> Yes, the 'expected date' is an assumption, but it
> is a best guess assumption using relative dating,
> ie other context. Being that those who made the
> assimption know full well it is only that, thus
> employing a C14 test helps to check on the
> validity of the best guess.
If the first test had given a date 1000 yrs off from the expected, the test would have been scraped. It's preposterous that an assumed date is the yard stick for a science test.
> Why? Do you a scientific test you could suggest be
> used to show C14 is useless, or are you dismissing
> on 'faith' argumentation? I'm sure many scientists
> around the world await your paper on this.
I'm also sure they are waiting and routinely check this board for my opinion.
There are the tests and measurements made by qualified engineers and machinists who are able to interpret tool marks and have determined that primitive tools cannot produce some of the cuts at pyramid sites.
Something's wrong with C14 testing OR the C14 dates are when the casing was removed by squatters.
> It's not faith I have, it's an adherence to the
> structural proofs of the science backing it up.
There are scientists that do not share your belief
> Again, the world awaits your scientifically peer
> reviwed study on how C14 is all wrong. Quite the
> different task there merely stating it, eh? Until
> you have the science to show it is wrong, you
> remain wrong. That's just the way it is.
Again, it's you who are wrong. The replicants have it wrong.
> > ???? Like 300, 800 yrs ago? I haven't heard anQuote
Since the casing was intact up until a
> > centuries ago...
> > Egyptologist come up with this one!
> You've been at this how long and you've never run
> across this basic piece of knowledge on the
> casing? Its not hard to find.
A "few centuries" would be about 2-8 centuries.
I'm not going on a wild goose chase for something you are not able to clarify.
You're making a vague statement, you look it up.
I think you're making stuff up.
> > And this logic follows on the heels of an AvryQuote
even if your fantasy particles
> > the samples they would come back with dates only
> > few centuries old.
> > first - casing was intact until when Avry,
> > time??
> No, not Mamoun's time. Its an easy piece of
> research. I kindly suggest you have a look for it.
I kindly suggest you form something other than a vague meaningless statement.
> Didn't say that. Their being able to penetrate
> casing (and in some cases into the core structure)
> is a fantasy.
Penetrate casing?? That doesn't make a bit of sense.
Porous and pitted stone/mortar. Small particles that fill every hole.
Yep, that's a tough one to visualize.