I've done extensive research. And the 587bc thing makes the 70 year prophecy WRONG. Which makes the Bible FALSE. I.E...we shouldn't have any faith in anything it says.

That is circular logic. You are starting with the premise that the Bible is infallible and citing such as an argument against this inconsistency when the a literal interpretation of the Bible as being infallible has been far from established. After all, how do you justify that a literal interpretation of this book can't be wrong when within its pages you find that its god is one whom is unable to defeat "war chariots with iron scythes."? Within its pages you also hear of a global flood that would have chronologically coincided with the existences of the pyramids of Egypt which would have been bult 1,500 yrs before the flood, despite them showing no signs of water damages (which is extremely noticeable when it occurs). Not to mention how only so many animals could fit in the Ark, but somehow all the species of the planet have evolved from these few amount in less that 6,000 years according to the Bible (which is way too little amount of time according to what scientists have actually discovered in evolutionary timelines; as you should know since you claimed to have studied medicine).

You, your motives, sources, and information are esoteric. No they are not. Unlike you, I am actually citing my sources. You are just speaking of your "extensive research" without citing any material at all. And what exactly is esoteric about wikipedia articles and an archive of the OFFICIAL UN website? Here is the definition of esoteric to help you form your answer.

Just because you're strutting around victoriously, does not mean you are actually making a compelling argument in any way.