Posts by never a jw

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

never a jw

I get a headache. And as much I trust the fall of jerusalem happened in 587 BCE, I still considered the posts defending this date superfluous. The Bible is vague, contradictory and has large gaps. It can not provide by itself a reliable account of the chronology of the sixth century BCE. If I have to split my 10 point vote, I give 8 points to defenders of 587 BCE and 2 points to defenders of 607. The only time Ethos seem to have made sense is when he said --I paraphrase-- with the Bible you have to conjecture. Exactly.

Let the Babylonian clay tablets solve the problems. They are 99.999999 percent reliable in determining all important dates of the neo-Babylonian period. Sorry Bible lovers, but the "god" of the Babylonians was a better communicator and a better record keeper than the God of the Hebrews. When it comes to history and chronology, I trust the Babylonian text much more than the Bible's.

53

VAT 4956 - Comparison Of The Lunar Three Time Intervals For Years 568/7 BCE and 588/7 BCE

by AnnOMaly in

vat 4956 - comparison of the lunar three time intervals for years 568/7 b.c.e.

the online sky view cafe (svc) and the cartes du ciel* (cdc) astronomy programs have been used for these results.. observer's location: babylon, 32 33' n / 44 24' e.. sr = sunrise; ss = sunset; mr = moonrise; ms = moonset.. .

svc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 1.75 to 6.5. average difference 3.5.. cdc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 0.75 to 8.5. average difference 4. .

never a jw

AnnOmaly,

Thanks again for all your help. Your notes are perfect and I appreciate that you took the time to improve the presentation of my conclusions.

It may not be relevant to this thread, but in my research I ran into a Lynn47 in some other site. He sounds intelligent and well informed, at least to a neophyte such as myself. However, he looks like another Furuli with a different chronology. Is he another christian apologist who picks and chooses "weak" or controversial data to cast doubt in the prevalent chronologies while at the same time ignores piles of incontrovertible data, only to create his own "chronology of the Bible". Just curious

Thanks for the link to the site with the planetary information. It looks great. I think it's going to save me a lot of time in my research.

53

VAT 4956 - Comparison Of The Lunar Three Time Intervals For Years 568/7 BCE and 588/7 BCE

by AnnOMaly in

vat 4956 - comparison of the lunar three time intervals for years 568/7 b.c.e.

the online sky view cafe (svc) and the cartes du ciel* (cdc) astronomy programs have been used for these results.. observer's location: babylon, 32 33' n / 44 24' e.. sr = sunrise; ss = sunset; mr = moonrise; ms = moonset.. .

svc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 1.75 to 6.5. average difference 3.5.. cdc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 0.75 to 8.5. average difference 4. .

never a jw

AnnOMaly

I greatly appreciate your taking the time to go over my tables. The subjects of the neo-Babylonian period and astronomy are something I recently have taken interest in. Each subject by itself is very interesting, but you put them together and it just couldn't get more fascinating. Thanks for your help. With your great help I am sure I will solve my doubts and misconceptions and move on to the next subject, the planetary observations. I know that's going to get tougher to delucidate, but I feel that the rewards are going to be greater than when I saw with my own eyes the almost perfect match of the Babylonian data and the data from my astronomy program regarding the lunar threes for years 568/567. Thanks a million.

Felipe

123

New here

by Change Name in

i had been studying with the jehovah's witnesses for the last couple years.

they have been interesting study sessions and have learned quite a bit about them and their beliefs.

much of what they teach is what i had learned through personal bible study.. growing up was normal.

never a jw

Change Name,

So you dislike the Catholic Church. JW's leadership is not very different from the Catholic Church of the 15th century. The only difference is that the WTS has no power to control and inflict damage as the Catholic church did.

Let's see:

The Catholic church banned reading literature opposing the church. WTS does the same. Ask in the congregation how many have read Carl O. Jonsson or Ray Franz. The ones who have read either of these authors are no longer JW's.

The Catholic church rejected science (remember Galileo). The WTS is the troglodyte of christian religions today. Don't be fooled by their articles on science, it's a cover up filled with intellectual dishonesty and fallacies.

The Catholic church kept the masses in ignorance. WTS dissuades, or rather emotionally coerces the young to forgo higher educaton.

The Catholic church tortured and killed dissenters. The WTS does not go that far, because it's illegal. But I wonder if they were given the power, they would go beyond what they do today, namely destroy the social life and the families of those who no longer believe the lies of the WTS. Actually, the WTS does have blood in their hands, especially of children whose parents have prevented doctors from saving their lives through a blood transfusion.

The Catholic church until recently protected child molesters. WTS still does (read the latest letter to the elders regarding child molesters)

The Catholic church made history. WTS is trying to re-write history. Have you heard about Jerusalem being destroyed in 607 BCE?

The Catholic church was considered dogmatic, until the governing body of JW's took the meaning of the word to a whole new level.

53

VAT 4956 - Comparison Of The Lunar Three Time Intervals For Years 568/7 BCE and 588/7 BCE

by AnnOMaly in

vat 4956 - comparison of the lunar three time intervals for years 568/7 b.c.e.

the online sky view cafe (svc) and the cartes du ciel* (cdc) astronomy programs have been used for these results.. observer's location: babylon, 32 33' n / 44 24' e.. sr = sunrise; ss = sunset; mr = moonrise; ms = moonset.. .

svc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 1.75 to 6.5. average difference 3.5.. cdc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 0.75 to 8.5. average difference 4. .

never a jw

Program used: The SkyX Light Edition

The table for Furulli's year contains up to three dates for the same babylonian date because is not clear,

at least to me, what Julian dates Furulli wanted to match with the calendar dates of the VAT 4956 lunar

threes. You will see on the far right who selected each of those three alternative dates (scroll to the right using the bar at the bottom)

Never a JW

37th year of Nabuchadnezzar or Julian Year 568/567 BC, beginning April 22 after sunset and ending April 12, 567 BC at sunset

Date

First Day

Julian

Interval

Measured

Begin

End

Interval

Degrees

Differ

Abs.

Judgment

Diff.

(Babyl.)

Julian

Date

VAT 4956

Sky X

(decimal)

ence

Diff

Call

(min.)

I-14

23-Apr

May 6, 568

SR-MS

4

5:13:42

5:30:08

0:16:26

4.11

0.11

Excellent

0.43

II-26

23-May

June 17, 568

MR-SR

23

3:17:06

4:46:32

1:29:26

22.26

-0.74

0.74

Excellent

2.97

III-1

21-Jun

June 20, 568

SS-MS

20

7:08:52

8:36:47

1:27:55

21.98

1.98

Good

7.92

III-15

21-Jun

July 5, 568

SR-MS

7.5

4:49:11

5:23:21

0:34:10

8.54

1.04

Very good

4.17

XI-1

13-Feb

Feb 12, 567

SS-MS

14.5

5:43:23

6:52:59

1:09:36

17.40

2.90

Acceptable

11.60

XII-1

15-Mar

March 14, 567

SS-MS

25

6:06:26

7:49:07

1:42:41

25.67

0.67

Excellent

2.68

XII-12

15-Mar

March 26, 567

SR-MS

1.5

6:08:52

6:12:00

0:03:08

0.75

-0.75

0.75

Excellent

3.00

Average difference

1.17

Year 588/587, beginning April 4/3, 588 and ending April 22, 587 BC at sunset

Date

First Day

Julian

Interval

Measured

Begin

End

Interval

Degrees

Differ

Abs.

Judgment

Diff.

(Babyl.)

Julian

Date

VAT 4956

Sky X

(decimal)

ence

Diff

Call

(min.)

I-14

4-Apr

April 17, 588

SR-MS

4

5:37:41

5:28:47

0:08:54

-2.23

-6.23

6.23

Very bad!!

24.90

II-26

4-May

May 29, 588

MR-SR

23

3:46:04

4:53:24

1:07:20

16.83

-6.17

6.17

Very bad

24.67

III-1

2-Jun

June 1, 588

SS-MS

20

6:58:19

7:49:56

0:51:37

12.90

-7.10

7.10

Very bad

28.38

III-15

2-Jun

June 16, 588

SR-MS

7.5

4:46:38

5:12:22

0:25:44

6.43

-1.07

1.07

Very good

4.27

XI-1

25-Jan

Jan 24, 587

SS-MS

14.5

5:26:16

6:34:10

1:07:54

16.98

2.48

Acceptable

9.90

XII-1

24-Feb

Feb 23, 587

SS-MS

25

5:52:22

7:43:13

1:50:51

27.71

2.71

Acceptable

10.85

XII-12

24-Feb

March 7, 587

SR-MS

1.5

6:35:09

6:06:42

0:28:27

-7.11

-8.61

8.61

Very bad!!

34.45

Average difference

4.91

In penultimate column the exclamation points indicate an impossible measurement

Year 588/587, beginning May 3/2, 588 -- according to R. Furruli / Watchtower calendar

Date

First Day

Julian

Interval

Measured

Begin

End

Interval

Degrees

Differ

Abs.

Judgement

Diff.

(Babyl.)

Julian

Date

VAT 4956

Sky X

(decimal)

ence

Diff

Call

(min.)

I-14

3-May

May 17, 588

SR-MS

4

5:02:38

5:08:25

0:05:47

1.45

-2.55

2.55

Acceptable

10.22

Hunger

May 16, 588

SR-MS

4

5:03:33

4:32:52

0:30:41

-7.67

-11.67

11.67

Very Bad!!

46.68

Ann, N a JW

II-26

1-Jun

June 28, 588

MR-SR

23

3:35:56

4:47:06

1:11:10

17.79

-5.21

5.21

Very bad

20.83

Hunger

June 26, 588

MR-SR

23

2:22:11

4:46:45

2:24:34

36.14

13.14

Very bad

52.57

Never a JW

June 27, 588

MR-SR

23

2:57:43

4:46:55

1:49:12

27.30

4.30

Bad

17.20

AnnOMaly

III-1

1-Jul

July 1, 588

SS-MS

20

7:11:30

8:20:16

1:08:46

17.19

-2.81

2.81

Acceptable

11.23

Hunger

June 30, 588

SS-MS

20

7:11:58

7:30:58

0:19:00

4.75

-15.25

15.25

Bad

61.00

Ann, N a JW

III-15

1-Jul

July 16, 588

SR-MS

7.5

4:54:22

5:57:52

1:03:30

15.88

8.38

Very bad

33.50

Hunger

July 15, 588

SR-MS

7.5

4:53:48

4:51:30

0:02:18

-0.58

-8.08

8.08

Very bad !!

32.30

Ann, N a JW

XI-1

23-Feb

Feb 22, 587

SS-MS

14.5

5:51:34

6:32:15

0:40:41

10.17

-4.33

4.33

Bad

17.32

H, Ann, N a JW

XII-1

24-Mar

March 24, 587

SS-MS

25

6:12:52

7:38:12

1:25:20

21.33

-3.67

3.67

Bad

14.67

Hunger, Ann

March 23, 587

SS-MS

25

6:12:14

6:28:27

0:16:13

4.14

-20.86

20.86

Very bad

83.45

Never a JW

XII-12

24-Mar

April 7, 587

SR-MS

1.5

5:51:56

6:11:20

0:19:24

4.85

3.35

Bad

13.40

Hunger

April 4, 587

SR-MS

1.5

5:56:12

4:42:34

1:13:38

18.41

-19.91

19.91

Very bad !!

79.63

Never a JW

April 5, 587

SR-MS

1.5

5:54:47

5:13:49

0:40:58

10.24

-11.74

11.74

Very Bad!!

46.97

AnnOMaly

Average difference

8.43

4.33

13.32

for dates chosen by

AnnOMaly

Hunger

N a JW

Excellent

Under 3 minutes

Very good

Under 6 minutes

Good

Under 9 minutes

Acceptable

Under 12 minutes

Bad

Between 12 and 20 min.

Very bad

Over 20 minutes

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

never a jw

Wrong thread

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

never a jw

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

never a jw

AnnOMaly,

I finished completing the tables for years 588/587 BCE (real Babylonian calendar) and 588/587 (Furulli's fabrication). Since I had disagreements with you and professor Hunger as to the dates to choose for Furulli's calendar, I included your dates, my dates and professor Hunger's dates. Since I am a neophyte in astronomy and neo-Babylonian studies, I have to defer to you and Mr. Hunger. Regardless, the results for any of Furulli's dates or around his suggested dates are abysmal. I will post the results later in the thread where you posted my first table. My calculations using your dates are very similar to your own calculations.

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

never a jw

Ethos,

After your failed attempts to make a strong argument or persuade the feeblest mind, have you considered changing Ethos to a more suitable name, Bathos perhaps. Given your unethical methods of argumentation, Ethos is definitely a misnomer.

529

Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos in

i agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.

i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.

therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.

never a jw

Black Sheep,

I downloaded stellarium and is cool. It seems to be better in some regards. However, for the specific purpose of finding the data for the lunar threes the Sky X seems to be child's play in comparison. Once you find the city you want to use as observation point, gettting the specific time for sunset, or sunrise, or moonset, or moonrise for any given date can be done literally in few seconds. In stellarium I still haven't figured out how to enter a BCE date, much less get any times for sunset, sunrises, etc.

Ethos,

Speaking of regurgitators of information, the quintessential example of regurgitation is heard and seen in kingdom halls all over the world every Saturday and Sunday. Wouldn't you agree? Aren't you part of that group of people who raises his/her hand only to repeat what the governing body expects you to repeat? Try thinking by yourself and deviate a little from the text; soon you will find yourself in a J.C.