Carbon dating myths and facts

carbon dating myth or fact - The same day, this claim is repeated, along with signs that the carbon dating of the gospel of judas manuscript (which is a historical fact) has been influencing the legend’s memory regarding the nag hammadi library and leading the first tradents of the legend to assign a c-14 result to nag hammadi similarly (june 15, 2006):I have already (perhaps elsewhere) posted that i am aware of only two valid carbon dated results in respect of nt manuscripts:1) nag hammadi – dated by the bindings to c. Weeks later, the date had morphed to “350 ce” and the material said to have been dated is connected with the gospel of thomas in the re-telling of the legend, along with the first use of the word “citation” in this connection, albeit without any actual citations (july 26, 2006):By my research to date however, there appears to be only two actual carbon dating citations with respect to the new testament texts. , with the help of a few friends, can even show us charts with the calibrated dates of the c-14 radiometric dating of the material in the nag hammadi codex (because–and i know not how–he has concluded that the supposed c-14 dating of the nag hammadi codex material was in fact uncalibrated and therefore needed to be calibrated by him), complete with some very specific numbers. Started as a defensive counterpoint, to deflect a claim that some of the codices at nag hammadi may contain manuscripts dating before the council of nicaea, has finally evolved into a triumphant posture, seizing upon the objectivity of the dating attributed to the nag hammadi codices and using it to show the blinkered lack of vision of those who are not “asking the obvious questions.