Me:
Mercury (mentioned in line 9, not line 8) could in fact have been seen to set earlier in the evening in question
He’ll probably leap on this because of the ambiguity of ‘could’, which is intended in the sense of maybe rather than was. 🙄 As previously stated, it is more likely that they simply knew Mercury had already set at the time of the observations in line 9 of VAT 4956, because they knew about Mercury’s position on previous nights.
And… that still leaves his math off by two years for the 480/490 years.
I’m also aware that if Nisan dating is used, he can twist it to just one year out, which doesn’t normally matter too much for normal ancient history purposes, but is critical for his type of numerological nonsense.
(Also, when I indicate years for when the temple was ‘actually’ built, I mean based on the Bible. The historicity of Solomon is disputed, and the temple may have been built considerably later than the period claimed in the Bible.)