Some People Seem Too Willing to See me as Someone Else's Dupe

Example somewhat current in Paris.

Kent Hovind is a Young Earth Creationist. I am a Young Earth Creationist. Ergo, I became a Young Earth Creationist because Kent Hovind had charisma and I had insecurity ...

Kent Hovind also is on record or was on record as stating the Catholic Church had started Islam, because Alberto Rivera heard that in a secret briefing. He also is on record as stating Christ made no fermented wine in Cana and used no fermented wine on the Last Supper. See how I react to those things before you consider me Kent Hovind's dupe ...

Other example.

Graham Hancock believes the Younger Dryas and Göbekli Tepe are intimately connected to the history of mankind and civilisation. And Göbekli Tepe built on a previous and lost culture which was in the main not being expressed in the Palaeolithic culture of the post-Flood Ice Age.

While the hint about Younger Dryas and Göbekli Tepe actually reached me by reading Graham Hancock, and I cite him - wait a second on how we each tease out the details.

First, CMI which never directly responded to my stuff is responding in a very condescending way, not to Graham Hancock (who never reached out to them), but about him:

Ancient Apocalypse ‘hooey’
CMI : Feedback 2023, Gavin Cox responding
https://creation.com/ancient-hancock-hooey

Some of this is actually a useful resource about Graham Hancock.

Importantly, Hancock rejects using Scripture as the only way to interpret historical data. His is a hybrid approach, which discounts the (evolutionary) idea that humans were ‘primitive’ prior to and during the Ice Age and adds the (pseudo-biblical) idea that an advanced culture was destroyed by a cataclysm during a period called the ‘Younger Dryas’ (YD), supposedly around 12,900–11,700 years BP (before present). The YD represented a return to glacial conditions, which reversed the initial warming that happened after the Last Glacial Maximum, supposedly, c. 27,000–20,000 years BP. If you are interested on reading up on the YD see: Ice core oscillations and abrupt climate changes: part 1—Greenland ice cores, and scroll down to the sub-heading “The special Younger Dryas event”.

The reference they give discusses the mechanism.

Now, my view is that Younger Dryas was a few years just prior to the death of Noah. It involved some coastal floodings, and this may have been what gave Nimrod the idea that God wasn't keeping His promise, so men had to get to heaven to avoid the next Flood.

In Göbekli Tepe, Nimrod didn't meet any Ancient Alien Astronauts unlike what Hancock suggested in Chariots of the Gods, but was himself an Ancient Aspiring Astronaut.

And they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven: and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands.

Why "the top of which" or "the top whereof may reach to heaven"? If the building was going to stay on the ground and only reach heaven by being very tall, why not "a tower which may reach to heaven"?

On the other hand, if Moses knew Nimrod planned and Kennedy and Khrushchev were going to succeed with three step rockets, one sees why "the top whereof" is used. At takeoff a threestep rocket looks like a tower - but steps one and two fall into the sea or burn when falling down the atmosphere, so only the top actually reaches the moon.

Hebrew English interlinear tells me that the relevant words in Hebrew are "weroshow bashamayim" (and the top [is] in the heavens). I click on wə·rō·šōw and find 7 occurrences, two translated "top" (Genesis 11 and 28, the tower and the ladder) and five translated "head" (Leviticus 13, Joshua 2, Job 20, Ps 7, Ezechiel 33). So, it is not the "height" but the actual material top of it that reaches into heaven.

This explains why there is no very high tower or ruins of such in Göbekli Tepe. If (as I think) my identification is correct. Nimrod having very inadequate access to pre-Flood science and technology was not helping him really achieve the goal. God actually helped the project by then and there stopping it. By letting human research get from Nimrod to Wernher von Braun.

But not just what happened socially I differ from Graham Hancock, not just the connexion to Younger Dryas, but equally obviously how he and I date these things.

As I see Göbekli Tepe as Babel, specifically city of Babel, I go to the Biblical dates for Babel, between 350 and 401 after the Flood, between the death of Noah and the birth of Peleg (yes, I know it doesn't work out that way in Masoretic chronology and I know the Vulgate has Masoretic chronology, but the Catholic Church also has a text read at Christmasses which has another chronology, a version of the LXX as to Genesis 5 and 11). This means that Göbekli Tepe's earliest carbon date, charcoal below the actual buildings, dated to 9600 BC, has to match some year close to 350 after the Flood or 2607 BC, and Göbekli Tepe's latest carbon date, a charcoal layer on top, dated to 8600 BC, has to match some year close to 401 after the Flood, or 2556 BC. This is very much not what Graham Hancock is doing, as he is taking the carbon dates as they stand.

As some may know, I use this equation for my New Tables, as two of the nodes between archaeology and Biblical chronology.

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

The entries here show how I deal with it:

2607 B. Chr.

0.428224 pmC/100, so dated as 9607 B. Chr.

...

2556 B. Chr.

0.481415 pmC/100, so dated as 8606 B. Chr.

Let me fix some deviations from conventions. In a tired moment, I regretted that English BC is less specific than French av. J. Chr. so I used B. Chr. The other one is, I found normal fractions easier to count with than percentages. Here is how it normally should look:

2607 BC

42.8224 pmC, so dated as 9607 BC

...

2556 BC

48.1415 pmC, so dated as 8606 BC

Now the thing is, feed 42.8224 pmC into a carbon 14 calculator, you get ... 7000 years. 2607 + 7000 = 9607 BC. The carbon date is the sum of the real date and the "instant carbon date" or "phantom age" produced by the lower initial pmC in the charcoal sample.

Same for 48.1415 pmC, gives 6050 years, 6050 + 2556 = 8606 BC.

And obviously, my rationale for the carbon levels I searched for was, as with the other nodes, they must be calculated from the amount of extra years. 9600 - 2607 = 6993 or roughly 7000 extra years. 8600 - 2556 = 6044 or roughly 6050 extra years. Put that into a carbon 14 calculator, and you get:

7000 -> 42.879 pmC
6050 -> 48.101 pmC

But why 42.8224 pmC instead of 42.879 pmC? Why 48.1415 pmC instead of 48.101 pmC?

I actually calculated successive C14 levels on paper, without a C14 calculator. I used decimal fractions obtained by multiple square roots of 0.5, multiplied by each other. This is because I did that work during the first confinement, to correct the Genesis 14 node from estimated carbon date c. 3200 BC to the actual test result 3500 BC, obtained from reed mats evacuated with temple treasures from En-Gedi by the Amorrhaeans. Osgood hadn't given a date, I only found it later.

Here are basically the fractions I used:

Creation vs. Evolution : Bases of C14
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/bases-of-c14.html

So, with this in mind, how do I date the glacial maximum and the Younger Dryas Cooling event?

12,900–11,700 years BP = 10,900 - 9,700 BC.

In New tables, I find it here:

2666 BC

35.4608 pmC, so dated as 11 216 BC

2644 BC

38.0408 pmC, so dated as 10 644 BC

2621 BC

40.6138 pmC, so dated as 10 071 BC

2599 BC

43.1708 pmC, so dated as 9549 BC

In other words, during the Younger Dryas, carbon 14 levels rose from 35.4 / 38 pmC to 40.6 / 43.1 pmC. It began in some year between 2666 and 2644 BC, and it ended some time between 2621 and 2599 BC. Let's make rough estimates by going to the medium values, from 2655 BC to 2610 BC. Far from lasting 1000 years, the Younger Dryas lasted only something like 45 years. That's why it was survived.

My theory is not proposed previously by other Young Earth Creationists, because they have neglected Göbekli Tepe. Lita Sanders and Robert Carter in 2011 answered on Göbekli Tepe without mentioning Babel.

My theory is also not proposed previously by Graham Hancock. He takes the carbon dates at face value, and believes the samples started out with c. 100 pmC.

Creationists believe I am a New Ager and a dupe of Graham Hancock. Graham Hancock believes I'm a religious fanatic and a dupe of Creation Ministries International or Kent Hovind.

Result - neither of them looks at what I do. Neither of them credits what I do. My study debt so far remains mostly unpaid, at below 400,000 SEK, below 38 819,18 USD, below 31 371,40 GBP, below 35 827,42 €.

Other result - neither of them needs to take my data into account for possibly reinterpreting his own.

But before I end, I'll be helpful about the Glacial Maximum as well ...

Last Glacial Maximum, supposedly, c. 27,000–20,000 years BP

2935 BC

3.9541 pmC, so dated as 29 635 BC

2912 BC

6.6161 pmC, so dated as 25 362 BC

...

2867 BC

11.9246 pmC/100, so dated as 20 467 BC

How do I obtain these levels? I obviously have no Biblical historic artefact corresponding to Glacial Maximum, so how?

Well, this is calculating a growth curve from the level needed to get 2957 BC (the Flood) as "40 000 BP" (Neanderthal démise, now corrected to "39 000 BP") up to the level for getting 2607 BC as 9600 BC.

I then put the levels of the different years into carbon 14 dating calculators, get the extra years, insert the carbon dates that correspond to the real ones.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Fabian of Rome
Pope and Martyr
20.I.2023

Romae natalis sancti Fabiani, Papae et Martyris, qui, Decii tempore, martyrium passus est, atque in coemeterio Callisti sepultus.

PS, I forgot to make the average between the real dates surrounding the carbon date 27000 BP ... oops, not necessary, since 27000 BP = 25000 BC, one of the values, 2912 BC. However, same mistake further down, I need 18 000 BC as carbon date, and when 2845 carbon dates as 18 745 and 2823 as 17 373, the carbon date 18 000 BC or 20 000 BP would be c. 2834 BC./HGL