Ecrasez L'infame

If you were right, then the sum of all your probabilities would be (a lot) more than 100%. Hell, we're on 150% just for the two dates 925 and 871. Does that worry you?

-Jay-

Ummm. The quote above parses to "I just learned a new term. I don't much know or care what it means, but I'm gonna throw it in, anyway". Weighted averaging isn't a new technique. Pretty much any elementary school teacher that keeps grade books has been doing it for years. And one more time: CAN is not equal to DOES.

And so, having completely ruined the city of Statistokyo and leaving a wake of destruction behind him at Calcusaka, Larszilla begins his fearsome rampage towards the humble village of Arithmeticoto. Where will the carnage end?

Now you appear to be quote mining your source. All the source is doing here is giving the reader information on the techniques that they can use to help improve dating on their samples. Nothing magic. And every single one of those things is already incorporated into the chart, which shows standard deviations much above 10.

Here's a little experiment for you. Go get some rice. Better yet, go grow some rice (so you'll have no doubt about it's provenance). Engrave about a pound of the grains (so that you're certain to have a relevantly large sample) with today's date (so that you'll have no doubt about the date of the destruction event), and char those little puppies over a wood fire, and go to Groningen and have them dated using the Groningen PGC equipment. You'll find that your dating results give you a standard deviation of around 9 years. This despite your certainty of the history of the rice and the modernity of the sample.


Your position is shifting again.

It looks like you're going back to the original measured data for the seven samples at from Stratum IV. Here they are again, with the standard deviations highlighted:

Boundary;
Phase ‘Stratum IV Destruction’

Larsguy47

Thanks, you gave me what I wanted though you don't realize it. I don't know why you're fighting this. City V destructive level is only 40-55 years earlier. 871 BCE is within the high middle range for this dating and since it is the correct historical date, it means that method and the graph are quite accurate at pinpointing the "true date." "True date" is their term.

Thanks so much! A 10-year error margin is excellent. That narrow error margin causes problems for Finkelstein, et al.

LG47








[/LEFT][/QUOTE]

3DJay

I get that it refers to the Pharaoh. But, it tells me the first son, of the Pharaoh on the throne, is killed in the plague. There'd be no need to reference the Pharoah, if his firstborn son, didn't die.

Ahhhh...the Egyptians conspired to rewrite history, as well?

How does one sister, who dies decades before your birthdate for Moses, work?
THE WOMEN OF THUTMOSE III IN THE STELAE OF THE EGYPTIAN MUSEUM
Do you know Manetho's version of the Exodus, at least?


Peace

Larsguy47

No, not actually, unless you're talking about the vague reference of some diseased people being expelled or something. Some have suggested that was Egyptian propaganda explaining why a large group of people left, etc. There was not enough foreground or background for me to decide if the two were fully related. Is that the reference you are referring to?

Tell me what you know about the first son of Amenhotep III. I vaguely remember a reference that he was young and had died and they found a tomb, etc.

From a literary point of view I don't think pharoah could have been excluded to make the point about who many first-borns would be affected and in the absence of a living son he would not have been excepted in lieu of making the generic reference. So I'm okay with it, but I understand your particular.

But since you're so picky, how about weighing in on the fact that no where is Jeroboam mentioned with Shishak's invasion and Rehoboam is said to have misled "all of Israel" and is consorting in repentance with the "princes of Israel" after the invasion. Why is it so hard to understand this was still during Solomon's reign? for some?

LG47

Jack the Bodiless

...Argh! "Nonnegotiable"? It's hooey! Balderdash! Nonsense! Garbage!
SEVENTY YEARS. Supposedly, a "prophecy" of the (approximate) duration of the BABYLONIAN EXILE.

But this was "adapted" by the author of Daniel, writing in the Maccabean period (2nd century BC), who wanted to portray the Maccabean Rebellion as an end of a spiritual "exile" and did so by stretching seventy years to seventy "weeks" (groups of 7 years), with various significant events happening towards the end of that period:
This refers to the events of the Maccabean Rebellion: the "destruction" of the city and sanctuary (the Hebrew word also means "desecration") by the pagan Seleucid Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the deposition and murder (cutting off) of the "anointed one" (high priest) Onias III, the ending of the temple sacrifices, the erection of the "Abomination of Desolation" (the statue of Antiochus as Zeus, defiling the Temple) halfway through the final "week", and the eventual triumph of the Jewish rebellion against Antiochus.

Of course, Christians like to apply this to Jesus instead, claiming that the "cutting off of the anointed one" (Messiah) refers to the crucifixion.

...But there is no justification at all for ANOTHER seven-fold increase, taking the original 70 years(inflated already to 490 years) up to 3430 years! And how would it fit the described events anyhow? It would also imply that the Christian retrofit to Jesus must be abandoned, so the life and death of Jesus wasn't worth mentioning in the new version! David Ben-Gurion is more important than Jesus?

Hex

:notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:

I'm burning that image into my mind right this second!

Hex

If that 'margin' causes problems for Finklestein et al. (and we all know how I feel about that subject, right? ), doesn't it worry you, Lars?

Here ... See if maybe this helps. It's from Beta Analytic, one of the biggest, most precise C-14 dating services in the world. This explains one of their output pages which, even though it's different from the one you've been using fancifully, should give you an idea about why you can't just use a '10-year error margin'. You'll also see why the Tel Rehov results are so impressive in their low sigma ranges, but also not definative in the way you want them to be.

If this doesn't convince you that you're dealing with the chart all wrong, I don't know what will. :huh:

- Hex

3DJay

He isn't depicted in the murals of Amenhotep III's royal jubilees (30th year and 37th year). With the titles he carried, he should have been there, and possibly even leading the jubilees. He seems to have died, before the 30th year.

Before his death, he had grown old enough to be described, like this, on his cat's coffin:

"Made under the administration of the eldest son of the King, beloved by him, leader of craftsmen, the priest Thutmose.

Made under the administration of the son of the King, Overseer of the prophets of Upper and Lower Egypt, leader of craftsmen, the priest Thutmose."



"Crown Prince Thutmosis. Eldest King's Son, High Priest of Ptah at Memphis, Sem-Priest of Ptah at Memphis, Overseer of the Prophets of Upper and Lower Egypt.

The prince seems to have died during the third decade of the reign of Amenhotep III."



He disappears over a decade too early, to be included in the plague, using your chronology.

29 At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. 30 Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead.

"Not a house" would include the Pharaoh's house, wouldn't it?

What are you talking about?

Solomon dies, before Jeroboam returns.
Jeroboam returns, and confronts Rehoboam, before the invasion.
Rehoboam rejects Jeroboam, along with his other critics, and fortifies the cities of Judah, for, at least 3 years, before the invasion.
Then comes the invasion, in his 5th year.
Judah becomes subject to Shishak. And, continues to war against Israel.

There's no way you can get a co-rule, during the invasion, out of that. Unless, of course, the Bible is wrong, which I'm fully prepared to accept.


Peace

-Jay-

I'm just restating the positions you seem to have drifted through in these threads. My concerns are your apparent inability to properly interpret the data and your apparent disregard for what the authors of the source have said. I honestly don't give a crap about what your dating fantasies do or don't do for Finkelstein - I never have.

Now, just so we're all on the same page, since these threads tend to cover a lot of ground, I'm going to pose a few questions. I'd appreciate very simple, straightforward answers (most of these can be answered with a single number or a yes/no), and not a lot of superfluous material.

1) Your position is that The Chart shows that the destruction of the City in Stratum IV occurred most probably in 871 BCE. Yes or no?

2) In your opinion, based on your understanding of the chart and the data behind it, what is the 1-sigma value relative to this 871 BCE date (or whatever date you end up identifying)?

3) In your opinion, based on your understanding of the chart and the data behind it, what is the 2-sigma value relative to this 871 BCE date (or whatever date you end up identifying)?

4) Have you ever taken a college level probability and statistics class? If so, when and where?

5) Have you ever taken a college level calculus class that covered definite integrals? If so, when and where?

Simple questions. Simple answers.

regards,

NinJay