MemberJanuary 6, 2021 at 12:51 am
Hi Ron Bublitz, I’ve encountered what you are referring to as far as eclipses. An eclipse for example in the afternoon said to be visible at location A being reported by someone at location B who heard it second hand… it introduces all sorts of possible calculation errors. I’ve tried to look into one or two from ancient events. You run into stuff where computer calculations have a few eclipses 50 years apart or maybe even closer in time but just requires a shift in the viewers vantage point by a few miles. That is why the sequence referenced by David Rohl of a solar and lunar eclipse occurring exactly when the sun was rising and the sun was setting (I’m unsure of the order of all this) it eliminates a lot of time ambiguity and is exceptionally rare. So I’m still confident in that result though I haven’t yet tried to rerun or duplicate such a finding.
You said, “There is calendrical drift and if you don’t take account of this, your dating is off and you need to fudge the numbers. These people always fudge their numbers.” I’m just hoping David Rohl is smart enough to have figured out all the possible errors you are talking about here. I haven’t seen the astronomical dating he wrote about being specifically challenged. I’m not going to be the intermediary though. You can find all this stuff for yourself if you’d like.