Evolution Cruncher Chapter 21
and other dates correlate archaeological finds with the Bible
This chapter is based on
pp. 1069-1087 of Other Evidence (Volume Three of our three-volume
Evolution Disproved Series). Not included in this chapter are at least
46 statements by scientists. You will find them, plus much more, on our
website: in the encyclopedia.
SORRY, but we did not have
room in this paperback for this chapter.
Here are the reasons we
did not include it:
will find ALL
of it on our website, evolution-facts.org. Go to the chapter entitled,
"Archaeological Dating." (2) If we had included that
chapter, we would have had to leave out other very important material
that you need in paperback format. (3) Because of the complexity of the
data, it is best to present it in full on our website rather than only
partially in this paperback. (4) The dating of archaeological remains is
not a basic aspect of evolutionary theory, as are most of the other
topics discussed in this paperback. Yet it shows that the First
Dynasty does not extend very far back in history, and therefore supports
the conservatively accepted date for the Flood. (5) The
complexity of the data requires a rather full coverage, and we do not
have the needed space in this paperback, without omitting other equally
vital, but more basic information disproving evolutionary theory.
Here is what you will
find in the "Archaeological Dating" chapter on our website:
The importance of
archaeology. The attempt to wed Darwinism to archaeological dating.
Actually, the experts keep lowering the date of the Egyptian First
Dynasty. Why the Bible is an important ancient historical record. Manetho’s
Egyptian king-list and problems with it. *Velikovsky and
Courville’s studies. Events after the Flood [very interesting
reading]. The radiocarbon dating cover-up. *Velikovsky’s
letters and responses. More problems with radiodating. The accuracy of
eclipse dating. The problem with Egyptian partial eclipse dating.
The theorized "Sothic Cycle." The "astronomically
fixed" Egyptian date fraud. The "rising of Sothis" and
serious flaws in the theories. Plus an appendix study on
"Near Eastern Mounds."
Here are some quotations
from that chapter:
"In the course of a
single century’s research, the earliest date in Egyptian
history—that of Egypt’s unification under King Menes—has plummeted
from 5876 to 2900 B.C., and not even the latter year has been
established beyond doubt. Do we, in fact, have any firm dates at
all?"—Johannes Lehmann, The Hittites (1977), p. 204.
"The number of
years assigned to each [Egyptian] king, and consequently the length of
time covered by the dynasties, differ in these two copies, so that,
while the work of Manetho forms the backbone of our chronology, it gives
us no absolutely reliable chronology."—George A. Barton,
Archaeology and the Bible, p. 11.
"In composing his
history of Egypt and putting together a register of its dynasties,
Manetho was guided by the desire to prove to the Greeks, the masters of
his land, that the Egyptian people and culture were much older than
theirs and also older than the Babylonian nation and
civilization."—*I. Velikovsky, Peoples of the Sea (1977), p.
"As prehistory is
made continuous with [preceding that of] recorded history, a problem of
ancient chronology exerts a crippling effect on both the study of the
Old Testament and on ancient history in general. Evidence is
accumulating rapidly that Egyptian chronology is off by as much as
500-600 years. Since most scholars calibrate Old Testament events and
the history of other ancient cultures by Egyptian dates, the effect is
devastating, crippling, and stifling."—Erech von Fange,
"Time Upside Down" in Creation Research Society Quarterly,
June 1974, p. 26.
secured for me a most favorable introduction to Dr. Froelich Rainey,
Director of the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Rainey is
a vigorous, enthusiastic, obviously very well-informed, courteous
gentleman in his late middle years. At no time was your name brought up
by me or by anyone else at the University. I told Dr. Rainey that I was
interested in the latest findings that have bearing on the date of the
Exodus. My position as a professor of religion in Ursinus College and a
long-time interest in the matter had prompted my quest for information
in this area . .
" ‘The dating of
Egyptian history,’ said Dr. Rainey, ‘is one of the most
controversial matters in the whole realm of archaeology today. On the
basis of radiocarbon dating we have come up with a very serious
difference of 600 years between the old chronology and the radiocarbon
evidence! We do not know how to account for it. It seems to extend
throughout Egyptian history, but the earlier dates are off more than
more recent ones . . Right now our Museum, the British Museum, and the
University of Leiden are working furiously to try to find out the cause
of the discrepancy’ . .
" ‘Is it your
opinion then,’ I asked Dr. Rainey, ‘that we may expect some very
drastic changes in the dates of early Egyptian history in the next few
years?’ He replied, ‘Yes. And not only in Egypt but in the dating of
the entire Ancient World, especially the Near East.’
"Dr. Rainey then
called Miss Elizabeth K. Ralph who is in charge of the Radiocarbon
Laboratory of the University of Pennsylvania. This laboratory is located
in marvelous quarters in the basement of the new Physics Building. A
special guide took me to Miss Ralph.
"Miss Ralph is a
deeply serious, dedicated scientist, whose whole life is bound up with
her work. She received me most kindly, was in no wise hurried in
answering my inquiries, and most willingly answered all my questions and
gave me access to all the information she had!
"In addition to
confirming everything that Dr. Rainey told me, she furnished me a wealth
of other information . . Miss Ralph was insistent on the wide gap
between the so-called archaeological dates of Egyptian history and those
derived from radiocarbon dated materials. In almost every case the
radiocarbon dates are significantly younger. Today, they feel they can
date to within an accuracy of 25 years in some instances. I found
her working on a huge graph on which she had entered every reported item
of radiocarbon Egyptian evidence, plotted against the
archaeologically determined dates for the same material. This graph
shows a very unmistakable trend throughout Egyptian history in the
interest of younger dates. She is trying to ascertain what the cause may
be."—David Baker letter, dated 1963, to I. Velikovsky, in
"Letters," Ash Pensee 4(1):14 (1973) [emphasis ours].
"If a C-14 date
supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not
entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is
completely ‘out of date,’ we just drop it."—Professor
Brew, quoted by J.O.D. Johnston, "Problems of Radiocarbon
Dating," in Palestine Exploration Quarterly 105, p. 13 (1973).
verification by actual historical dates] is not true of geological and
archaeological measurements, except in relatively rare instances.
Measurements of time in these fields are inferred from processes, the
rates of change or progress of which are not consistent and which are,
as yet, quite unpredictable. There is no known standard rate for any one
of these processes, and measurements of time for one process are
invariably relative to rates of progress in other processes." —Frederick
Johnson, quoted in H.M. Morris, W.W. Boardman, and R.F. Koontz, Science
and Creation (1971), p. 85.
"It may come as a shock to some,
but fewer than 50 percent of the radiocarbon dates from geological and
archaeological samples in northeastern North America have been adopted
as ‘acceptable’ by investigators."—*J. Gordon Ogden III,
"Use and Abuse of Radiocarbon Dates," Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, 288:187 (1977
COULD NOT DO THIS
The ichneumon wasp (Thalessa)
looks so delicate that the slightest wind ought to blow it over. Yet it
lands on a hard tree trunk, and begins thumping with something that
looks as delicate and frail as the leg of a daddy longlegs. But that
antennae, thinner than a human hair, happens to be a high-power
extension drill. The drill is about 4½ inches [11.43 cm] long, so long
that it curves up and down as the small insect thumps on the hardwood
with it. After thumping for a time, the tiny creature somehow knows it
has found the right place to start work. Drilling begins. This little
wasp uses that delicate feeler to cut its way down through several
inches of solid, hard oak wood! This is totally unexplainable.
Scientists have tried to solve the puzzle, but without success. The
second miracle is what the wasp is drilling for; the larvae of a special
beetle. How can it possibly know where to start its drill, so as to go
straight down (it always drills straight down)—and reach a beetle
larvae? Scientists cannot figure this out either. Somehow the initial
thumping told the tiny insect that a grub was several inches down, and
that it was the kind of larvae it was looking for. The ichneumon wasp
lays its eggs on just one larvae, that of the Tremex. When those
eggs hatch, they will have food to grow on. Then, before they grow too
large, tiny ichneumon wasps come out through that original hole.
21 - STUDY AND REVIEW QUESTIONS
GRADES 5 TO 12 ON A GRADUATED
Use the data found in
chapter 35, Archaeological Dating, on our website, in preparing answers
to the following:
1 - This chapter is not
directly about evolutionary teaching, but the dating of ancient history.
Why is this chapter important?
2 - The earliest
Egyptian date was set at nearly 6000 B.C. Gradually it kept coming down.
What date is it down to now? How does that compare with the conservative
date for the Flood? Memorize the suggested conservative date for the
Flood and Creation.
3 - List 5 of the 11
reasons why modern archaeological work tends to be confused and
inaccurate in its conclusions.
4 - Write a paper on the
walls of Jericho and the dating of Sodom, as an example of prejudice
applied to archaeological findings.
5 - Write a paper on
Manetho and the reliability of his king-lists.
6 - Write a paper on
Velikovsky and Courville’s research into early dating.
7 - Write a paper on the
descent from the Ark into Mesopotamia and the Babel incident.
8 - Write a paper on the
migration into Egypt.
9 - Write a paper on the
10 - Write a paper on
11 - Write a paper on
the Sothic Cycle.
12 - Write a paper on
the "rising of Sothis" and problems with the theory about it.
13 - Write a paper on
the three Egyptian seasons and the second Egyptian calendar.
14 - Write a paper on
the conclusion, as it applies to Manetho, eclipse dating, Sothis, and
15 - Write a paper on Near Eastern
mounds (in the appendix).
You have just completed
21 Archaeological Dating
NEXT— Go to the next file in
Chapter 22 Evolutionary