Has history been tampered with? Radiocarbon of Egyptian mummies shows serious contradictions

Has history been tampered with? We shall once again consider the alleged reliability of the radiocarbon method used for supporting the traditional version of the "ancient" history, particularly Egyptian, as reflected in a fundamental and detailed article published by the Manchester Museum in England in 1979 as part of the project named "The Mummies of the Manchester Museum".

The radiocarbon dating of the mummy from the Manchester Museum collection attributed the mummy's bones to 1000 b.c., whereas the cloth that
the mummy has been wrapped in received the dating
of 380 a.d.

The discrepancy between the datings of the mummy and the cloth equals some 1400 years, although the dates should be equal. The cloth may be
somewhat older than the mummy if an old cloth had been used by the embalmers, but it couldn't possibly have belonged to a later age.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• manchester
• museum
• egyptian
• mummy
• moses
• egypt
• pyramids
• giza
• embalm
• turin
• shroud
• jesus
• christ
• radiocarbon
• method
• ancient
• artifact
• artefact
• dating
• medieval
• cloth
• tissue
• c14
• church
• andronicus

[mithec]

enournous half lifetimes=>potassium-argon dating precision is +/-5000 years, and uranium-lead dating precision is +/-100.000 years. Uselless on BC-AD historical period. look up on wikipedia or britannica.

[mithec]

mummy's talking

[chrispaulrevolution]

fail

[KeithTruth]

HAHAHAHA WHAT A RADICAL JOKE.

[brewerbrian420]

The reason people laugh at creationist. LMAO LOL LOL ROFL ROFLMFAO.

[MrChristainchris]

did you know the part of the shroud of turin, carbon dated was new as it been worked on since.

[NewtonDKC]

re: the Shroud: the date doesn't really pose any major problems except for those who regard it from a religious/Faith perspective (to be fair, there were reports the shroud showed apparent fire damage, which could easily skew any 14C dating methods, but from what I've read (and I'm certainly not claiming any expertise), the accepted range is ~ 1200AD - luckily Faith doesn't require proof). It is still a fascinating work, as there is much debate on exactly how it was created artistically.

[NewtonDKC]

For the mummy wrappings in the first example, couldn't it be as simple as the mummy from 1000 BC was re-wrapped during 380 AD? There are no details in the video indicating when/where the mummy was discovered; provided it wasn't from a tomb that appeared to be unbreached from 1000BC, then there's many possible explanations, incl re-wrapping (and presumed reburial) possibly as a devotional gesture. So more details are crucial to being able to determine reasonable alternatives.

[abby495]

Well since Christianity is a myth why would there be archaological evidence? Christ was likely an ascendant master.

[abby495]

@k7leetha lmao!

[Londron]

Carbondating is innacurate on that type of clothing...is known for years. Unlike religion science doesn't have 1 answer for all the questions.

[k7leetha]

Sad grade school reject can't even use his own voice for the video, how pathetic.

[OneEyedJack1970]

@jzuidema No problem. Artifacts sounds about right -- carbon-dating is used fairly often in archaeology.