I repeat Neo-Babylonian chronology is a 'dog's breakfast' because it used as a principal base for all secular chronologies which simply are the 'deep things of Satan' who seeks to deceive and misleed the many by chronologies that are the product of higher critics. Such people fail to uphold the integrity of the Bible and its chronology as fully explained by celebrated WT scholars and such mischevious ones are condemned to spiritual darkness.
Archaeologists and historians are tricked by "deep things of Satan". Superstitious drivel! Did you throw some salt over your shoulder for good luck while you typed that rot?
There is a twenty year gap between the secular and sacred chronology and there remains Nebuchadnezzer's missing 'seven years unaccounted for by this chronology. Present day archaeological discoveries are of great interest WT scholars and his material simply confirms the date of 607 for the Fall because of the increasing date over what has become known as the 'Babylonian Gap ' problem. Scholars the world over show a marked preference for 586 rather than the apostate date of 587 so before you demonstrate any triumphialism you need to sort out what date is supposedly correct: 586 or 587?
The 20 year gap in the Watchtower's Babylonian chronology is matched by the Society's 20-year inconsistency with Egyptian chronology, which was completely independent of Babylonian chronology. It is clear that it is the Watchtower Society produces the gap. Your misdirection over 586/7 is ludicrous. You contend that doubt over a period of 1 year somehow proves that it is at 20 years variance with reality. Because professionals like to rely on facts, they sometimes have a slight amount of variance when solid facts are not available. Indeed, the return of the Jews, the Society's supposed end-point of the 70 years, is also not agreed upon by all scholars; therefore the beginning and end of the Society's 70 years are not firmly fixed at all. So it looks like you too, 'scholar', will have to belay your "triumphialism" (which of course, is not actually a word).