Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When a real Egyptologist says
> "dates are uncertain", they are talking about the
> absolute dating being bantered about within a
> range of ten or fifteen years... maybe fifty on
> the outside. Some pseudohistorian bozo then grabs
> that statement and miraculously transforms it into
> ten or fifteen centuries... or worse: ten or
> fifteen millenia.
>
> Anthony
Agreed. My general rule is +/- 20 years (18th dynasty forward). Some time periods have larger error rates than others.
To totally discount Carbon Dating along with all of the great chronologies from historians is absurd.
You can't change the timelines to help prove your theory; in fact, if the accepted chronologies do not match with your theory... then your theory is discredited. Anthony summed it up pretty nicely.
*********
Relying on Velikovsky or even Newton for chronology is a fools errand. Newton makes statements like... I see 3 Amenhoteps... so I'll conflate them... and reduce the timeline. He didn't have modern archaeology or carbon-dating to double check his theories. Sometimes this stuff makes for interesting reading....
But like reading Budge, you must assume this text is wrong until you have a reliable source to back it up.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2007 01:18AM by rich.