Do the celestial positions on BM 33478 help to prove Artaxerxes I's 20th year was 455 BCE? (For 'scholar')

by AnnOMaly 38 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  AnnOMaly

  Your comments on Furuli are simply opinion and mishief-making. You clearly like Jomsson unable to work from the primary souces and you are untrained in the field of ancient astronomy so your 'personl research has not been independently teated. When you did canvas your views with Furuli on the Yahoo site you were debunked by Furuli as has Jonsson. Methinks you should stick to domestic duties rather than the heavy world of chronology.

  Oh Neil, that was hilarious! Thanks for the laugh. Good to know chauvinism and misogyny are still alive and kicking 'down under.'

  But seriously, quit your pathetic posturing and finding lame excuses not to look. Use the eyes and brain God gave you, and for once in your life live up to the name you've chosen for yourself on this board!
• 

  bohm

  I have been reading Scholars posts for half a year now, and i think this definately marks the day where he declared interlectual bankrupcy by resolving to name-calling to a throughoutly researched critisism.
  Scholar: if you were debating evolution, would you really think it was fair if someone demanded you wrote darwin and then waited for an answer?

  You got three options now a) Give a proper response. b) Admit you are unable to properly answer this point because of your lack of knowledge. c) Admit defeat.

  At any rate i think you should begin by apolegizing for your stupid sexist remark...
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Ann,

  Evidently your domestic duties include mopping the floor with Furuli and cleaning scholar's clock!
• 

  scholar

  AnnOMaly

  Post 1118

  On these technical matters I am happy to let Furuli speak on the matter as he has done so well and will continue to do so. I have no interest in your nonsense and opinion.

  scholar JW
• 

  AnnOMaly

  I see 'scholar' has gone for bohm's options b) and c). And LOL @ Billy.

  I'm very disappointed in you, Neil.

  You know, Wrench also knew little about the subject and yet he had the courage and motivation to take on my criticisms about Furuli's treatment of VAT 4956. He wasn't afraid to LOOK. I respect him for that. He didn't opt out and squawk sexist insults when he was confronted with something difficult to tackle. We went through that tablet line by line and with a fine-toothed comb, comparing our results with Furuli's and challenging each other's responses. And boy, did we make each other work! The debate went on for weeks and he could see some of the problems with Furuli's analysis. But whatever Wrench's final conclusions were at the end of it, we were both educationally enriched, learning a lot from the experience.

  Now, I wasn't asking for another weeks' long debate with you over so detailed a tablet as VAT 4956. I was asking that you take a little time out and analyze the astronomical information I presented above and compare them to Furuli's. I was wanting you to have the guts to LOOK and come back to me with specific objections to my findings like Wrench did. I'm disappointed that, despite all your swagger and brags, when it comes right down to it you really don't have the backbone to even take on an ignorant home-maker. How pitiful!
• 

  besty

  I'm embarassed for you 'scholar'.
• 

  scholar

  AnnOMaly

  Post 1102

  I too am dissappointed in you for not accepting my initial prpoposal which ensures that we all know what we are talking about. It was obvious from your discussions wiith Wrench which I followed with much amusement was that niether of you kneww what you were talking about and both of yoy were simply point-scoring or 'grandstanding. I have no intention of entering any debate unless I am on top of the subject and my proposal was the best means of ensuring that both of us know what we are talking about.

  scholar JW
• 

  Mickey mouse

  ^ This is what comes of getting your degree from the school of Awake readership.
• 

  AnnOMaly

  I have no intention of entering any debate unless I am on top of the subject

  Thank you for your frank admission that you are ill-equipped to go beyond insults and rise to my challenge. No sweat here - come back when you're ready to play in the big kids' sand-box. I'll keep a spot for you.

  And on that note, I'll let you, as the 'true Christian,' have the final spit in my direction ;-)
• 

  scholar

  AnnOMaly

  Both of us are in the same sand pit of amateurs on this subject because neither of us are equipped to engage in any sort of debate on anceient astronomy. We should let the experts such as Furuli and other professional scholars deal with the matter as both of us are spectators/

  scholar JW