by ithinkisee 42 Replies latest watchtower bible
People, you really shouldn't reply to JCanon. He's as nutty as a fruitcake, contributes nothing of value to this board aside, perhaps, from a bit of entertainment, and sometimes derails serious discussions. At the very least, replying to him feeds his dementia.
AlanF
People, you really shouldn't reply to JCanon. He's as nutty as a fruitcake, contributes nothing of value to this board aside, perhaps, from a bit of entertainment, and sometimes derails serious discussions. At the very least, replying to him feeds his dementia.AlanF
Hi Alan. Nobody is reading this stuff anyway, so why should you care if anyone might be "influenced" be me.
Anyway, hope you are well and I want to THANK YOU, BIG TIME FOR...
1, Helping me learn about astronomy (you were very patient)!!
2. Discovering that Line 18 of the VAT4956 was a reference to Venus which makes it clear Sachs/Hunger lied intentionally about the "moon" in that position since it DEFINES the "bright star behind the Lion's Foot" (MUL KUR sa TIL GIR UR-A) as beta-Virginis, meaning the Rear Foot of the Lion" (GIR ar sa UR-A) must be a reference to sigma-Leonis, at least in this text.
Anyway, you don't have to worry about this board. Here are just some Biblical folks trying to figure out what to do with 1914 and the witness organization, but also the Bible. That's all been worked out. But I now have enough rather interesting details to now present my research academically which will begin with indicting Hermann Hunger for the misrepresentations in the VAT4956, easy to do, thanks to you.
But I won't bother with the "double dating" stuff to 511BCE at the academies, nor the Biblical dating, except as background (I can use Josephus); instead I'll call onto the carpet Stephenson for this lame theory about the Earth's Rotational position which will come up because of Line 8 in the VAT4956. The theory of the Earth's rotational speed reducing is based upon a single eclipse during the Seleucid Era, but the Egyptians from 1500 years earlier timed their year based upon the Dog Star thus we know from them exactly how long the year was far beyond the Seleucid Era or the Babylonian texts, which don't give specific year times anyway since they were lunar-month based. Combine that with the fact that RIGHT NOW the Earth's rotational speed does not change within a fraction of a second!!! Why? What about the lunar pull on the tides that caused the earth to slow down about 3 minutes every five years during the NB Period through the 1st Century?!!!! Bottom line, it's a farce!
Finally, since we discussed this specifically, you should know that the SK400 reference to the first eclipse in Tammuz 14 is specifically mentioned by Ptolemy as occurring "one hour before Midnight". Right now it occurs 57 minutes before Midnight from Babylon by Skymap or the eclipse canons!!! This affects the 554BCE Nabon 18 text eclipse which you and Jonsson (how is he?) claimed was a good reference for proving year 2 of Nabonidus to 554 even though the eclipse was over before the Moon set. But when you actually adjust the SK400 eclipse to match Ptolemy, one hour before Midnight, you make the eclipse later and that makes the 554BCE eclipse easily set while eclipsed as the text says. So it's a good argument for what the Babylonians were observing or claim to be observing. I'm of course, content to throw confusion and bewilderment into this arena without any attempt to reestablish any Bilbical chronology in the process since that is something that only matters to me.
But you should know a recent "curiosity" about this. Since I claim that the eclipse that accurally occurred "one hour before Midnight" originally fell in 541BCE, if you adjust the time of the first eclipse to that time in 541BCE then the parallel eclipse in 479BCE for month six which I date year 2 of Nabonidus to, a total eclipse, it sets while total! which is really the reason for the panic. A partial eclipse does not fit that scenario. The academics will never by the "conspiracy theory" to do that, but I just thought you should know that the combination of the SK400 with the Nabon 18 works either way when you retime the eclipses to one hour before midnight, you get a text match for 554BCE or 479BCE, respecfully. I think it's just FUN even if it means nothing beyond me being able to "steal" yet another ancient reference for my Messianiah 1992 chronology.!!!!!!!a
So I'm not worried about this board, truly...I'm up and outta here. The true fun is going to be calling Stephenson and Hunger onto the carpet along with the British Museum for fraud and complacency in misrepesenting ancient texts. It's already happening since archaeologists are considered responsible to the public for what they dig up since the findings are considered to belong to the entire world, not individuals.
If the Earth Rotational Speed was supposed to slow down because of tidal drag from the Moon then it would still be happening, Alan. it's not. Per the calculations from the NB and Seleucid Era, which keeps on adding time, by the 1st Dynasties in Egypt the year would have been 366 or more days, but it was not, it was exactly 365-1/4+ days the way it is now!!!
End result is that hardcore Biblicalists like myself have every reason to laugh and sneer at people trying to qualify those revised texts from the NB and Persian periods when we all know good and well they were revised documents now and have all kinds of miscalculations and the delta-T attempt to harmonize them doesn't work because the times were fabricated anyway.
HERE'S YOUR TECHNICAL NOTE:
The Tammuz 14 eclipse occurs 3:20 "after night". YOU GAVE ME THE TIME OF sunset 7:09 at Babylon. That gives you the time of 10:29 p.m. before the adjustment for "before night", which is some amount of time rounded off to 4 minutes. But how long is it? 20 minutes? 30 minutes? 36 minutes? Ptolemy provides the answer! He says the eclipse occurred "one hour beforeMidnight". To get from 10:29 to 11:00 p.m. you need 31 minutes, so the first division of the night was 32 minutes long!
When you apply the 32 minutes to the second eclipse for "before morning" based upon sunrise at 7:19 a.m. you get an eclipse occurring at 1:47 a.m. It was 5 hours before morning (thus 7:19 = 6:79 minus 32 is 6:47. 5 hours earlier is 1;47).
Add 59 minutes and 1:47 and the interval is 2:46.
The interval in 523BCE, year 7 of Kambyses, the revised year is 4:46!!! So it doesn't work and never will match the text.
But the interval for the eclipses in 541BCE is EXACTLY 2:46!!! 541BCE doesn't work for "year 7" of Kambyses but if you apply it to Nebuchadnezzar, it means his 19th year, the fall of Jerusalem, falls in 529BCE.
Sooooo....play dumb and blind all you want, AlanF, what I have now is going to crash the academic hold on the fake chronology for the NB period,whether they decide to go along with the Biblical timeline or not. Plus if you downdate the NB period by 57 years then Solomon is downdated to the correct time per pottery dating; right now, he's 57 years too early! So should be really interesting.
But on another topic. Akhenaton and the KTU 1.78 eclipse is particularly interesting translation wise. That's another interesting discussion that will overturn Rohl and his "New Chronology" but very easily done if you have as much astrotext experience as I do or George Parrish (remember him?)
So, again, thanks for getting me started in astronomy. To establish the Biblical timeline, the true chronology, you must first destroy the astronomy notions and errors now in place and I can easily do that now. JW discussion boards are small potatoes now. I can do it legitimately through a college program in ancient history.
Plus I found a destroyed temple to Artemis at Corfu that shows Darius being killed!!! Part of the revisionism has to do with Darius being killed by the Athenians, which Herodotus alludes to happened at Marathon. But apparently the reason Xerxes destroyed so many monuments is because the Greeks built temples thanking Artemis for the beheading of Darius at Marathon. It's fun to compare the face bas-reliefs of that temple with the bas-reliefs at Persepolis, something the Greeks would be very familiar with since they were the ones hired by Darius to do most of the artwork anyway. It doesn't make sense that the temple was created featuring Darius unless he was murdered.
So believe, I'm going to have a LOT OF FUN with my little arguments. I have enough secular evidence to PROVE the Jews' timeline and that of the Bible is the more reliable. Imight even write a book and make some money from it. That would be REALLY NICE!
Well, thanks for warning the nice people here not to talk with me, as if not posting would somehow make me an exception to the "freedom of speech".
Of course, for anyone reading down this far, another reason for discouraging people to listen to me or refusing to arguing with me is because you are just afraid now to LOSE an argument. If I'm such a "fruitcake" seems to me you could easily overturn my arguments for the benefit of others. Why not accept that challenge and give your own view rather than simply saying, "don't believe this person because they are crazy" and you have not refuted a single thing I've said? Calling someone crazy is just a way to avoid losing an argument since I guess there is an unwritten rule that you don't have to answer or debate with a "crazy" person, whether they are correct or not? Right?
So thanks for the back-handled compliment. Refusing to debate with means I must be onto something!!! Which, of course, I am!
Thanks Alan!!!!!
I just resent that I can't ask a simple question about 607/1914 without Left Nut or Right Nut (Scholar and JCanon) crapping all over the thread and hijacking it.
-ithinkisee
