found only three major periods of settlement at En-gedi:-.

1. The Roman period - not relevant here
   
   
2. During the Kingdom of Israel - not relevant here
   
   
3. During the Chalcolithic of Palestine - the largest and most prolific settlement period.

In fact, a building complex was discovered situated on a hill terrace above the spring of En-gedi approximately 150 metres north. This appeared to be a sacred enclosure, similar to the Chalcolithic sanctuary discovered in Stratum XIX at Megiddo. Notably, the enclosure at En-gedi was not destroyed, but was abandoned with the people apparently taking their cult furniture with them.

This is from:

The Times of Abraham
By A.J.M. Osgood | Published 30 Mar, 2006
https://creation.com/en/articles/the-times-of-abraham

But can archaeology stand if it's in conflict with the Bible?

Now, is it? If Ein Geddi was abandoned, why is it enumerated as a conquestion in Joshua 15?

In the desert Betharaba, Meddin and Sachacha, And Nebsan, and the city of salt, and Engaddi: six cities and their villages.
[Josue (Joshua) 15:61—62]

Let's enumerate:

1) Betharaba, 2) Meddin 3) and Sachacha, 4) And Nebsan, 5) and the city of salt, 6) and Engaddi

Yes, Ein Geddi is one of them. So, was there a habitation in the time of Joshua?

I think a part of its history from the time of King David may help:

Then David went up from thence, and dwelt in strong holds of Engaddi And when Saul was returned from following the Philistines, they told him, saying: Behold, David is in the desert of Engaddi
[1 Kings (1 Samuel) 24:1-2]

I think the context indicates two things:

1. Ein Geddi was known, and known as being by built a kind of fortification
2. Ein Geddi was also usually empty, hence the term "in the desert" which doesn't primarily mean in sand and dry climate, though that is there too, but in a place with no inhabitants.

So, Joshua conquered ghost cities that were sometimes but rarely in use. But the villages around perhaps were.

As the Chalcolithic Ein Geddi is from 3500 BC, carbon dated, we can take this as the carbon date for the earliest Ein Geddi. Which, as Osgood pointed out, is Asason Tamar:

And there came messengers, and told Josaphat, saying: There cometh a great multitude against thee from beyond the sea, and out of Syria, and behold they are in Asasonthamar, which is Engaddi.
[2 Paralipomenon (2 Chronicles) 20:2]

The reason I came to think of this is a video about a prophecy:

And the fishers shall stand over these waters, from Engaddi even to Engallim there shall be drying of nets: there shall be many sorts of the fishes thereof, as the fishes of the great sea, a very great multitude:
[Ezechiel (Ezekiel) 47:10]

Here is the video:

Biblical Prophecy Is Finally Unfolding at the Dead Sea — Christians Are Stunned
6 Oct. 2026 | Ryan Lau Discovery / ⁩Ambrose Wild / ⁩Ambrose Discovery / Ambrose Faith
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaCHYvg5kno

Now, the Biblical and therefore actual date of Genesis 14 cannot be 3500 BC, it is probably c. 1936 (this one based on Abraham born 2016 BC, as per Roman Martyrology, and him being c. 80 years old, as he was 75 in chapter 12 and will be 86 in chapter 16). Hence, the carbon 14 level was not around 100 pmC, but little above 82 pmC. An online calculator gives 82.763 pmC for these 1564 years of instant age.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Bridget of Sweden
8 October 2026

PS, next day. The connection closed down in the library, so while above was written the 8th, you only see this the 9th. Excuses for the delay!/HGL

PPS, doublechecking:

It’s incredible to find a large freshwater pond with fish, shaded by trees in the middle of the desert next to the Dead Sea.

Ein Gedi
October 25, 2009
https://israel-tourguide.info/blog/ein-gedi

So, for the possible prophecy fulfilment, I recommend a double check. This does not affect my main argument here./HGL