Comments:
What you really need to calculate is the length of the reign of the Babylonian kings in relation to 539 being the definite and indisputable date for the Medes and Persians conquering Babylon. This is one of the few absolute dates upon which we all agree., regardless of the 70 years captivity. And the Scriptures assure us that the land was never wholly desolate anyway. 2 Kings 24;14, 2 Kings 25;12 If you start at 587 BC and add on the length of each of the kings’ reigns, you get the picture, with no reference needed to any other source but the Bible. 539 + 17 years for Nabonidus = 556 BC 556 + 9 months for Labashi Marduk = 557 BC 557 + 4 years for Neriglissar = 561 BC 561 + 2 years for Evil Merodach = 563 BC 563 + 43 Years for Nebuchadnezzar = 606 BC Therefore Nebuchadnezzar began to reign in 606 BC and in his 19th year he besieged Jerusalem for the first time making that 586 BC. So you see it matters not whether the land was totally empty for 70 years or not, the reigns of the kings make the dates unmistakable, based on a date upon which everyone agrees, namely the date the Medes and Persians overthrew Jerusalem.

Comments:
You need to take a look at "Gentile times reconsidered".

Comments:
I've been looking at the whole 607 B.C.E. issue with an open mind. Can someone explain simply, in point form, why counting back 70 years from 537 B.C.E. doesn't establish 607? Sorry, I'm new to all this, and need to discuss it with others too.