jeudi 29 juin 2017

Comparing Three Roads from Seven Cows to Seven Trumpets


Tas Walker and Myself on C14 : Glacial Maximum and End · Interim III, Flood to Abraham with Syncellus · Continuing Interim III to Joseph in Egypt · Comparing Three Roads from Seven Cows to Seven Trumpets

St. Jerome

If Djoser had been dated by Cambridge halflife to 2800 BC in 1950, the remaining C-14 would have been 56.293 %. A full Cambridge half life is however further back.

However, as usual, this presumes that the C-14 content back then was c. 100% of the present value.

Also, the Libby date is off, so instead of 4750 years, 4892,5 years. 4892 years gives a content of 55.334 %.

Why is this important?

Well, Djoser, as well as Neferkasokar seem to be Joseph's pharao. ... This means that carbon dated 2800 BC = 1728 or rather less, later, BC. ... Carbon dated 2800 = 1709. ... The carbon content in Joseph's time when Jacob died was therefore about 87.636 pmc.


This Morning I Read it's 77 and 68 Years of Radiocarbon
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2017/02/this-morning-i-read-its-77-and-68-years.html


Syncellus

XXXVII 1901 BC
89.685 pmc : 2801

Jacob +
1881 BC


Continuing Interim III to Joseph in Egypt
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2017/06/continuing-interim-iii-to-joseph-in.html


Correcting error carbon dated 2800 BC = 1881 BC. 920 extra years, 89.468 pmc.

2801
1881
0920

Ussher, cited in Haydock comment:

Year of the World 2315, Year before Christ 1689.

GENESIS - Chapter 49
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary, 1859 edition
http://haydock1859.tripod.com/id376.html


2800
1635
1165

Carbon dated 2800 BC = 1635 BC, 1165 extra years and that means 86.855 pmc.

Time taken according to the three:

500 BC = carbon dated 500 BC, no extra years, 100 pmc.

1881 1709 1635
0501 0509 0505
1380 1200 1130


Real dates according to Syncellus:

i 1881 BC  ij 1842 BC  iij 1802 BC
iu 1763 BC  u 1723 BC  uj 1684 BC
uij 1644 BC  uiij 1605 BC  ix 1566 BC
 
x 1526 BC  xj 1487 BC  xij 1447 BC
xiij 1408 BC  xiu 1368 BC  xu 1329 BC
xuj 1290 BC  xuij 1250 BC  xuiij 1211 BC
 
xix 1171 BC  xx 1132 BC  xxj 1092 BC
xxij 1053 BC  xxiij 1014 BC  xxiu 974 BC
xxu 935 BC  xxuj 895 BC  xxuij 856 BC
 
xxuiij 816 BC  xxix 777 BC  xxx 738 BC
xxxj 698 BC  xxxij 659 BC  xxxiij 619 BC
xxxiu 580 BC  xxxu 540 BC  xxxuj 501 BC


Extra years and percent modern carbon:

i 920 89.468 pmc ij 894 89.75 pmc iij 867 90.043 pmc
iu 841 90.327 pmc u 815 90.612 pmc uj 789 90.897 pmc
uij 762 91.194 pmc uiij 736 91.482 pmc ix 710 91.77 pmc
 
x 683 92.07 pmc xj 657 92.36 pmc xij 631 92.651 pmc
xiij 605 92.943 pmc xiu 578 93.247 pmc xu 552 93.541 pmc
xuj 526 93.835 pmc xuij 499 94.142 pmc xuiij 473 94.439 pmc
 
xix 447 94.736 pmc xx 421 95.035 pmc xxj 394 95.346 pmc
xxij 368 95.646 pmc xxiij 342 95.947 pmc xxiu 315 96.261 pmc
xxu 289 96.564 pmc xxuj 263 96.869 pmc xxuij 237 97.174 pmc
 
xxuiij 210 97.492 pmc xxix 184 97.799 pmc xxx 158 98.107 pmc
xxxj 131 98.428 pmc xxxij 105 98.738 pmc xxxiij 79 99.049 pmc
xxxiu 53 99.361 pmc xxxu 26 99.686 pmc xxxuj 0 100 pmc


Apparent carbon dates:

i 2801 BC  ij 2736 BC  iij 2669 BC
iu 2604 BC  u 2538 BC  uj 2473 BC
uij 2406 BC  uiij 2341 BC  ix 2276 BC
 
x 2209 BC  xj 2144 BC  xij 2078 BC
xiij 2013 BC  xiu 1946 BC  xu 1881 BC
xuj 1816 BC  xuij 1749 BC  xuiij 1684 BC
 
xix 1618 BC  xx 1553 BC  xxj 1486 BC
xxij 1421 BC  xxiij 1356 BC  xxiu 1289 BC
xxu 1224 BC  xxuj 1158 BC  xxuij 1093 BC
 
xxuiij 1026 BC  xxix 961 BC  xxx 896 BC
xxxj 829 BC  xxxij 764 BC  xxxiij 698 BC
xxxiu 633 BC  xxxu 566 BC  xxxuj 501 BC


Interval is about 39 and a half years (39.4285714285714286 years), after which you have 99.524 % of original
89.75 pmc - 89.468 pmc = 0.282 pmc rise
99.524 % * 89.468 pmc = 89.04213232 pmc with zero replacement
Stays 89.468 pmc with 0.42586768 pmc replacement
0.42586768 + 0.282 pmc = 0.70786768 pmc replacement
0.70786768 / 0.42586768 = 1.6621775101599633

This latter being the ratio for C14 production then to now. Note : if equal all over the time from Djoser and Joseph (according to Syncellus) to 501 BC.

As we have seen, even a ratio of 20:1 is possible without disastrous consequences. This I made clear back in October 2015, with these words:

Les premiers 179 après le déluge, j’ai fait ajouter efficacement 36,32968 % du taux actuel ou 17 fois davantage, ce qui correspond à en moyenne 6,614647619047619034 milliSieverts par an du cosmos. Ce qui est à peu près l’exposition à Princeton, actuellement, si on ajoute aux 0.39 milliSieverts cosmiques tous les autres facteurs de radioactivité. J’ai fait abstraction du fait que l’ajout est en réalité plus haut, parce que contrepesé par la perte. Mais 7 ou même pas 8 milliSieverts par an, c’est ce qu’on peut compter au maximum comme moyenne ces 179 ans après le déluge. Selon mon petit modèle, bien entendu.


New blog on the kid : Avec un peu d'aide de Fibonacci ... j'ai une table, presque correcte
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2015/10/avec-un-peu-daide-de-fibonacci-jai-une.html


Mise-à-jour: À propos dangérosité. La radiation cosmique donne, par le monde en moyenne 0,39 milliSieverts par an, et l'exposition à milliSieverts est en moyenne dans le monde 3,01 milliSieverts par an. Aux États-Unis la moyenne est même 6,24 milliSieverts par an. 3*0,39 milliSieverts = 1,17. Ceci serait, pourvu que la production de carbone 14 est directement proportionnelle aux milliSieverts et non à leur carrée ou racine carrée, par exemple, l'exposition au temps d'Abraham, selon mon modèle ici exposé. Pour arriver à une identification entre Moïse et Amenamhat IV, il faudra peut-être un peu davantage, mais ceci ne serait pas un risque de santé aux temps d'Abraham. 1,17 est bien inférieur à 3,01 ou encore à 6,24!/HGL


New blog on the kid : Un essai, décision de demander l'aide à un professeur de maths
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2015/10/un-essai-decision-de-demander-laide-un.html


Unfortunately we probably cannot keep very close to the medium ratio of replacement of 1.6621775101599633.

For, suppose that we are also dealing with a match with Jericho? Kenyon's date for fall of walls, according to Syncellus just after 1644 BC, would be more or less an exact match, reaching 100 pmc or more, since Kenyon dated desztruction to ....

The destruction of Garstang’s City IV, which he had dated to about 1400 B.C.E., occurred, according to Kenyon, at the end of the Middle Bronze Age, about 1550 B.C.E.(14)

(14) Kenyon, Digging Up Jericho (London: Ernest Benn, 1957), p. 262; "Jericho," in Archaeology and Old Testament Study (AOTS) ed. D. Winton Thomas (Oxford: Clarendon, 1967), pp. 265- 267; "Jericho," in Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land (EAEHL), vol. 2, ed. Michael Avi-Yonah (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1976), pp. 551, 564; The Bible in Recent Archaeology (Atlanta: John Knox, 1978), pp. 33-37.


Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence
Technical - mai 01, 2008 - by Bryant G. Wood PhD - on Associates for Biblical Research
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/05/Did-the-Israelites-Conquer-Jericho-A-New-Look-at-the-Archaeological-Evidence.aspx


A real date of 1644 and a carbon date of 1550 mean too little time is measured, i e a higher carbon ratio than even 100 pmc.

Namely:

1644
1550
0094

94 years too little = a carbon content of 101.144 pmc when Jericho fell.

So, in 237 years the carbon content would have risen from 89.468 pmc to 101.144 pmc. Is this possible?

In 237 years, 100 pmc would drop to 97.174 pmc. 97.174 % * 89.468 pmc = 86.93963432 pmc. Which is what zero carbon 14 genesis would imply.

101.144 pmc
-86.93963432 pmc
=14.20436568 pmc replacement

The replacement with current carbon 14 building would be 100 - 97.174 = 2.826 pmc.

And this means that 14.20436568 / 2.826 = 5.0263148195329087 or more simply 5 times as fast as now is how carbon 14 would have been building in those years.

I think this may pose a problem for accepting the chronology of Syncellus, but it might not be insurmountable. Can anyone point to a destruction of Jericho which could be carbon dated to 2406 BC? That might solve it.

What about the time for St Jerome's chronology, between Joseph burying his father in Egypt close to the time, I am presuming when the Pharao Djoser was buried, and taking of Jericho?

1709 and 1510 - 40 = 1470. 2800 and 1550.

2800
1709
1091 extra years, 87.636 pmc

1550
1470
0080 extra years, 99.037 pmc.

With zero new C14, 87.636 pmc would drop to 97.15 % * 87.636 pmc = 85.138374 pmc

99.037 -
85.138374
= 13.898626 pmc

Well, just a little slower with St. Jerome than for Syncellus.

What about Ussher now? Taking of Jericho is given in Haydock as "Year of the World 2553, Year before Christ 1451."

2800
1635
1165 extra years, 86.855 pmc

1550
1451
0099 extra years, 98.81 pmc

1635-1451=184 years. 100 pmc would sink to 97.799 pmc. 97.799 % * 86.855 pmc = 84.94332145 pmc

Carbon building in this time:

98.81 pmc
- 84.94332145 pmc
= 13.86667855 pmc

Expected carbon building : 100 pmc - 97.799 pmc = a 2.201 pmc drop being compensated.

13.86667855 / 2.201 = 6.3001719900045434

So, carbon 14 would have been forming a bit more than 6 times faster than now.

I think this is a problem common to all of the scenarii.

Either I was wrong in identifying Joseph with Imhotep, though this is supported by the Hungere Stele, or Garstang was wrong in singling out his "City IV" as the one the destruction of walls of which are the destruction of Jericho, or between Joseph burying his father in Egypt and Joshua taking Jericho, carbon 14 was forming fairly fast. 5 to 6 times faster.

Or, these chronologies were wrong in taking the soujourn in Egypt as only half of the soujourn in "a land not your own", by adding 215 years to each of them, the carbon build up would have been somewhat slower than that. This would imply first pushing back the date of Joseph burying his father in Egypt:

1881
0215
2096 (Syncellus + 215)

1709
0215
1924 (St Jerome + 215)

1635
0215
1850 (Ussher + 215).

That also reduced the number or extra years and raises the pmc in the time of Joseph (obviously pmc in time of Genesis 14 would also be higher, since also pushed back 215 years).

2800
2096
0704 extra years, 91.836 pmc

237+215=452 years, carbon loss from 100 to 94.679 = from 91.836 pmc to 86.94940644 pmc with zero replacement:

101.144
-86.94940644
=14.19459356 pmc carbon production.

Expected replacement 5.321 pmc.

14.19459356 / 5.321 = 2.6676552452546514, between 2 and 3 (closer to 3) times as fast carbon build up as now.

2800
1924
0876 extra years, 89.945 pmc

Same loss ratio = from 89.945 pmc to 85.15902655 pmc with zero replacement.

99.037 -
85.15902655 =
13.87797345 pmc carbon rise.

Expected replacement identic, so 13.87797345 / 5.321 = 2.6081513719225709, similar ratio.

2800
1850
0950 extra years, 89.144 pmc

184+215=399 years. Carbon loss and expected replacement, from 100 to 95.288 pmc, 4.712 pmc.

Carbon loss in terms of pmc drop with zero replacement : 89.144 pmc * 95.288 % = 84.94353472 pmc

98.81 pmc -
84.94353472 pmc =
13.86646528 pmc real carbon production.

13.86646528 / 4.712 = 2.942798234295416, nearly 3 times as fast carbon 14 production as now.

I think if you prefer the traditional chronologies or prefer reducing the carbon 14 production speed in these times between Joseph and Joshua, both are feasible.

I am however not showing a table for the above values, which ignore Jericho, for now.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Sts Peter and Paul
29.VI.2017

Update, next day:

Jericho archaeology has produced two possibilities for the position of Joshua and the conquest of Jericho. One centers around the wall Garstang found.

Kenyon claimed this wall was from the Early Bronze III period, placing it from 2700-2200 BC, far too early for Joshua.

Source: Jericho Archaeology
[on Israel, a History of]
http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/jericho-archaeology.html


What was the carbon date I said would fit the slower buildup of carbon 14? Well, 2400 about. This would fit the wall of Jericho III.

So, the slower buildup of carbon 14 remains possible./HGL

lundi 26 juin 2017

Classic Riddle


Q What has been around for thousands of years, but is never more than a month old?
A The Moon.

Look how it is presented now:



Thousands of years would even on the erroneous evolutionary view not be actually wrong, just inadequate.

BUT by changing the riddle, they are making themselves look smarter with those who think evolution is right and because this is obvious, they are also making evolutionary thinking look smart./HGL

lundi 19 juin 2017

Continuing Interim III to Joseph in Egypt


Tas Walker and Myself on C14 : Glacial Maximum and End · Interim III, Flood to Abraham with Syncellus · Continuing Interim III to Joseph in Egypt · Comparing Three Roads from Seven Cows to Seven Trumpets

How do we do that?

Well, for one thing, we know the Joseph in Egypt episode is misdated to whenever Djoser is misdated to, since Joseph according to hunger stele was in all probability Imhotep.

Then we look for a clue when Joseph would have been there according to Syncellus.

2189 BC Birth of Abraham
0075 (take away)
2114 BC Promise to Abraham
0430 (take away)
1684 BC Exodus after promise = 1685 BC, Exodus acc to Syncellus
0215 (add back)
1899 BC Jacob to Egypt c. about time when Pharao Djoser is going to die.

Interim III ended on:

XXIX 2208 BC
86.572 pmc 3400 BC


2208
1899
0307 : 8 = 38.375 (actually 309, sorry!)

XXIX 2208  XXX 2170  XXXI 2131
XXXII 2093  XXXIII 2055  XXXIV 2016
XXXV 1978  XXXVI 1939  XXXVII 1901


1900 BC, misdated as 2800 crude C-14 year (Djoser redated on historical grounds to 2600 BC).

This is 900 extra years.

1192
0900
0292 : 8 = 36.5 extra years

XXIX 1192  XXX 1155.5  XXXI 1119
XXXII 1082.5  XXXIII 1046  XXXIV 1009.5
XXXV 973  XXXVI 936.5  XXXVII 900


This means what in percent modern carbon (pmc)?

XXIX 86.572 pmc  XXX 86.955 pmc  XXXI 87.34 pmc
XXXII 87.726 pmc  XXXIII 88.115 pmc  XXXIV 88.504 pmc
XXXV 88.896 pmc  XXXVI 89.289 pmc  XXXVII 89.685 pmc


And which are the "apparent years"?

XXIX 3400  XXX 3325  XXXI 3250
XXXII 3175  XXXIII 3101  XXXIV 3025
XXXV 2951  XXXVI 2875  XXXVII 2801


Let's make a table, inserting our previous knowledge too:

I 3358 BC
1.514 pmc 38 000 BC

Arphaxad *
3356 BC

II 3317 BC
1.962 pmc 35 815 BC

III 3276 BC
2.543 pmc 33 631 BC

IV 3235 BC
3.295 pmc 31 446 BC

Cainan *
3223 BC

V 3194 BC
4.271 pmc 29 262 BC

VI 3153 BC
5.535 pmc 27 077 BC

VII 3112 BC
7.173 pmc 24 892 BC

Shelah *
3093 BC

VIII 3070 BC
9.297 pmc 22 708 BC

IX 3029 BC
12.049 pmc 20 523 BC

Noah +
3008 BC

X 2988 BC
15.616 pmc 18 338 BC

Eber *
2963 BC

XI 2947 BC
20.239 pmc 16 154 BC

XII 2906 BC
26.23 pmc 13 969 BC

XIII 2865 BC
33.994 pmc 11 785 BC

Shem +
2858 BC

Peleg *
2829 BC

XIV 2824 BC
44.057 pmc 9600 BC

Arphaxad +
2791 BC

XV 2780 BC
49.459 pmc 8600 BC

Cainan +
2763 BC

XVI 2739 BC
51.476 pmc 8229 BC

Reu *
2699 BC

XVII 2698 BC
53.577 pmc 7857 BC

XVIII 2657 BC
55.763 pmc 7486 BC

Shelah +
2633 BC

XIX 2617 BC
58.038 pmc 7114 BC

XX 2576 BC
60.405 pmc 6743 BC

Serug *
2567 BC

XXI 2535 BC
62.87 pmc 6371 BC

XXII 2494 BC
65.435 pmc 6000 BC

Peleg +
2490 BC

Eber +
2459 BC

XXIII 2453 BC
68.105 pmc 5629 BC

Nahor *
2437 BC

XXIV 2412 BC
70.883 pmc 5257 BC

XXV 2371 BC
73.775 pmc 4886 BC

Reu +
2360 BC

Terah *
2358 BC

XXVI 2331 BC
76.785 pmc 4514 BC

XXVII 2290 BC
79.918 pmc 4143 BC

Abraham *
2288 BC

XXVIII 2249 BC
83.178 pmc 3771 BC

Serug +
2237 BC

Nahor +
2229 BC

XXIX 2208 BC
86.572 pmc 3400 BC

Isaac *
2188 BC

XXX 2170 BC
86.955 pmc : 3325 BC

Terah +
2153 BC

XXXI 2131 BC
87.34 pmc : 3250 BC

Jacob and Esau *
2128 BC

Abraham +
2113 BC

XXXII 2093 BC
87.726 pmc : 3175 BC

XXXIII 2055 BC
88.115 pmc : 3101 BC

XXXIV 2016 BC
88.504 pmc : 3025 BC

Isaac +
2008 BC

Jacob +
1981 BC - ERROR WHERE?

XXXV 1978 BC
88.896 pmc : 2951 BC

XXXVI 1939 BC
89.289 pmc : 2875

XXXVII 1901 BC
89.685 pmc : 2801

Jacob +
1881 BC


I seem to have come to an impass with the chronology, it seems Jacob dies way too early in relation to his arrival in Egypt.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. Juliana Falconieri
Sister of the Servite Founder
19.VI.2017

PS, note very well that if this is an error in Syncellus and not in my understanding of him, there is no such paradox in St Jerome:

2015 Abraham born (acc. to Christmas chronology)
1915 Isaac born (when his father was 100)
1855 Jacob born (when his father was 60)
1725 Jacob to Egypt (at 130 years of age)
0215
1510 Exodus (acc. to Christmas chronology)

All years BC./HGL

PPS, Error fixed, simply subtraction error in year of when Jacob died./HGL

dimanche 18 juin 2017

News on C14 Front


  • When it comes to carbon dates of millions of years old pretendedly things to 40,000 or sometimes even 20,000 years (depending on the presumption original carbon content was 100 pmc or so), I have heard a new argument from Evolutionists : carbon 14 could have formed due to background radiation in the object itself.

    When the object is coal, supposed to be 20,000 years old, I would think it would not have had any nitrogen left and therefore not be able to produce carbon 14 by background radiation. See here:

    http://creation.com/dating-in-conflict

    In the same rock, right alongside the fossil mussels, are fragments of coalified wood. ... So I arranged for this coalified wood to be radiocarbon ‘dated’ by the Physikalisches Institute of the University of Bern, Switzerland.2 I assumed that such a prestigious laboratory would take all necessary precautions to eliminate contamination, and allow for all other sources of error.3 The result: 36,440 years BP ± 330 years.


    Also, this would mean that the explanation nwould have to go for things as recent as dated by carbon 14 to 36,440 years BP, not just objects older than 40,000.

  • Other item: I have extensively here used a fact from Osgood. Abraham must have been alive when Chalcolithic En Geddi was inhabited. I credited his article for the fact, but I had read it so hastily I first now had time to credit him for his detective work. I did it day before yesterday, and here is an article which already has 60 views:

    Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... Pyramids, Flood, Babel, LXX, Dead Sea Scrolls
    http://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2017/06/pyramids-flood-babel-lxx-dead-sea.html


    Citing which:

    The one place where I can't credit you [= Nathan Hoffman] with excellent detective work is accepting Saqqara pyramids as centuries before 2000 BC.

    Abraham lived around that time, and we should probably group him with Narmer in time. That is, Narmer, carbon dated raw date to 3400 BC or so, must have lived more like 2000 BC.

    Abraham coincides with sth else which requires carbon date 3400 BC, namely chalcolithic of En-Geddi. I failed to properly credit Dr A.J.M. Osgood for his detective work, but it was because I trusted him so much I didn't read all of the article carefully. I didn't even look up whether En-Geddi was mentioned in Genesis 14. Its synonym is:

    // As is often the case, the positive clue comes from the most insignificant portion of this passage. In Genesis 14:7 we are told that the kings of Mesapotamia attacked ‘the Amorites who dwelt in Hazezon-tamar’. Now 2 Chronicles 20:2 tells us that Hazezon-tamar is En-gedi, the oasis mentioned in Scripture a number of times on the western shore of the Dead Sea. //


    The Times of Abraham
    By Dr A.J.M. Osgood
    http://creation.com/the-times-of-abraham


    Great detective work, Osgood, even if you missed this has an implication for carbon levels - or didn't like the implication it had! In c. 2000 BC, the carbon level was so low that things from back then, if organic then, carbon date to c. 1400 years older than they are, i e to 3400 BC.

    A Masoretic reading making Abraham more recent would of course add even more extra years to make same apparent date. This means that Saqqara pyramids are too young to disprove the Masoretic text - but nice try!

mercredi 14 juin 2017

Variation of carbon level during Flood?


1.218 pmc now per 36440*
0.792 pmc now per 40000**

/54.788 % per 4974 years since Flood.

0.01218/0.54788 = 0.0222311455063153
0.00792/0.54788 = 0.0144557202307075

2.22311455063153 pmc - 1.44557202307075 pmc - a reasonable variation of carbon level? Perhaps so./HGL

Using for pmc and percent in relation to years : https://www.math.upenn.edu/~deturck/m170/c14/carbdate.html

* See http://creation.com/dating-in-conflict

** See my theory of Neanderthal extinction = Flood.

jeudi 8 juin 2017

Here goes my Howlibird theory ...


Joel kontinen : Death of a Darwinian Icon: T. Rex Did Not Have Feathers, Fossil Evidence Suggests
http://joelkontinen.blogspot.com/2017/06/death-of-darwinian-icon-t-rex-did-not.html


Recently, Dr Phil Bell (University of New England, Australia) and colleagues published a paper in the journal Biology Letters, examining skin impressions from a famous T. rex skeleton known as Wyrex.

They found no evidence for feathers.

In contrast, they found “scaly reptilian-like skin.”


Fine article, except certain people like complaining about the wikipedia instead of doing sth.

Some museums and textbooks (as well as Wikipedia, of course) have put feathers on T. rex although there is no fossil evidence that these huge reptiles ever sported them.


I look up wikipedia and see this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrannosaurus#Skin_and_feathers

While there is no direct evidence for Tyrannosaurus rex having had feathers, many scientists now consider it likely that T. rex had feathers on at least parts of its body,[33] due to their presence in related species. Mark Norell of the American Museum of Natural History summarized the balance of evidence by stating that: "we have as much evidence that T. rex was feathered, at least during some stage of its life, as we do that australopithecines like Lucy had hair."[34]

The first evidence for feathers in tyrannosauroids came from the small species Dilong paradoxus, found in the Yixian Formation of China, and reported in 2004. As with many other theropods discovered in the Yixian, the fossil skeleton was preserved with a coat of filamentous structures which are commonly recognized as the precursors of feathers.[35] Because all known skin impressions from larger tyrannosauroids known at the time showed evidence of scales, the researchers who studied Dilong speculated that feathers may correlate negatively with body size—that juveniles may have been feathered, then shed the feathers and expressed only scales as the animal became larger and no longer needed insulation to stay warm.[35] However, subsequent discoveries showed that even some large tyrannosauroids had feathers covering much of their bodies, casting doubt on the hypothesis that they were a size-related feature.[36]

While skin impressions from a Tyrannosaurus rex specimen nicknamed "Wyrex" (BHI 6230) discovered in Montana in 2002,[37] as well as some other giant tyrannosauroid specimens, show at least small patches of mosaic scales,[38] others, such as Yutyrannus huali (which was up to 9 meters (30 ft) long and weighed about 1,400 kilograms (3,100 lb)), preserve feathers on various sections of the body, strongly suggesting that its whole body was covered in feathers.[36] It is possible that the extent and nature of feather covering in tyrannosauroids may have changed over time in response to body size, a warmer climate, or other factors.[36]

Research has suggested that large theropods like Tyrannosaurus had teeth covered in lips like modern day lizards, rather than having bare teeth like crocodiles. This is based on the presence of enamel, which may need to remain hydrated, an issue not faced by aquatic species like crocodilians or toothless species like birds, which have lipless mouths and toothless beaks. In modern terrestrial animals with bare teeth, the teeth typically lack some or all of the standard amount of tooth enamel. Because Tyrannosaurus and other toothed theropods had enamel-covered teeth, they would have required some sort of lip-like covering to seal the mouth when closed.[39][40] However, the discovery that Daspletosaurus horneri, a related genus, seemingly did not possess lips and instead seems to have possessed large scales similar to those of crocodiles on its face. Based on comparisons of bone texture of D. horneri with crocodilians, this suggests that Tyrannosaurus and other tyrannosaurids may not have had lips at all and instead had large, flat scales that left no room for lips. The skull of Daspletosaurus horneri also suggests that tyrannosaurids including Tyrannosaurus had integumentary sensory organs similar to crocodilians likely used in touch, temperature readings, prey detection and precise control of jaw movements.[41]


Two hypotheses apart from that of the evolutionists:

  • the dinos with feathers seem to come from China, a country with still a socialist system apart from certain aspects of market economy, and could be frauds;
  • the Dilong paradoxus as well as the Yutyrannus huali, while Chinese, are even so not frauds but could resurrect my Howlibird theory ... they would in that case be another created kind than T Rex and Allosaurus.


Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Thursday in Pentecost Octave
8.VI.2017

mercredi 7 juin 2017

Shem the Cave Painter? Or Japheth?


It should be known by now that I differ on when Palaeolithic mainly occurred from CMI, them preferring after Babel, me preferring from Flood to soon before Babel.

Today's article on CMI accentuates this:

Cave art—more recent than you might think!

Cave paintings of horses and other animals would have been created after the Babel dispersion recorded in Genesis 11. As small populations of human beings migrated from Babel across the continents, some sheltered/lived in caves and daubed the cave walls with images of horses and other animals they saw. Many of these creatures (including the classic ‘prehistoric’-looking horse) subsequently became extinct. In one way, the work of people like the Stroebels has served to bring this ‘cave painting era’ psychologically closer to the present.17 It also raises the question of whether these creatures and the paintings really date to many tens of thousands of years ago, as is popularly claimed.18


I obviously agree cave art is more recent than evolutionists tend to think.

But I think it ended before Babel.

Here is a wikipedian article on these items:

"Cave painting" on the Wickipeejuh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_painting


And here are salient dates:

The oldest date given to an animal cave painting is now a pig that has a minimum age of 35,400 years old at Pettakere cave in Sulawesi, an Indonesian island. Indonesian and Australian scientists have dated other non-figurative paintings on the walls to be approximately 40,000 years old. ... Other examples may date as late as the Early Bronze Age, but the well-known Magdalenian style seen at Lascaux in France (c. 15,000 BCE) and Altamira in Spain died out about 10,000 BCE, coinciding with the advent of the Neolithic period. Some caves probably continued to be painted over a period of several thousands of years.


Pettakere in Sulawesi, 35,400 years old, 33,400 BC. This is fairly close to the 33,631 BC (carbon dated) which in my table goes with (extended) LXX chronology 3276 BC, about 80 years after the Flood. "Death" of Magdalenian style, 10,000 BC, comes between the 11,785 BC and the 9600 BC (beginning of Göbekli Tepe / Babel, 40 years before dispersion) which in this table come to the years 2865 BC and 2824 BC. Between which years Shem dies and Peleg is born:

III 3276 BC
2.543 pmc 33,631 BC

XIII 2865 BC
33.994 pmc 11,785 BC

Shem +
2858 BC

Peleg *
2829 BC

XIV 2824 BC
44.057 pmc 9600 BC


Interim III, Flood to Abraham with Syncellus
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2017/05/interim-iii-flood-to-abraham-with.html


On the view of CMI, the cave art would be from one short epoch, but spontaneously arising independently, and this despite having very many commonalities. On my view, it could be from one single artist. On second thoughts, perhaps not Shem, after all, but his brother Japheth, who might be presumed to have lived about as long - or his wife.

Unity of style argues that cave art of Magdalenian type at least was by one artist or one school of artists. It was a style like the Gothic or Renaissance or Baroque. It would have taken a man kind very different from ours in mental capacities to extend this style over 20,000 years or even 10,000 years with so little variation. But it would be easy as cake for the people living longer than we after the flood to extend the style something like 432 years, simply because whoever took the initiative to the style took longer to die off than we do now.

If this was before Babel, we get two implications, which have so far neither to the best of my knowledge been overturned, nor confirmed:

  • There was no idolatry.
  • The language was Hebrew (not yet called so, since not yet restricted to Heber's family and descendants).


While they have not been overturned, I say, they are contested, this or that can be supposed to be one or other shaman or even idol of fertility.

Now, the "sorcerer" in the Cave of Trois-Frères must if so have known about the true God:



On wiki:
Wizard or Cuckold God of the Trois-Frères Sanctuary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Trois-Fr%C3%A8res#/media/File:Pintura_Trois_Freres.jpg


Date
2001

Source
http://www.celtiberia.net/verimg.asp?id=534

Author
Clottes, J y Lewis-Williams


It could be Cainan or Nimrod up to some bad things. Or it could mean sth entirely other than sorcery. It is at least not proof the people back then had already turned away from the true God to idols.

The other aspect is that everyone was still speaking Hebrew. A figurative painting as such can neither validate nor invalidate it. The so far thought to be oldest piece of writing being the Dispilio tablet - carbon dated to 5202 ± 123 BC, that is between 2412 BC and 2371 BC on my table - could be non-Hebrew and would not refute my observation, since, unlike cave paintings this is after Babel. Or Tărtăria tablets dated around 5300 BC, that is before 2412 BC - we are speaking with birth of Nahor and death of Reu on this table.

But it would be interesting to follow up what Genevieve von Petzinger will have to say on the 32 late palaeolithic signs:

Her video : Why are these 32 symbols found in caves all over Europe | Genevieve von Petzinger
TED
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJnEQCMA5Sg


My response : Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Genevieve von Petzinger's 32 late palaeolithic signs
http://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2017/03/on-genevieve-von-petzingers-32-late.html


If I am right this could be alphabetic signs, or some of them, it would be very interesting if it turned out to be compatible with Hebrew alphabet and some stone had for instance Yod Gimel Resh (corresponding to, not same shapes!) for Japheth Gomer Riphath, somewhere, and somewhere else some other genealogy in nuce. I have tried to reach her about this, but so far no response. Not even as much as a "not interested", I can't tell if that is the case or if it was not forwarded to her.

And if I am wrong, if nothing can be reconstructed as Hebrew language genealogies or other phrases, perhaps a simple Shin for shalom (once one looks), that would of course boost CMI and their position palaeolithic cave arts were post Babel.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Ember Wednesday of Pentecost
7.VI.2017

CMI's article for today is:

Resurrecting a ‘prehistoric’ horse
by Philip Bell
http://creation.com/resurrecting-a-prehistoric-horse