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