607 BC vs 587 BC: Archaeoastronomy for Everyone

by Londo111 28 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Londo111

    I'd welcome any comment from Scholar or any JW apologist in regard to this.

  • breakfast of champions
    breakfast of champions

    LONDO111 - outstanding job!

    Don't apologize for being boring. Some of the most important things in life are "boring"! To me, personally, this is far from boring.

  • Londo111

    Thank you. Last night, I finished going through VAT 4956 and comparing it to 568 BC, taking screenshots. Now it will be a matter of putting this together in a presentable form.

    This is more approximate, more or less determining if a planet or moon is in the ballpark. I’m not sure if Cartes du Ciel is good for gauging precise measurements, for instance, of the Lunar 3’s, or whether non-freeware software like SkyX or TheSky would be a better tool for this. However, for a general audience, finding planet or moon about where it should be might be good enough.

    Hopefully, one day, someone will fill in my slack, and make a video for more advanced observations. It would be awesome too if people made some response videos of their findings: A picture is worth a thousand words.


    Londo, everyone has differing gifts. You seem to really enjoy things that give me a massive headache. Without your hard work, and the work of like-minded people, this would be extremely difficult for persons like myself to understand. So thank you brother, for your hard work.

  • Londo111

    Thanks, Brother. I think this subject appeals to my inner geek.

  • AnnOMaly

    You've walked through the process very well, Londo! Neil could do with checking out your video to help start him off on the research he feels is beyond him.

    It's great that you used Cartes du Ciel - one of the programs the WTS article names. Btw, the CdC figures for the Lunar Threes are compared HERE. Despite being less accurate, notable differences between the 588/7 and 568/7 results are still readily apparent.

    Some criticisms (sorry).

    Typos in your spellings of 'Pegasus' need correcting. Also, the location is listed as Geneva - even though the coordinates are correct for Babylon and you specified Babylon verbally, this could still be a source of confusion.

    As Jeffro already mentioned, the WTS's case for a 588/7 BCE dating for VAT 4956 focuses on its LUNAR positions only. The planetary observations are dismissed on the (erroneous) argument that the terminology or positions for these are too ambiguous to be useful. I'm wondering if a JW who is semi-clued-up on the WTS's article will just think, 'Well, so what if Saturn doesn't fit 588. The planets' positions can't be used to prove anything one way or another.'

    As you know, one of the glaring weaknesses with the WTS's treatment of VAT 4956 is its grossly flawed and dishonest approach to its 'analysis': about two-thirds of the tablet's data are waved away as irrelevant and only a specially selected group of 13 observations, which in turn are manipulated into a new, improbable calendar (i.e. new year starting in May!), are considered as decisive in dating the tablet. The article makes it look like the 588/7 dating hangs on two key lines - 3 and 17 - where Nisanu 9 was not an error after all (and is good for May 588), and the Simanu 15 eclipse from which all revised dates are derived by counting backwards.

    Center more on the WTS's sins of omission and their manipulation of the tablet's astronomical data, IMHO.

    Looking forward to watching A7a, which will have to wait till later.

  • Londo111

    Thank you, Ann.

    I’m trying my best to avoid directly mentioning the Watchtower or JWs or anything that might be perceived of as “apostate”. Of course, despite removing every stumbling block, this would not help someone deeply asleep--and this series would be slapped with that scarlet letter. Hopefully, this approach will work for those who are awakening, or on the verge of awakening—like I was nearly two years ago when you and AlleyMom and others were dissecting the October/November 2011 articles.

    I’ve been asking myself, “What sort of Youtube presentation would I have appreciated at the time?” I’m hoping that these ones will come away with an understanding of the basic issues involved, as well as knowing that being able to research this subject for themselves is within their reach. They don’t need to even read a so-called “apostate” book on the subject. All the tools are neutral ground, as it were.

    I ended up using Sky View Café for the Lunar Threes. That is a nifty online tool as well.

  • AnnOMaly

    I’m trying my best to avoid directly mentioning the Watchtower or JWs or anything that might be perceived of as “apostate”. ...

    ... They don’t need to even read a so-called “apostate” book on the subject. All the tools are neutral ground, as it were.

    Ahh, I see where you're coming from. Fair enough.

    Yes, I like SVC. Simple, no fuss, user-friendly and reasonably accurate for BC skies ... and free online! I bought the offline version eventually. I suggest that, if you pick a program for your videos, you stick with it throughout whenever possible. There were one or two programs where Moon/Sun/set/rise intervals were hard to obtain. I'd mix, say, the SVC Lunar Three figures with another program's lunar positions relative to stars - declaring which one I used for which result, of course, but in retrospect, it makes for a less 'scientific' outcome.

    Going to watch your other vids now.

  • Londo111

Share this