Debating Bas Verschoor on Göbekli Tepe : Noah's Altar or Nimrod's Babel?

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on One Real Stake with Creationism (quora) · HGL's F.B. writings : Debating Bas Verschoor on Göbekli Tepe : Noah's Altar or Nimrod's Babel? · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : ... on Tower of Babel Against a Preaching Atheist

Bas Verschoor

a partagé un lien/shared a link.

Hier/yesterday, à 03:03 AM

Genesis 8:20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6bekli_Tepe

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I don't think GT is Noah's altar, I think rather it is Nimrod's work and we might find preparations for a three step rocket if digging on, that being the actual Tower of Genesis 11.

Bas Verschoor

Even if its not Noahs altar the bible made a prediction that the oldest building would be an altar for animal sacrifice, which is what this is even including depictions of animals and a huge amount of bone remains. Also it was made when there were no other settlements, thus confirming the idea of Noah having made an altar prior to a house. I dont see how this fits better with Nimrod but either way it certainly is an interesting part of our history.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"the bible made a prediction that the oldest building would be an altar for animal sacrifice"

Where so?

"I dont see how this fits better with Nimrod"

Because carbon dates.

If 40 000 BP can reduce to a Flood 2957 BC, there is some time after the Flood before you get to sth carbon dated as 11 600 to 10 600 BP.

Like the centuries up to Babel.

Bas Verschoor

Hans-Georg Lundahl In the verse provided. After the flood everything was destroyed and the first thing Noah build was an altar for animal sacrifice. The location makes more sense to Noah then Nimrod and I dont trust carbon dates over 6k. Are you trying to say you have system for correcting the errors? Still I wouldnt accept it.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I do have a system.

A carbon error is due to assuming that original carbon content is like today's when it wasn't.

But the carbon content has come to today's, arguably 2500 years ago, at least, and that gradually.

Also, location doesn't fit Nimrod how?

Bas Verschoor

I agree with that. But I wouldn't consider it a system. During the time of Nimrod this would have been early Hayastan. Nimrod lived more to the east.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

" In the verse provided. After the flood everything was destroyed and the first thing Noah build was an altar for animal sacrifice."

Who says we have found it?

"During the time of Nimrod this would have been early Hayastan"

Even if Nimrod is carbon dated to 9600 - 8600 BC?

"Nimrod lived more to the east."

GT is east of Euphrates, so in Shinar.

" I agree with that. But I wouldnt conider it a system."

I have systematised it in certain tables.

Bas Verschoor

Hans-Georg Lundahl Im not saying we have found it. It could be lost for all we know. Im saying we might have found it if this is it.

You do know that river doesnt start in Turkey right? Multiple countries are on its east side. It doesnt say Noah build his altar on the west side of the river.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

OK, but Euphrates is already Euphrates west of GT which is clearly further South than Ararat.

See a little about Hayk, founder of Hayastan:

Moses of Chorene gave Hayk's genealogy as Japhet, Gomer and Tiras, Torgom. Hayk's descendants are given as Amasya, Ara, Aram, Aramais, Armanak, Gegham, and Harma.[6] Hayk was also said to be the founder of the Haykazuni Dynasty. Some of the prominent Armenian royal houses such as the Arran, Bagratuni, Bznuni, Khorkhoruni, Manavazian, Syuni, and Vahevuni trace their genealogy to Hayk Nahapet.[citation needed] According to Juansher, Hayk "was prince of the seven brothers and stood in service to the giant Nimrod (Nebrovt') who first ruled the entire world as king.[7]"

In Moses of Chorene's account, Hayk son of Torgom had a child named Armanak while he was living in Babylon. After the arrogant Titanid Bel made himself king over all, Hayk emigrated to the region near Mount Ararat.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hayk

Closer travel if the Babylon in question was Göbekli Tepe, right?

Bas Verschoor

mmm consiering this I would say it was first Nimrods land but after that it belonged to Hayk who started Hayastan and his sons may be responsible for its current name Armenia. But that still doesnt disprove that it couldnt have been Noahs altar.

But still if you rely on your system than you should understand that it is older than Nimrod.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

No, I think it is NOT older than Nimrod, and in a moment I will tell you why.

You say GT is from the Flood.

Nice and dandy, but - I suppose you are using the 2348 BC date for the Flood - this means the carbon date 9600 BC and the real BC date make a difference of 7252 extra years (I checked it out after leaving the internet session).

This 7252 extra years amonts to just a little more than 1 1/4 halflives, the Cambridge halflife. One half life corresponds to 50 %, one quarter halflife corresponds to fourth root of 50 %, i e 81.7 %. If you multiply 50 % by 81.7 % you get 40.85 % as the carbon level corresponding to the extra years.

And that means 40.85 % of present relative C14 content would have been the immediate post-Flood content (actually worse, it would have been a pre-Flood content too, since the organisms involved would have been breathing pre-Flood atmosphere and eating pre-Flood grown grass, but we'll leave that one out).

Now, Baumgardner says the Flood by drowning so much carbon - most of which is by far C12 - would have reduced the amount of C12 that the C14 is compared to. Let's say that this was immediate, which arguably it was not, and that it took away half the C12, doubling the C14 ratio, this means that the immediate pre-Flood ratio would have been at least 20.425 % of present content or ratio.

This is 2 1/4 halflives, i e the immediate pre-Flood extgra years would have been datable to two and a quarter halflives immediately if a modern scientist had been transmported back in a time machine.

That means 11,460 + 1432.5 extra years. That is 12,890 extra years for any organism living just before the Flood. 12,890+2348+1950=17,188 BP.

But the real pre-Flood, immediately such, ratio of carbon gives more extra years. Rather than 20 % of present ratio it has to be 2 - 4 % of present ratio. This we know by Creationists carbon dating coal, diamonds, petrol, dinosaur bones.

This means that the immediate post-Flood atmosphere was having at most 4 percent modern carbon, which means how many extra years?

100 - 50 = 5730 extra years
50 - 25 = 5730+5730
25 - 12.5 = 5730+5730+5730
12.5 - 6.25 = 5730+5730+5730+5730 extra years.

That is at least 22.920 extra years.

If Flood related specimens could date as recently as Göbekli Tepe, the coal, diamonds, dinosaurs would all be from pre-Flood times. This means that most remains would NOT be Flood remains.

So, with a more straightforward Flood Geology and Flood Palaeontology, Göbekli Tepe is far too young for Flood or immediately after.

There is another reason why GT is NOT it. There have been found 40 human skulls stringed up by holes through the cranium. That is very much NOT from Noah, but would fit Nimrod extremely well.

Furthermore, what exact dating ballpark would YOU give Nimrod and Tower of Babel? Ziggurat of Ur?

Sorry, but Ziggurat of Ur has a building master with a known name and a known language as being Sumerian, which is a post-Babel language. Therefore Ziggurat of Ur cannot be Tower of Babel.

Also, if you think the animal scultures in Göbekli Tepe represent the animals offered by Noah, what about sculptures representing foxes or vultures or apes?

Bible text specifies of every CLEAN beast and fowl.

Bas Verschoor

Hans-Georg Lundahl The depictions of animals are indeed those of unclean and clean ones, however they are just decorations. Most of the bones found are those of clean ones. But much more than the 7 Noah was supposed to have offered. The abundance of vultures is also strange. It doesnt have to be noahs altar for me to still make sense of the world but all those people that have studied GT say it was made by hunter gatherers, there were no crops in the year it was made and that doesnt seem to fit with Nimrod, though some of the other features do. It could actually be from neither and something else. Thank you for time and dedication. God bless.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"all those people that have studied GT say it was made by hunter gatherers, there were no crops in the year it was made and that doesnt seem to fit with Nimrod"

The crops we have found are usually a bit younger, but one from Holy Land (wheat) is actually older.

If we accept their chronologies, there was about a 10 000 year long pause between that first and those later crops in same region.

If it is just a century or less, it is about chances of what was preserved and what wasn't.

Probably earliest crops in the places most known could have gone totally to workers in GT, and what we find are later ones, after their comes a surpplus not consumed by GT / Babel project.

That is how I would fit it with Nimrod.

But I think the modified crania definitely clinch it to Nimrod, not Noah:

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Read Today About GT
http://filolohika.blogspot.fr/2017/08/read-today-about-gt.html

with link to:

Modified human crania from Göbekli Tepe provide evidence for a new form of Neolithic skull cult
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/6/e1700564.full

You are welcome.