stp2007

That is indeed the case. Calling out a user is frowned on in these parts. I acknowledge my error and will try my best not to do it again. Learning from mistakes is how rational/logical/scientific people advance their thinking and practices.

I will now take this opportunity to ask afdave again if he has an explanation for how all the animals, reptiles, insects, birds, bacteria (and everything else on the ark) repopulated the world after the flud?

Every species, represented as a pair, must have had a 100% success ratio of survival otherwise we wouldn't be seeing that species today. That's pretty long odds on a world where EVERYTHING was destroyed and the entire landscape covered by 1 or 2 miles of sediment.

mung bean

I think this is due for a bump, since Dave appears to have been conspicuous by his absence since it was posted.
As I see it the relevant questions are:

1/ Since a record of the moment pre-Flud Egypt was wiped out would inevitably involve a large deposit of sediment, and since the Nile Valley is full of sediment, are these sediments the result of the Flud?

2/ if they are, how did the drainage canyon ( 8,000 feet deep under Cairo and several hundred feet deep under Aswan) become filled with sediment if it was cut as the Flud waters were draining away?

3/ If they aren't, WTF are they doing there and where are the Flud sediments, considering that according to Dave the Egyptian society we know was founded almost directly after the Flud?

I have also decided to start a thread about Dave's repopulation projections and the Tower of Babel, since I'm sure he'd like to demonstrate to us that he does have answers on that topic.

Seven Popes

I'm sure that "After The Bar Closes" regulars remember that AFDave was finally forced to concede that the bible could not be inerrant due to the failed Tyre prophecy.

Seven Popes

I will provide links, of course, if anyone asks, but they depict Dave behaving badly and being a poor sport, and as I have am willing to forgive his past transgressions, I would rather not directly linkfrom here. Kind of me, huh Dave? <watching him read these posts via his buddy page!>

Edit, never mind, after 30 minutes of reading this thread, he's just logged out. Just wondering if he had anything to add, and apparently he did not.

Dave Hawkins

A REBUTTAL OF DEAN ANDERSON'S POST ...

The reason Rohl is important is not because his New Chronology conclusively supports the founding of Ancient Egypt after the Flood. He is important because he raises serious questions about accepted Egyptian Chronology. I don't think you have ever addressed any of these serious questions. What about Champollion's misreading of the name rings? What about Manetho's "Blast of God" reference in the reign of Dudimose? (Rohl's Pharoah of the Exodus) What about all those Hebrew slave names found in the reign of Dudimose? How do you explain that a foreign power ruled just after Dudimose? Makes perfect sense if the entire Egyptian army was drowned don't you think? Until you can deal with these questions, I don't think you can say that "Egyptian Chronology is settled. The Flood is impossible."

I need to retract my statement that NASA is correct on this point. They may be, but I'm not even sure that NASA's position is accurately represented by you. You say that the 3 deg. 42 min. figure is wrong and you showed a simple calculation ... I don't think you even gave me anything from NASA. And I'm not sure your simple calculation is correct. Consider this entry from Wikipedia (admittedly not a watertight source, but at least something to consider) ... If it is true that it was only 5 deg. off the pole in 1887BC (900 years after 2787), then it makes sense that Proctor would have said it is close to 4 deg. off in 2170 BC (300 years earlier), especially considering that it stayed within 1 deg. until 2587 BC. I think your simple "NASA says it's wrong" is unsupported. You haven't shown me that NASA says it's wrong. And further, you have applied a simplistic calculation to a phenomenon which, I'm guessing, is not simplistic. Why should we expect the rate of transit of the star to be constant? Further, it seems that even your simplistic calculations are wrong. If the entire transit is 47 degrees, then it takes ~12,500 years (half the precessional cycle) to travel the entire 47 degrees, right? So 47 / 12500 * 600 = 2.25 degrees. So I'm not sure where you get your 6 degrees from.

Smyth's argument for the 2170 BC date of construction begins HERE. I see nothing there about prophecies and such. Maybe you could explain why you hold your view.
Since you acknowledge that Petrie was aware of this, why were you not aware of it? Davidson's figures are not arbitrary at all as I showed in great detail with his diagrams I posted. They flow naturally from the data and use more sensible assumptions about the sockets and the casing stones than Petrie's assumptions. I showed you why Davidson's socket scenario makes more sense (remember the Lisht pyramid?) and I have never understood why Petrie thought the tapered casing thickness makes any sense at all. Talk about not using Occam's Razor!
Again you mistakenly believe that Smyth's date for the Pyramid comes from prophetic speculations. See the link above to correct your understanding on this. If you have actually read Smyth's book, you would know that he spends a relatively small amount of the book on the prophetic inference part. The majority of the book does NOT discuss this.
It did not contradict Smyth and Davidson at all. And I gave you a link with many other corroborations about the concavity.

I will leave it at that on the Pyramid and Smyth's dating of it.

In my next post, I will provide evidence for Primeval (and early post-Flood) longevity, and also dig deeper into population growth.

RED DAVE

afdave, since you've returned to the thread (unlike praxeus, who seems to have taken a powder), let me pose once again the two fundamental questions that have been guiding this thread for awhile.

1) What is your date for the Flood (i.e. the one that you accept for purposes of argument)?

2) If it's approximate (and there's no reason why it shouldn't be), what are the outside limits?

RED DAVE

Sven

Dave's recent post: Lots of (deliberate?) misunderstandings + some desparate denying.

*yawn*

Hex

Oh yeah ... The Wiki -definately- would be more likley to be correct on matters of space than NASA ... Not like they actually pay attention to how stellar objects and the Earth interact and the patterns therein ...




It almost makes me miss Lars ...

Dean Anderson

I have never addressed those questions - and I have no intention of doing so, since it would merely be a pointless distraction from the main point: which is that even if Rohl is correct, Egypt was still founded before your Flood date and continued through the Flood without noticing it.

Besides, I think it is no straw-man to sum up your argument as:

1) Every Egyptologist except one says that Egypt was founded in date X.

2) One maverick Egyptologist says that Egypt was actually founded in date Y.

3) Both X and Y contradict your theory.

4) However, because you can find a single maverick who disagrees with the rest, you can claim that the matter is "not settled" and therefore you might be correct, even though no Egyptologist agrees with you.

I leave it up to the readers to judge the quality of this argument.

Having checked my maths, and having re-read Smyth, I concede this point. I was mislead by an earlier poster who was saying that Thuban was aligned at the pole in 2170 BCE. Re-reading Smyth's book, I see that the previous poster was misrepresenting Smyth and that Smyth's alignment does use the 3-4 degree angle that you quote.

However, before you get too excited, this means nothing.

There was a star lined up with the north/south axis of the pyramid in 2170 BCE. There have been many stars which have lined up with the north/south axis at various times, and there have been many stars which have lined up with the east/west axis at various times.

Unless you have independent evidence (from other archaeological sources) to support the 2170 BCE construction date, drawing the conclusion that the pyramid must have been constructed at that date simply because a star happens to line up with it then is unwarranted.

Because Smyth is at pains to point out that the 2170 BCE date features in his reading of various features of the Grand Gallery as being symbolic and prophetic of various important events. That is his only corroborating evidence for his 2170 BCE date.

I was aware of it. I never said that the sides of the pyramid were not concave. I said that the shape of the concavity does not match Davidson's diagrams and calculations.

And your quote of Petrie's description of the concavity shows that it doesn't.

On the contrary, the language throughout the book - as well as the summary at the end showing Smyth's conclusions is explicitly religious.

You are implying that there is some small section about prophecy somewhere, but in fact that is the central tenet of Smyth's work. That he spends much time leading up to it does not mean that it can simply be dismissed as a "relatively small amount of the book" as if it were an afterthought.

Good, because your argument seems to have been reduced to the level of "Did so!".

And because your argument does you no good whatsoever.

Even if we hypothetically grant that the pyramid was built when Smyth says it was, Egypt was still founded before your Flood date and still continued throught the alleged flood without noticing.

Don't bother.

In this post, you only responded to less than half of my points - only one of which you were actually able to provide any sustabtial criticism of, and my remaining points (particularly those that you chose not to respond to at all) still utterly kill your argument.

You can post whatever nonsense you like about primaeval longevity. It will still not help you solve the question in the OP of this thread, which is asking how the Egyptians culture managed to survive through the Flood without a hiccup.

It doesn't matter one whit when the pyramid was built, or how long people lived.

According to your chosen figures (which still contradict the Bible - something that you have steadfastly avoided addressing) Egypt was founded before the Flood and continued through the Flood with no interruption.

Until you can address this, you can say what you like about the pyramid and about longevity and it won't help you in the slightest.

Mike PSS

I have yet to hear Dave explain, or even acknowledge the existance of, the previous pyramids built before the GP.

And thus we get humor.

Stepped Pyramid of Djozer: "What am I? Chopped Liver?"