|Author:||afdave1 [ Mon Jun 04, 2007 6:28 am ]|
WRITTEN RECORDS ARE THE MOST ACCURATE FOR DETERMINING EVENTS OF THE PAST
This may seem like an obvious statement, and indeed it would have been for most people prior to the “Great Darwinian Subversion” of academia which began in the late 19th century.
THE HISTORICAL RECORD OF GENESIS
But this theory has been discredited. Thanks to the massive efforts of 20th century archaeology, we now know …
1) that Moses and his countrymen DID know how to write and kept meticulous records … the skeptics were wrong
Elsewhere I have pointed out clear statements by leading archaeologists such as Nelson Glueck and William F. Albright who spent their lives personally investigating the historicity of the Old Testament. Both of these investigators are quite clear in their contentions that the Old Testament including the Book of Genesis is highly accurate in its historical accounts.
OTHER HISTORICAL RECORDS
The important item to notice relevant to our Dendrochronology discussion is that …
Most of our knowledge of Ancient Egypt comes from the WRITTEN RECORD of Manetho and his king lists.
We also have inscriptions on monuments and other written records.
But I hope you will not miss the fact–seemingly lost on some modern historians such as “Fronkey” at this forum–
that WRITTEN RECORDS have always been and will always be the most reliable means of determining events of the past.
CARBON 14 DATING OF ARTIFACTS
Carbon 14 dating is sound in principle, but only if proper ASSUMPTIONS are made, namely, the assumptions about …
the C14 ratio in the atmosphere throughout the history of the planet
If the world C14 inventory were in equilibrium (say for the last 100,000 years or so) and there had been no major global events of the past to alter C14 ratios significantly, then C14 dating could be assumed to be relatively accurate. Relatively minor variations in C14 ratios during the historical period of the world (up to ~6000 bp) should be able to be calibrated by various methods, of which Dendrochronology is one such proposed method. However, if one overlooks a major historical event such as the Great Flood of Noah, then Carbon 14 dating is called into question because of the massive alterations in Carbon 14 which would be expected to occur in such a cataclysm.
Carbon 14 chronologists today are operating under the following assumptions …
which of course, brings us to the subject of this debate.
It is my belief that Dendrochronology, while it can possibly be used in a limited way to calibrate Carbon 14 dating back to ~3000 YBP (maybe as much as 4000 YBP), it cannot be used to determine accurate dates beyond this period because of the huge perturbation in C14 ratios caused by the Global Flood.
Now I am quite happy to be proven wrong if BWE can do so, but I think it will be a significant challenge for him.
Dr. Don Batten, a plant physiologist with much commercial success in his field to his credit, has written …
and he goes on to explain why he thinks it is a circular process.
I THINK IT’S A CIRCULAR PROCESS, BUT FEEL FREE TO PROVE ME WRONG
And so, my good friend BWE, I challenge you to convince me that it is NOT a circular process. To do this, I will ask the same questions I have asked elsewhere …
My starting point with this subject is SAWells’ (a physicist) post found HERE
I follow Wells just fine on his first two points, but then he makes an incredible LEAP here …
Let’s just stop right there for a while. Please explain to me in detail how this process was done. Where can I go and see these original tree samples which were used to create the master sequence? I have in my mind’s eye, a picture something like this …
that would extend off to the right far off the page. How am I doing? Is that how this works?
So I would like to see this entire master sequence and examine it closely. Can I do this? Where can I go to do this? What trees were used to build this Master Sequence? From where? What species? How long did they live?
In short, please give me the details of how we get all the way back to 15000 YBP, considering the fact that the oldest livingtree is only ~4700 years old (Methuselah).
Now I did read the article you linked which supposedly extends dendro back to 13000 YBP, but I was tripping over so many assumptions and unexplained items that it left me very confused about how this is really done. Maybe I’m just ignorant, I don’t know, but to me, this debate is all about EXPLAINING the basis for all these various assumptions and determining if they are valid or not. For example, from the Intro …
Well how about we just start right there and ask how we got an “unbroken West European tree ring sequence spanning the past 7272 years” ??
NOTE: We’ve each taken our shots now … you at Creationism and me at Darwinism, so I suggest we leave more of that aside for other places and other times and make our focus razor sharp on the present questions. 🙂
Over to you.
- Moderator’s Introduction
- BWE’s 1st Post
- Dave’s 1st Post
- BWE’s 2nd Post
- Dave’s 2nd Post
- BWE’s 3rd Post
- Dave’s 3rd post
- BWE’s 4th Post
- Dave’s 4th Post
- BWE’s 5th Post
- Dave’s 5th Post
- BWE’s 6th Post
- Dave’s 6th Post
- BWE’s 7th Post
- Dave’s 7th post
- BWE’s 8th Post
- Dave’s 8th Post
- BWE’s Penultimate Post
- Dave’s Penultimate Post
- BWE’s Final Debate Post