Theory: Why The Exodus Myth Exists

Christ left? Where did he go?lfen

Heaven?

This is an Exodus topic.Adminnemooseus

---

Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
Thread Reopen Requests

Where is that?lfen

ooops, sorry I replied to Hydarnes before reading your post.If some sort of topic for this comes to me, or perhaps Hydarnes we will continue it elsewhere.lfen

ooops, double post. my browser was playing tricks on my mind
lfenThis message has been edited by lfen, 08-16-2004 06:58 PM

Hey folks, sorry for my long drawn absence. Things have been getting quite busy for me.I recently received a new BOOK! It's called "DISCOVERIES: Questions Answered", Edited by Jonathan Gray and Assited by Josephine Gray. It is a 340 book refuting the critics on Ron Wyatt's discoveries, and I should say it gets the job done. The more I read and study both sides of the spectrum, the more I'm convinced than ever that these discoveries are truly genuine. I just love the opening to this book:--------------------------------------
WHY THIS BOOK?

​

WHY ANSWER SO MANY QUESTIONS?"The answers in this book are presented for the benefit of the countless honest folk who genuinely want to konw the truth concerning the DISCOVERY claims. This includes many who are sharing the news and need extra information for genuine enquirers.

​

This information is NOT for those critics who have set their hearts against the truth. No matter how strong the evidence, it would be wasted on them. The battle lines have been drawn and the ranks are becoming clearly defined.

​

So welcome to:

​

DISCOVERIES: QUESTIONS ANSWERED."The above statement couldn't be further from the truth. Nevertheless, I'm still going to use it against critics, simply so the honest folk see it and are not devoured by the sophestry coated lies the critics have to offer.I am wating for the day when all criticism (especially from the ungodly critics) will be forever snuffed out of existance. I truly believe that day is coming soon. When the evidence keeps getting stronger and stronger, they will feel sorry that the so strongly opposed it, for now greater will be the humiliation.It isn't so pleasant when you've come to the realization that it's time to tuck your tail between your legs.I will do all in my power to ensure this forum does not go down without a loud and clear show of the truths of these discoveries.P.S. Plus, some good updated news regarding Moller's upcoming TV series, The Exodus Case. Instead of being played on the Discovery or History Channel, it is going to be released into movie theaters in early 2005. This is not common for a documentary. It will most likely be an interesting twist for the theater industry. After its release in theaters, it will be available on VHS/DVD for purchase.This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-24-2004 11:44 AM

---

~Lysimachus

WOW! If it's going to be released in theaters it must be as true as ET or Close Encounters.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Ok.. you seem to love Ron Wyatt.Now, if Ron Wyatt is so great, where is the peer reviewed scientific article on his discoveries? Where is the peer reviewed analysis of the artifacts that he has found. For example, what seperate labs were used to carbon date the wheel found?You know, in my experiance, if something is too good to be true, it ususally isn't true. Ron Wyatt's claims all seem too good to be true.. and so MANY like that.

ramoss

quote:

---

Ok.. you seem to love Ron Wyatt.

---

Liking Ron Wyatt has nothing to do with the discoveries. Regardless of the individual, it is the data that counts. No matter how ludicrous it may sound that he "discovered" them all, this argument bears no effect on the facts.

quote:

---

Now, if Ron Wyatt is so great, where is the peer reviewed scientific article on his discoveries? Where is the peer reviewed analysis of the artifacts that he has found. For example, what seperate labs were used to carbon date the wheel found?

---

Why do you think acquired I this book? To answer these very questions. They have been peer reviewed. The central argument here is people question these "peer reviewers". Critics in these forums continuously attack Moller because "his profession is medicine", but yet fail to realize that the very same scientific principles he uses in his field can be applied and utilized in the field of archaeology, depending on the "type" of archaeology. His training in the field of Marine Biology should establish in people's minds that he knows enough about this subject. It's like me with computer networking. I have a degree in Computer Networking, but the majority of my knowledge in this field did not come from the classes and tests I took. It came from my own interest and experimentations at home and elsewhere.In fact, I know more about computer repair/trouble shooting than I do networking, but networking was the field I studied for. Now you just gave me the FIRST reason to quote from the "Discoveries: Questions Answered" book.You asked: "For example, what seperate labs were used to carbon date the wheel found?"Q/A book answer:--------------------------------------------------------------------
173. BEEN DATED?

​

Have the remains been dated?

​

You may now know that it is possible to date coral? (and wood, of course). C-14 dating is reliable enough (+/- 10%) at the sort of age range you are talking about (1400 BC). In principle, if you really do find chariot wheels in the center of your coral, the oldest coral near them could be dated?Your statement that carbon 14 is reliable to +/- 10 has been repudiated by many scientists in that field. The Geochron Laboratory in America refuses to use carbon 14 dating beyond 3000 years, claiming it is unreliable beyond that. If the radio-active decay rates were even close to popularly expressed values, people would not have been able to live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki for a hundred thousand years. As we are all aware, the radioactivity deteriorated at a much higher rate than predicted.Even more relevant is the fact that salt water LEECHES OUT the carbon 14 molecules - and these remains including bones, have been underwater for 3,500 years, so there's absolutely NO WAY anyone could carbon date them and expect any "realistic" date to come forth, anyway!Nevertheless, one of our chariot wheels has been dated according to the appropriate Egyptian dynasty by comparison with the Egyptian monuments. It is 18th Dynasty Egyptian.
--------------------------------------------------------------Another question I might add, why would chariot wheels just coincidentally be found right where the presumed crossing site would have been? The Nuweiba crossing site was already being considered as a more reasonable site BEFORE any diving was conducted in the area. Why are they laying at the bottom of the sea across the Wadi Watir? Why are they found on both coast sides? Why between the Solomon Pillars? Why just before the number one candidate for Mt. Sinai, Jebel Al Lawz (of which this site is beginning to grow amongst popular biblical scholars around the globe as the number one candidate)?This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-24-2004 01:44 PMThis message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-24-2004 01:48 PMThis message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-24-2004 01:52 PM

---

~Lysimachus

Once agin, an assertion that simply does not appear to be true.From the Geochron Lab website.

quote:

---

Radiocarbon dating is the principal method for determining the age of carbon-bearing materials from the present to about 50,000 years ago.

​

The method takes advantage of the natural occurrence of a radioactive isotope of carbon (14C or "Carbon 14"). 14C is continuously produced in the upper atmosphere by the interaction of cosmic ray neutrons with 14N. The newly formed 14C rapidly oxidizes to carbon dioxide which is taken up by plants during photosynthesis, and also mixes with carbon dioxide dissolved in the hydrosphere.

​

From plants, 14C passes up the food chain to other organisms which will then assimilate into their structure 14C of equal proportion to that of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Once an organism dies, it ceases to participate in the flow of 14C from the atmosphere and the 14C in its structure is gradually lost by radioactive disintegration back to 14N. By measuring the amount of 14C in samples of ancient carbon compounds and comparing this with the amount in modern materials, it is possible to determine the time of cessation of carbon exchange with the atmosphere.

​

The radiocarbon lab at Geochron uses gas proportional counters to measure methane derived from relatively small samples. We also offer liquid scintillation analysis using an extra low background Quantulus 1220 for high precision measurements on benzene. Very small samples (less than 300 mg) are analyzed by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). We have subcontractor agreements with several AMS facilities around the world.

---

Geochron Labs C14 webpage for details.edited to fix spelling in sub-titleThis message has been edited by jar, 08-24-2004 01:54 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

A book is not a peer reviewed article. Please, where is a peer reviewed article.Anybody can get a book published.. but when it comes to scientific discoveries, until it is published in a peer reviewed journal, it basically is not valid.Do you have a peer reviewed journal on these discoveries?It seems the book makes some very strong errors when it comes to science. (i.e. the carbon 14 dating claim, which makes a claim that
when an attempt to verify it is made, comes up false).That is why peer reviewed is important, to validate the claims.This message has been edited by ramoss, 08-24-2004 01:59 PM

quote:

---

Radiocarbon dating is the principal method for determining the age of carbon-bearing materials from the present to about 50,000 years ago.

---

That is the "theory", but they do not actually follow up with this theory. Exactly as it says, "radiocarbon dating is the principle method for determining the age of carbon-bearing materials", but beyond 3000 years, it loses its accuracy.But the fact that this dating method is irrelevant to artifacts lieing in salt water still remains. Added to this, we are talking about wheels lieing at the bottom for up to 3,500 years.You don't date chariot wheels found at the bottom of salt water using C-14 buddy! You date them by their design.

---

~Lysimachus

Well,
That is the claim. However, there have been numerous archelogical finds in the ocean where they used carbon 14 dating.Here is an article that mentions using carbon 14 dating on undersea wreaks.

quote:

---

"Carbon Dating

​

Carbon 14 dating is used on organic remains such as bones, wood and coal. It is strictly limited to short term dating of up to 30,000 years maximum. In fact, it is only probably reliable up to 3000 years. The Geochron laboratory in Massachusetts in America refuses to use it beyond three thousand years, claiming that it is unreliable beyond that."

---

Yet the same claim from another source confirms this is what Geochron Laboratory does.Source: http://www.cartage.org.lb/...act/Radioactive/Radioactive.htmThis message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-24-2004 02:11 PM

---

~Lysimachus