The more you examine a religion's claims, the more you realize it's a farce. Their math ain't mathin'

If you work out your credulity every day, there's no limit to what you can believe.

Well what about the fact that most of History went unrecorded

That changes nothing. What IS recorded (via this meme) demonstrates that the BuyBull is a crock of chit. The BuyBull is a manmade invention. "God" is a manmade invention. One of the driving impulses in human culture is a thirst for power. Men created religion out of the desire for power and money. An all powerful god wouldn't need your money but it's hilarious how his representatives are always crowing about the tithe. Power and wealth. Power over other men. Power over women. Power over culture. Power over society. That's all religion is truly about at its core.

But go ahead, pattern your life after some stupid, uneducated, Middle Eastern goatherdering shaman's writings ... a dude who didn't even know where the sun went at night.

But that's not relevant to the post

I created the post. I know what’s relevant to the post. Your argument is not.

The post is about the complete 100% unreliability of your BuyBull.

Well the locations are correct

The point isn't the locations. The point is the dates. Kinda like how Abraham (circa 2000 BCE) was supposed to have had thousands of camels ... but the camel wasn't domesticated until around 900 BCE. Jesus was supposed to have been born, according to Luke, during a fake census that never took place when Quirenius was governor of Syria (in addition to the fact that Joseph wouldn't have been required to go to where his 20x great grandfather was born for it). Matthew says Jesus was born during Herod the Great's reign. The problem is that Quirenius wasn't governor until 6 CE and Herod died in 4 BCE.

I literally can do this for hours and hours and hours.

Fun fact: Wikipedia says them at Ur came into existence in 3800 BC. JUST BECAUSE UR IS ALSO NAMED “Ur of of the Chaldees” DOESN’T MEAN THE CHALDESN PEOPLE CREATED IT!
For example, it is said that even thou guy Abraham wouldn't have been able to witness the Chaldeans during his lifetime, the writers of Genesis adopted the name to specify the location of their contemporary audience.

So glad you realize there were writers (plural) of Genesis. The documentary hypothesis seems to be well supported. As far as trusting anything written or linked on Wikipedia, I can only say LOL.

Pre-9th century Assyrian and Babylonian records (royal annals, boundary stones, economic tablets) list many ethnic groups in Mesopotamia (Akkadians, Kassites, Arameans, Elamites, Suteans, etc.), but the Chaldeans (Kaldu) are absent.

The first unambiguous appearance of their name is in the inscriptions of Ashurnasirpal II (883–859 BCE), who describes campaigns in southern Babylonia against the Kaldu (Glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, 2004, pp. 220–222).

The Hebrew Bible (BuyBull) refers to “Ur of the Chaldees” (Genesis 11:28, 31), but this is widely recognized as anachronistic: Ur had ceased to be inhabited by Chaldeans before the patriarchal period, and the Chaldeans did not exist in Abraham’s time (if dated to the 2nd millennium BCE). The phrase reflects the later reality of the 1st millennium BCE (cf. John Bright, A History of Israel, 4th ed., 2000, pp. 77–78).

The simplest way to put it: THERE WAS NO CITY CALLED "UR OF THE CHALDEES" and the BuyBull is full of Bull Shiit.

There is no evidence—textual, archaeological, or linguistic—of Chaldean presence in Mesopotamia before the 9th century BCE, thus, as with most everything Biblical, is completely unsupported by facts and evidence. . Their earlier placement in biblical or later traditions is retrojected from their prominence in the Neo-Babylonian period.

Obvoiusly Abraham didn’t think of Ur as Ur of the Chaldees, because you are right.
Yes there is evidence that the Chaldees really only existed between the 9-6 centuries BC and of course there is archeological evidence for that, such a historic records.
However, the writers didn't know when the Chaldeans came into existence and when they inhabited Ur, so they probably named Ur “Ur of the Chaldees” and put that name even into God’s mouth because they thought the Chaldeans existed back then.
So yes, there was no Ur of the Chaldees, but really only because the writers had no knowledge of when the Chaldeans actually inhabited Ur, so they had no idea they were writing something anachronistic.

Of course, because of this, I opt for the Church, or at least someone to make a new iteration of the Bible so mistakes like these get fixed

Proof once again that "god" is incapable of clear communication and instead has to rely on men to interpret what he/she/it really meant ... LOL. It never ends with believers. They'll believe anything a man in a pointy hat or a suit speaking from a pulpit says.