Years ago Neville became aware of two beings - a beautiful angelic woman above him and a monstrous hairy ape-like creature below that called her 'Mother'; when he pummelled it and it fed on his violence he realised it was his own misspent energy, pledged to redeem it, and it withered away and the energy returned to him.
Date (happened)
before 23 July 1968
unresolved
before 23 July 1968
bound
Source
bound from the telling lecture nid 1050 (1968-07-23)
Reasoning
The event is told in the past tense in nid 1050, delivered 1968-07-23 (that claim's confidence: certain, preferred), so it had happened by that date. This is the same premise phase4 L6a and L4.5 rest on, stated at the precision the evidence actually supports rather than as a fabricated year. It replaces nothing: the 1900 placeholder row remains, lowered, as the record of what phase3b did. `bound` is never `preferred`, so this does not change what the event displays.
c. 1900
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l1.4/sentinel1900: year 1900 here is not a date. `corpus v1 / phase3b` emitted it as a placeholder for "unknown, sometime before the telling" whenever the speaker used a vague temporal phrase — this row's own source note is the phrase. The same sentinel was identified and converged on in run v1.1/l0.5/retype/w1-conv. It carried confidence `certain`, which no evidence supported. Lowered to `doubtful`; an honest `before 1968-07-23` bound is appended alongside from the telling lecture (nid 1050). Nothing deleted, no year invented. || v1.1/l1.4/sentinel1900-refute: REFUTED. This event involves Neville himself and he was born 1905-02-19 (event 950 delta 9, `certain` + `preferred`), so 1900 is not merely unsupported — it is impossible. The event now displays no date, which is the honest state: the `before` bound appended by v1.1/l1.4/sentinel1900 remains and is what is actually known. Row kept, not deleted.
Told / reported
23 July 1968
estimated
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1050 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1050 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1968-7-23 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1958-11-3 refuted; 1968-7-23 certain; 1968-10-15 refuted; 1968-7-23 certain (preferred); 1968-7-23 certain. Superseded here: delta 0: 1968-10-15 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
15 October 1968
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1050, 1968-10-15) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1968-7-23. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- The Power and the Wisdom ¶11 (One night, many, many years ago, I suddenly became aware of two beings. I am the one perceiving them so there are three, but I am the perceiver. Here above me stands the most beautiful woman imaginable, an angel – an angel of beauty and of everything.)