Since the legendary Scholar has returned…bttt.
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
Nothing new to add yet...but for the sake for the newcomers...
I became very interested in the article several months ago because I found it quite interesting that the Watchtower had actually few lunar position matches. So I decided to test different years following the procedure the Watchtower followed. I found 3 other years with an eclipse close to the date of the eclipse of year 568/567 (July 4). I decided to test all 36 observations (few observations were excluded because the date is missing) for all 5 years including the RIGHT YEAR and the infamous 607/606 B.C.E. The results appear in the tables below. Some of the wrong years actually get more matches than the Watchtower’s year. The 1 st table is organized in chronological order. The 2 nd table is organized from left to right, from best to worst performer; and from top to bottom, by type of observation. If you look at the column on the right with percentages, it’s easy to see why the Watchtower chose to talk about lunar observations, and decided to shun lunar threes and planetary positions. They got the fewest matches, and when one consider that the entire calendar fabricated by the Watchtower is not valid one can conclude there’s not a single match
Below are some of the false statements in the article “When was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed”(pg. 25-28 of the Nov. 2011 issue). The tables below prove all of them false. If anyone is interested in all the details of my study send me a PM.
1. “Because of the superior reliability of the lunar positions, researchers have carefully analyzed these 13 sets of lunar positions on VAT 4956”. FALSE. THE LUNAR POSITIONS ARE THE LEAST RELIABLE BECAUSE OBSERVATION/CALCULATION MATCHES APPEAR WITH A HIGH SUCCESS RATE EVEN IN THE WRONG YEARS
2. “all 13 sets match calculated positions for 20 years earlier, for the year 588/587 B.C.E.” FALSE . ONLY 6 FIT, AND IF ONE CONSIDERS THAT THE CALENDAR FABRICATED BY THE WATCHTOWER DOES NOT FIT WITH THE ACCEPTED AND LARGELY ATTESTED BABYLONIAN CALENDAR, THEN NONE OF THE CALCULATED POSITIONS FIT
3. “Clearly, much of the astronomical data in VAT 4956 fits the year 588 B.C.E. as the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar II” FALSE
4. “17. Babilonian… B ecause the cuneiform signs for many of the planetary positions are open to speculation and to several interpretations, these positions were not used in this survey to pinpoint the year intended by this astronomical diary.” FALSE , ALL PLANETARY POSITIONS AND NAMES ARE UNAMBIGUOUS AND FIT YEAR 587/586 B.C.E. NONE FIT 607/606 BCE.
5. “18a. These time intervals (“lunar threes”) are the measurement of time from, for example, sunset to moonset …. Such measurements were not reliable.” FALSE, ALL TIME MEASUREMENT ARE QUITE ADEQUATE, AND ALL 7 LUNAR THREES FIT YEAR 587/586 B.C.E. VERY WELL. ONLY ONE BARELY FITS YEAR 607/606 BCE
VAT 4956 LINE Type of obser- vation Same Metonic Cycle Same Metonic Cycle Calculations with Highest Average Success Rate (only for the 4 lowest scoring years) Eclipse on July 15 Eclipse on July 4, July 5 588/587 569/568 587/586 568/567 549/548 1 M F P P P P 75% 2 PL F F F P F 3 Mm P F F F P 3 PL F F F P F 4 L F F F P F 8 Mm F P P P P 75% 9 PL F F F P F 10 PL F F F P F 11 PL F F F P F 11 L F F P P P 12 M F P P P P 75% 12 L F F P P P NOTE: Moon positions tend to generate high success rate for the wrong years (see all seven framed values above/below this comment). On the other hand, almost all planetary computations for the wrong years fail to match the observations (62 of 64) of VAT 4956. 12,13 PL F F F P F 13 PL F F F P F 13 PL F F F P F 14 Mm P F P F F 15 Mm F F F P P 16 SS F F P P P 16 Mm F F F P F 17 L F F P P F 3' PL F F F P F 5' M P P P P P 100% 5' L F F P P F 5' PL F F F P F Also, see blue note below. 6' PL F F F P P 6' M P P P P P 100% 12' M P P P P P 100% 12' L P F P P P 75% 12' PL F P F P F 13' Mm F P P P F 14' M P F P P F Success rate for year 588/587 Avg. Succes rate for 4 LOWEST score years Success rate for year 568/567 16' L F P F P F 16' PL F F F P F 17' PL F F F P F 19' PL F F F P F 19' PL F F F P F Grand Total "pass" 7 9 15 34 13 19% 31% 94% Grand Total "fail" 29 27 21 2 23 Success rate by category Total (M) out of 6 4 5 6 6 5 67% 83% 100% Total (Mm) out of 6 2 2 3 4 3 33% 42% 67% Total (L) out of 7 1 1 5 7 3 14% 36% 100% Total (PL) out of 16 0 1 0 16 1 0% 3% 100% Summer Solstice 0 0 1 1 1 0% 50% 100% Total Success Rate 588/587 569/568 587/586 568/567 549/548 NOTE: The matches in a blue background are the combined lunar observations (M and Mm). Notice that the year 587/586, wrong year, has a count (6+3) almost as high as that of the conventional year 568/567 (6+4). per year 19% 25% 42% 94% 36% 588/587 Watchtower's year for VAT 4956 (lowest "pass" rate) 568/567 Conventional year for VAT 4956 (highest "pass" rate) M Moon position in relation to a constellation Mm Moon positions in relation to a star (distance provided) PL Planetary position NOTE: All dates for years 569/568 and 588/587 are invalid . These years start a month later than the accepted and largely attested Babylonian lunar calendar. L Lunar 3's (intervals SS to MS, SR to MS, MR to SR) P Pass (observation and calculation are a match) F Fail (observation and calculation are not a match)
VAT 4956 LINE Type of obser- vation Five years tested for observations of VAT 4956. Organized in discending order of their success rate Success Rate for "Wrong" Years by Type of Observation 568/567 587/586 549/548 569/568 588/587 1 M P P P P F All percentages below are for wong years 12 M P P P P F 5' M P P P P P 6' M P P P P P Lunar Positions in relation to a Constellation 12' M P P P P P 14' M P P F F P Match rate 83% 3 Mm F F P F P 8 Mm P P P P F 14 Mm F P F F P 15 Mm P F P F F Lunar Positions referenced by its distance to a common star. 16 Mm P F F F F 13' Mm P P F P F Match rate 42% 4 L P F F F F 11 L P P P F F 12 L P P P F F 17 L P P F F F 5' L P P F F F 12' L P P P F P Lunar threes (time intervals) 16' L P F F P F Match rate 36% 2 PL P F F F F 3 PL P F F F F 9 PL P F F F F 10 PL P F F F F 11 PL P F F F F 12,13 PL P F F F F 13 PL P F F F F 13 PL P F F F F 3' PL P F F F F 5' PL P F F F F 6' PL P F P F F 12' PL P F F P F 16' PL P F F F F 17' PL P F F F F 19' PL P F F F F Planetary positions 19' PL P F F F F Match rate 3% 16 SS P P P F F Grand Total "pass" 34 15 13 9 7 Grand Total "fail" 2 21 23 27 29 Total (M) out of 6 6 6 5 5 4 Total (Mm) out of 6 4 3 3 2 2 Total (L) out of 7 7 5 3 1 1 Total (PL) out of 16 16 0 1 1 0 Summer Solstice 1 1 1 0 0 Total Success Rate 568/567 587/586 549/548 569/568 588/587 per year in descen- 94% 42% 36% 25% 19% ding order 588/587 Watchtower's year for VAT 4956 (lowest "pass" rate) 568/567 Conventional year for VAT 4956 (highest "pass" rate) M Moon position in relation to a constellation Mm Moon positions in relation to a star (distance provided)
I used the Sky X to calculate all positions in the tables (same program used by the researchers of the Watchtower) and all calculated positions were for an observer in An Najaf (32:32:11 N 44:25:15 E) a city located 100 miles south of Baghdad. The location chosen is close to, or maybe it is, the location were the ancient Babylonians made their observations for VAT4956
I just realized that the tables are so long for a computer screen that it is necessary to scroll up and down to see the explanatory notes at the bottom and compare them with the raw data across the table. If anyone is interested, send me a PM and I can get you a 2 page PDF file (one page per table), or just print it from the JWN page.
never a jw, pretty impressive research. I'm just now trying to get my head around it all!
@ never a jw.
It shows one can't just pick a year and make observations from a different year fit it.
Just to clarify:
ALL PLANETARY POSITIONS AND NAMES ARE UNAMBIGUOUS AND FIT YEAR 587/586 B.C.E. NONE FIT 607/606 BCE.
ALL TIME MEASUREMENT ARE QUITE ADEQUATE, AND ALL 7 LUNAR THREES FIT YEAR 587/586 B.C.E. VERY WELL. ONLY ONE BARELY FITS YEAR 607/606 BCE
The comparisions of astronomical data are, of course, between the years 568/7 BCE and 588/7 BCE.
... all calculated positions were for an observer in An Najaf (32:32:11 N 44:25:15 E) a city located 100 miles south of Baghdad. The location chosen is close to, or maybe it is, the location were the ancient Babylonians made their observations for VAT4956
Just for future reference, the ancient site of Babylon is slightly north of Al Hillah. Your location is fine, though.