The Dodwell Data now out!!!!!

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Or maybe this?

Exodus 12:12 For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.

Aw, what did those poor first born beasts ever do to deserve being smitten?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Nope. The Egyptians actually regarded them as spirits. You can't wave it off. As for your claim of a midwinter soltice, as all can now see, you can't support it. If a link I googled happened to include someone with that opinion, they are on their own, out on a limb with you! Let's see you prove it, or lose it. You refuted squat.

I didn't have to refute anything you refuted yourself.

 

[dad]

I didn't have to refute anything you refuted yourself.

Because you claim I somehow refuted myself, I will give the lie to your claim here.
post 248 (your post)
"G.S. Hawkins surved the complex and determined that its main axis was southeast, toward sunrise on the day of winter solstice, and northwest, toward sunset on the day of summer solstice. According to Hawkins the winter solstice sunrise was the primary alignment because the view of the summer solstice is blocked. Hawkins calculated when the complex was started, the Earth's axial tilt was 23 degrees, 87 minutes which would put it right on the Newcombe line."

So your claim here is that Hawkins determined something somehow. You don't say how. Story telling, pure and simple. HOW did he calculate the axial tilt when it was started????? What, did he look at tea leaves?


And, here is the clip from the link I posted.

"" Lockyer was very particular about the orientation of the temple of Amen-Ra, which dominates Karnak, and was found to align with the summer solstice sunrise. He said of it:

Evaluation of the site of the temple of Amun-Re at Karnak, taking into account the change over time of the obliquity of the ecliptic, has shown that the Great Temple was aligned on the rising of the midwinter sun. (6)
The earliest axis included the famous Great Hypostyle Hall built by Ramses II on an east to west alignment. Sir Norman Lockyer (1836-1920) proposed a midsummer sunset alignment of the Main Axis of the Great Temple of Amon-Re (see The Dawn of Astronomy, 1894). As Lockyer noted of Karnak, it was 'a scientific instrument of very high precision, as by it the length of the year could be determined with the greatest possible accuracy.' By some accounts, the temple at Luxor may have no less than four well-defined alignment changes involving stars. Unlike solar alignments which can generally last for thousands of years intact, stellar alignments are much more critical because of the precession of the equinoxes, and last only a few hundred years. Lockyer's measurements showed several Karnak temples had been altered over the centuries to match the precessional changes in their aligned stars. (3"
Karnak (Thebes), Egypt."

So some claim the one thing, others another. In no way does this refute my reasoned and honest questioning of how anyone actually knows squat! It seems like the guy that leans to the summer alignment even has star measurements that he claims back him up.

So who cares about Hawkin's claim, that is not supported, and you can not provide specifics on, as to how he arrived at his little claim? His little claim refutes squat, and reinforces that you have squat. So there.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Because you claim I somehow refuted myself, I will give the lie to your claim here.

post 248 (your post)
"G.S. Hawkins surved the complex and determined that its main axis was southeast, toward sunrise on the day of winter solstice, and northwest, toward sunset on the day of summer solstice. According to Hawkins the winter solstice sunrise was the primary alignment because the view of the summer solstice is blocked. Hawkins calculated when the complex was started, the Earth's axial tilt was 23 degrees, 87 minutes which would put it right on the Newcombe line."

So your claim here is that Hawkins determined something somehow. You don't say how. Story telling, pure and simple. HOW did he calculate the axial tilt when it was started????? What, did he look at tea leaves?


And, here is the clip from the link I posted.

"" Lockyer was very particular about the orientation of the temple of Amen-Ra, which dominates Karnak, and was found to align with the summer solstice sunrise. He said of it:

Evaluation of the site of the temple of Amun-Re at Karnak, taking into account the change over time of the obliquity of the ecliptic, has shown that the Great Temple was aligned on the rising of the midwinter sun. (6)
The earliest axis included the famous Great Hypostyle Hall built by Ramses II on an east to west alignment. Sir Norman Lockyer (1836-1920) proposed a midsummer sunset alignment of the Main Axis of the Great Temple of Amon-Re (see The Dawn of Astronomy, 1894). As Lockyer noted of Karnak, it was 'a scientific instrument of very high precision, as by it the length of the year could be determined with the greatest possible accuracy.' By some accounts, the temple at Luxor may have no less than four well-defined alignment changes involving stars. Unlike solar alignments which can generally last for thousands of years intact, stellar alignments are much more critical because of the precession of the equinoxes, and last only a few hundred years. Lockyer's measurements showed several Karnak temples had been altered over the centuries to match the precessional changes in their aligned stars. (3"
Karnak (Thebes), Egypt."

So some claim the one thing, others another. In no way does this refute my reasoned and honest questioning of how anyone actually knows squat! It seems like the guy that leans to the summer alignment even has star measurements that he claims back him up.

So who cares about Hawkin's claim, that is not supported, and you can not provide specifics on, as to how he arrived at his little claim? His little claim refutes squat, and reinforces that you have squat. So there.

The hills of western Thebes block the view of the summer solstice but not the winter solstice. This has been known since just after Lockyer postulated the alignment with the summer solstice. Do you think they aligned the temple to a solstice that couldn't be seen (summer) or one that could be seen (winter)
http://webs.um.es/bussons/arqueoastronomia.pdf


From the quote you previously posted (emphasis added):

Evaluation of the site of the temple of Amun-Re at Karnak, taking into account the change over time of the obliquity of the ecliptic, has shown that the Great Temple was aligned on the rising of the midwinter sun. (6)

Here is another quote from that webpage

For those interested, here is a quote from Lockyer:​

'Taking the orientation as 26°, and taking hills and refraction into consideration, we find that the true horizon sunset amplitude would be 27° 30'.This amplitude gives us for Thebes, a declination of 24° 18'. This was the obliquity of the eclipse in the year 3,700 B.C., and is therefore the date of the foundation of the shrine to Amen-Ra at Karnak..' (1).
​

This date is disputed by Egyptologists as it is unclear which part of the setting sun was used as the 'setting marker' (i.e. edges, top, centre, first glimpse, last glimpse etc), an argument often used against Lockyer, who was accused of using different 'setting markers' at different sites. Recent excavations have pushed the history of Karnak back to around 3200 BC (4), when there was a small settlement on the bank of the Nile where Karnak now stands.

Here is reference to Hawkins
Astronomical Alinements in Britain, Egypt and Peru
Author(s): G. S. Hawkins
Source: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 276, No. 1257, The Place of Astronomy in the Ancient World (May 2, 1974), pp. 157-167

A quote with emphasis added.
There was major rebuilding of the temple, particularly the Hall of Festivals by Tuthmosis III. Hayes give the reign of this pharaoh as established by various authorities to be ca. 1480 B.C. At that epoch the obliquity of the elliptic was 23.87. Calculations show that the declination of the sun with disk tangent to the skyline and centered on the axis, was -23.9 with an estimated error of 0.2. .. Thus, with concordant declination, the temple pointed to the sunrise at the time of the winter solstice. For Amon-Re this alignment was precise within the limits of the measurement (±0.2o)

Hawkins says this about Lockyer
"His foray in Egyptology (Lockyer 1894) collapsed almost entirely on the basis of ignoring criterion. "
No one has taken Lockyer seriously on either Egpyt or Stonehenge for a long time except maybe Dodwell who seems to have used Lockyers mistakes in constructing his mistaken curve.
So dad, do you accept the date of 3,200 B.C. for the history of Karnac as it says on the site you linked? Or as typical do you only accept out of context bits that support your position even when the site you link disagrees with them and you?
As I said you have refuted yourself again.

 

[dad]

The hills of western Thebes block the view of the summer solstice but not the winter solstice. This has been known since just after Lockyer postulated the alignment with the summer solstice. Do you think they aligned the temple to a solstice that couldn't be seen (summer) or one that could be seen (winter)
http://webs.um.es/bussons/arqueoastronomia.pdf

One that could be seen...at the time..

So, if this temple was built in the Middle kingdom, if the dates are anywhere near correct here, that would be post flood, and split. The dates are all that we need here. The difference between 2040, and 2345 is about 300 years. I don't see how that changes much. The data that Dodwell provides shows a clear pattern, and a few hundred years either way doesn't really affect anything much.

"The construction of Karnak Temple began in the Middle Kingdom...."


Middle Kingdom, 2040-1640 B.C.
Eleventh to thirteenth dynasties"

Civilization.ca - Egyptian civilization - Chronology



The Dodwell data agrees with the Newcombe curve within known times of a few thousand years. The divergence comes as we progress backward in time.

"
Figure 1 shows, on a small scale, how the discrepancies appear when they are set out on a graph, and the Scale is magnified in Figure 2. The observations which they represent belong to widely separated times and places, the latter including Ancient China, India, Egypt, Greece, and various parts of Asia Minor and Europe.
They agree ... consistently, throughout all times and places...."

Dodwell Manuscript

For those interested, here is a quote from Lockyer:

'Taking the orientation as 26°, and taking hills and refraction into consideration, we find that the true horizon sunset amplitude would be 27° 30'.This amplitude gives us for Thebes, a declination of 24° 18'. This was the obliquity of the eclipse in the year 3,700 B.C., and is therefore the date of the foundation of the shrine to Amen-Ra at Karnak..' (1).

Right, so this guy has the dates wrong. Also, he has no way of knowing what anything was 3700 BC! Whatever he used to get there is false. What he means is 'This would have been the obliquity of the eclipse in the year 3700 IF present backwards extrapolation methods worked'

This date is disputed by Egyptologists as it is unclear which part of the setting sun was used as the 'setting marker' (i.e. edges, top, centre, first glimpse, last glimpse etc), an argument often used against Lockyer, who was accused of using different 'setting markers' at different sites. Recent excavations have pushed the history of Karnak back to around 3200 BC (4), when there was a small settlement on the bank of the Nile where Karnak now stands.

Balderdash. The dates can't be supported. Basis?

So dad, do you accept the date of 3,200 B.C. for the history of Karnac as it says on the site you linked? Or as typical do you only accept out of context bits that support your position even when the site you link disagrees with them and you?
...

The date 3200BC would be something like 6 or 7 hundred years before the flood. Why would I accept such an unsupportable dream date?? There is no basis for the date.

Either Dodwell was right in the general pattern or not...

"
The conclusion thus reached is that the deviation from the theoretical curve of obliquity is due either to errors of observation, or to the existence of some abnormality of an unexpected kind.
The following pages show that errors of observation are quite inadequate to explain the increasingly large deviation when the curve is traced back to ancient times.
Also, since the curve itself is so plainly a logarithmic one, we are limited to the interpretation which that implies. That is to say, at the zero end, where the curve becomes vertical there is “irregularity,” corresponding to a sudden and major disturbance of the earth’s axis; and at the 90º end, where the curve becomes horizontal, there is “insensibility,” or restoration to equilibrium.
In other words, it is a curve of recovery after a large disturbance of the earth’s axis of rotation, the disturbance having occurred in the year 2345 B.C., and the restoration to equilibrium having been brought to completion in the year 1850 A.D.

Dodwell Manuscript

Speculation on summer sun positions, or winter ones aside, there is no way that you can make the dates sufficiently off course enough to really matter to the basic claim of Dodwell.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

One that could be seen...at the time..

So, if this temple was built in the Middle kingdom, if the dates are anywhere near correct here, that would be post flood, and split. The dates are all that we need here. The difference between 2040, and 2345 is about 300 years. I don't see how that changes much. The data that Dodwell provides shows a clear pattern, and a few hundred years either way doesn't really affect anything much.

"The construction of Karnak Temple began in the Middle Kingdom...."


Middle Kingdom, 2040-1640 B.C.
Eleventh to thirteenth dynasties"

Civilization.ca - Egyptian civilization - Chronology



The Dodwell data agrees with the Newcombe curve within known times of a few thousand years. The divergence comes as we progress backward in time.

"
Figure 1 shows, on a small scale, how the discrepancies appear when they are set out on a graph, and the Scale is magnified in Figure 2. The observations which they represent belong to widely separated times and places, the latter including Ancient China, India, Egypt, Greece, and various parts of Asia Minor and Europe.
They agree ... consistently, throughout all times and places...."

Dodwell Manuscript



Right, so this guy has the dates wrong. Also, he has no way of knowing what anything was 3700 BC! Whatever he used to get there is false. What he means is 'This would have been the obliquity of the eclipse in the year 3700 IF present backwards extrapolation methods worked'

Balderdash. The dates can't be supported. Basis?


The date 3200BC would be something like 6 or 7 hundred years before the flood. Why would I accept such an unsupportable dream date?? There is no basis for the date.

Either Dodwell was right in the general pattern or not...

and he was not.

"
The conclusion thus reached is that the deviation from the theoretical curve of obliquity is due either to errors of observation, or to the existence of some abnormality of an unexpected kind.
The following pages show that errors of observation are quite inadequate to explain the increasingly large deviation when the curve is traced back to ancient times.
Also, since the curve itself is so plainly a logarithmic one, we are limited to the interpretation which that implies. That is to say, at the zero end, where the curve becomes vertical there is “irregularity,” corresponding to a sudden and major disturbance of the earth’s axis; and at the 90º end, where the curve becomes horizontal, there is “insensibility,” or restoration to equilibrium.
In other words, it is a curve of recovery after a large disturbance of the earth’s axis of rotation, the disturbance having occurred in the year 2345 B.C., and the restoration to equilibrium having been brought to completion in the year 1850 A.D.

Dodwell Manuscript

Speculation on summer sun positions, or winter ones aside, there is no way that you can make the dates sufficiently off course enough to really matter to the basic claim of Dodwell.

As the site you referenced pointed out Dodwell clearly picked the wrong orientation for Karnak based on Lockyer's incorrect attribution. If you put that point back on the Newcombe curve where it belongs Dodwell's entire argument totally collapses. You have refuted yourself again. End of Story.

 

[dad]

and he was not.

That is to be determined. Not by second guessing one data point as to dates either.

As the site you referenced pointed out Dodwell clearly picked the wrong orientation for Karnak based on Lockyer's incorrect attribution. If you put that point back on the Newcombe curve where it belongs Dodwell's entire argument totally collapses. You have refuted yourself again. End of Story.

The orientation of the site really doesn't matter much, it is the date of the temple. That date cannot be arrived at using Newcombe's old age belief based graph. You can't put the site back on Newcombe's curve. Seems to me that Humpty Dumpty can't get back on that wall. Since the Dodwell curve intersects with the only record of the pre history world we have, that confirms it. The best you could hope for is to tweak the dates by a few decades I kind of was hoping I could do that anyhow.

Then of course there is the possibility that the site was earlier than they thought. That would put it either so near the split, or post split even, that it renders backwards extrapolations of present eclipses, and etc useless for dates.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

That is to be determined. Not by second guessing one data point as to dates either.

The orientation of the site really doesn't matter much, it is the date of the temple. That date cannot be arrived at using Newcombe's old age belief based graph. You can't put the site back on Newcombe's curve. Seems to me that Humpty Dumpty can't get back on that wall. Since the Dodwell curve intersects with the only record of the pre history world we have, that confirms it. The best you could hope for is to tweak the dates by a few decades I kind of was hoping I could do that anyhow.

Then of course there is the possibility that the site was earlier than they thought. That would put it either so near the split, or post split even, that it renders backwards extrapolations of present eclipses, and etc useless for dates.

With the proper solstice for the temple orientation it fits on the Newcombe Curve to within 0.2 degrees. You pointed to a site that gives the proper solstice as winter so you have refuted yourself.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Dad has refuted himself.

This thread is dead
No more needs be said

 

[dad]

With the proper solstice for the temple orientation it fits on the Newcombe Curve to within 0.2 degrees. You pointed to a site that gives the proper solstice as winter so you have refuted yourself.

Meaningless, if the dates are fantasy. Once we get into fantasy, naturally, we gravitate toward Newcombe's fantasy curve. How was the solstice 'date' arrived at? That would need to be supported, not just have an opinion that the summer solstice was unimportant in an Egyptian temple.

The facts are that Dodwell used decisive data to determine differences in dates, that definitely depended on dreams, and don't deserve the dignity of discussion, but demand disrespect.

The curve based on data is clearly one that is in a distinct pattern that increasingly shows that Newcombe htwrong. The dates for the building of Karnak that are accepted are not 3700 or 3200, or 11,700 BC. Personally, I doubt the whole winter solstice thing. But whether they saw the sun in either doesn't change anything in Dodwell's curve. Neither does it change the bible timeframe. Neither does it change the facts Dodwell recorded about China, and other locations and times, which all agree.

If we were to put Karnak ahead or behind a century, I doubt it would affect the curve much.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Meaningless, if the dates are fantasy. Once we get into fantasy, naturally, we gravitate toward Newcombe's fantasy curve. How was the solstice 'date' arrived at? That would need to be supported, not just have an opinion that the summer solstice was unimportant in an Egyptian temple.

The facts are that Dodwell used decisive data to determine differences in dates, that definitely depended on dreams, and don't deserve the dignity of discussion, but demand disrespect.

The curve based on data is clearly one that is in a distinct pattern that increasingly shows that Newcombe htwrong. The dates for the building of Karnak that are accepted are not 3700 or 3200, or 11,700 BC. Personally, I doubt the whole winter solstice thing. But whether they saw the sun in either doesn't change anything in Dodwell's curve. Neither does it change the bible timeframe. Neither does it change the facts Dodwell recorded about China, and other locations and times, which all agree.

If we were to put Karnak ahead or behind a century, I doubt it would affect the curve much.

None of what you call fantasy dates are required. When the winter solstice is used, and your site and mine agree it was the winter solstice since the summer solstice was hidden by the hill of Thebes, the orientation of the temple falls on the Newcombe Curve using Dodwell's date. The other dates and alignments are not that far off the curve. The whole "exponential" thing fall apart completely without the incorrect solstice used for Karnac.

Now as I said
This thread is dead.

 

[dad]

None of what you call fantasy dates are required. When the winter solstice is used, and your site and mine agree it was the winter solstice since the summer solstice was hidden by the hill of Thebes, the orientation of the temple falls on the Newcombe Curve using Dodwell's date. The other dates and alignments are not that far off the curve. The whole "exponential" thing fall apart completely without the incorrect solstice used for Karnac.

Now as I said
This thread is dead.

If Karnak was dated in the time Dodwell, and others claim it should be, then it stays on his curve, obviously. How would any solstice change anything?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

If Karnak was dated in the time Dodwell, and others claim it should be, then it stays on his curve, obviously. How would any solstice change anything?

Because the position of the sun is different at winter solstice than at the summer.

 

[dad]

Because the position of the sun is different at winter solstice than at the summer.

..So?

 

[Orogeny]

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

..So?

LOL this explains why you so readily refuted yourself.

 

[AV1611VET]

If I see that pic of Capt Kirk facepalming one more time ... I'm gonna scream!

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

If I see that pic of Capt Kirk facepalming one more time ... I'm gonna scream!

Don't worry then. It's not Capt Kirk.

 

[Orogeny]

Hold on while I create a Kirk facepalm ex nihilo...

or in other words...

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Hold on while I create a Kirk facepalm ex nihilo...