Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Aw, what did those poor first born beasts ever do to deserve being smitten?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.
I didn't have to refute anything you refuted yourself.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.
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
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).
Balderdash. The dates can't be supported. Basis?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.
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?
...
and he was not.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...
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 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.
That is to be determined. Not by second guessing one data point as to dates either.and he was not.
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 decadesAs 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.
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.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 decadesI 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.
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.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.
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.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.
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?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.
Because the position of the sun is different at winter solstice than at the summer.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?
..So?Because the position of the sun is different at winter solstice than at the summer.
Don't worry then. It's not Capt Kirk.If I see that pic of Capt Kirk facepalming one more time ... I'm gonna scream!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?