WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2

by AnnOMaly 322 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Londo111
    Londo111

    Since the legendary Scholar has returned…bttt.

  • Londo111
    Londo111

    Nothing new to add yet...but for the sake for the newcomers...

  • Newly Enlightened
    Newly Enlightened

    This was probably covered on a previous page but Snarky did a very good video debunking those articles:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4uDBuwDVv8

  • never a jw
    never a jw

    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

  • never a jw
    never a jw
    VAT 4956 LINEType of obser- vationSame Metonic CycleSame Metonic CycleCalculations with Highest Average Success Rate (only for the 4 lowest scoring years)
    Eclipse on July 15Eclipse on July 4, July 5
    588/587569/568587/586568/567549/548
    1MFPPPP75%
    2PLFFFPF
    3MmPFFFP
    3PLFFFPF
    4LFFFPF
    8MmFPPPP75%
    9PLFFFPF
    10PLFFFPF
    11PLFFFPF
    11LFFPPP
    12MFPPPP75%
    12LFFPPPNOTE: 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.
    12,13PLFFFPF
    13PLFFFPF
    13PLFFFPF
    14MmPFPFF
    15MmFFFPP
    16SSFFPPP
    16MmFFFPF
    17LFFPPF
    3'PLFFFPF
    5'MPPPPP100%
    5'LFFPPF
    5'PLFFFPFAlso, see blue note below.
    6'PLFFFPP
    6'MPPPPP100%
    12'MPPPPP100%
    12'LPFPPP75%
    12'PLFPFPF
    13'MmFPPPF
    14'MPFPPF Success rate for year 588/587Avg. Succes rate for 4 LOWEST score yearsSuccess rate for year 568/567
    16'LFPFPF
    16'PLFFFPF
    17'PLFFFPF
    19'PLFFFPF
    19'PLFFFPF
    Grand Total "pass"7915341319%31%94%
    Grand Total "fail"292721223Success rate by category
    Total (M) out of 64566567%83%100%
    Total (Mm) out of 62234333%42%67%
    Total (L) out of 71157314%36%100%
    Total (PL) out of 160101610%3%100%
    Summer Solstice001110%50%100%
    Total Success Rate588/587569/568587/586568/567549/548NOTE: 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 year19%25%42%94%36%
    588/587Watchtower's year for VAT 4956 (lowest "pass" rate)
    568/567Conventional year for VAT 4956 (highest "pass" rate)
    MMoon position in relation to a constellation
    MmMoon positions in relation to a star (distance provided)
    PLPlanetary positionNOTE: 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.
    LLunar 3's (intervals SS to MS, SR to MS, MR to SR)
    PPass (observation and calculation are a match)
    FFail (observation and calculation are not a match)
  • never a jw
    never a jw
    VAT 4956 LINEType of obser- vationFive years tested for observations of VAT 4956. Organized in discending order of their success rateSuccess Rate for "Wrong" Years by Type of Observation
    568/567587/586549/548569/568588/587
    1MPPPPFAll percentages below are for wong years
    12MPPPPF
    5'MPPPPP
    6'MPPPPPLunar Positions in relation to a Constellation
    12'MPPPPP
    14'MPPFFPMatch rate83%
    3MmFFPFP
    8MmPPPPF
    14MmFPFFP
    15MmPFPFFLunar Positions referenced by its distance to a common star.
    16MmPFFFF
    13'MmPPFPFMatch rate42%
    4LPFFFF
    11LPPPFF
    12LPPPFF
    17LPPFFF
    5'LPPFFF
    12'LPPPFPLunar threes (time intervals)
    16'LPFFPFMatch rate36%
    2PLPFFFF
    3PLPFFFF
    9PLPFFFF
    10PLPFFFF
    11PLPFFFF
    12,13PLPFFFF
    13PLPFFFF
    13PLPFFFF
    3'PLPFFFF
    5'PLPFFFF
    6'PLPFPFF
    12'PLPFFPF
    16'PLPFFFF
    17'PLPFFFF
    19'PLPFFFFPlanetary positions
    19'PLPFFFFMatch rate3%
    16SSPPPFF
    Grand Total "pass"34151397
    Grand Total "fail"221232729
    Total (M) out of 666554
    Total (Mm) out of 643322
    Total (L) out of 775311
    Total (PL) out of 16160110
    Summer Solstice11100
    Total Success Rate568/567587/586549/548569/568588/587
    per year in descen-94%42%36%25%19%
    ding order
    588/587Watchtower's year for VAT 4956 (lowest "pass" rate)
    568/567Conventional year for VAT 4956 (highest "pass" rate)
    MMoon position in relation to a constellation
    MmMoon positions in relation to a star (distance provided)
  • never a jw
    never a jw

    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

  • never a jw
    never a jw

    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.

  • 00DAD
    00DAD

    never a jw, pretty impressive research. I'm just now trying to get my head around it all!

    Thanks,

    00DAD

  • AnnOMaly
    AnnOMaly

    @ 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.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit