Wyatt Museum - Archaeology and Noah's Ark II

Cop-out. Either you have substantiating evidence or your 'argument' is just an(other) string of assertions. I don't expect others to dig through old posts to try to ascertain my points, so I think this is just trying to avoid really dealing with the issue.And btw, the way they calibrate the age is by counting the years of known systems and comparing them to the 14C results ... which if your argument were anywhere near correct should result in a scatter plot instead of a nearly linear distribution.The two lines pretty well define max\min boundaries for the results as well.But it's not just that -- it's all the correlations of all the dating methods by different systems that would have no other reason to give the same results.Try {Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Part III}
http://< !--UB EvC Forum: Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III) -->http://EvC Forum: Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III) -->EvC Forum: Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III)< !--UE-->And see if you can provide the evidence that has so far been lacking from creationists that shows how all these systems result in not just errors but the same errors.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDSHIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Of course I did, it is high school level history to know that no historical theory is ever proven. It is the same with archaeology, nothing is ever proven, it is only implied. Archaeology is excellent at disproving something, but not so good at proving it.Welcome to the firt step on the road to understanding what history is. Now you should realise that you can stop saying that Wyatt has found the chariot wheels of the Egyptians involved in the Exodus and start saying something like 'it looks likely that Wyatt.....'. These are all theories Lysimachus. A theory is the best explanation for the evidence available, and it is never proven. Also, a theory has to be falsifiable, there has to be a way to disprove it, if there is no way to do so then it isn't an historical or scientific theory. I have never disputed it, in fact I probably realise this more than most members here.BTW, where is the Sea of Reeds and how many reeds are there at Ron's crossing?Brian.