A woman friend present in the audience wrote him a letter describing a three-part dream: she woke at three remembering only gathering ripe fruit, slept again and woke at seven with a blank pad, and later that morning her friend Jan's phone call about the Book of Job triggered the memory of being on a painless wooden cross that rooted, branched and became a living tree full of ripened fruit.
Date (happened)
between 2 December 1966 and 8 December 1966
unresolved
between 2 December 1966 and 8 December 1966
estimated · preferred
Why
Old between-claim (1967-01-19..25/certain) left in place per append-only; this is the corrected window beside it.
Reasoning
The friend's letter is dated by the passage as arriving 'this past week' relative to the lecture. The existing between-claim (1967-01-19..25) computed that window off nid 1257's 1967-01-26 delivery claim, which the corpus's own L7 adjudication has since refuted (#2363); deriving anything from a refuted claim is not permitted. The surviving, certain delivery claim for nid 1257 is 1966-12-09, so the same 'week before' arithmetic recomputed against that date gives 1966-12-02 through 1966-12-08.
between 19 January 1967 and 25 January 1967
stated · refuted
Why
pm-actor-525: refuted by the M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 026): Computed from nid 1257's 1967-01-26 delivery claim, since refuted; superseded by the window recomputed against the surviving certain delivery (1966-12-09).
Told
9 December 1966
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 1257 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 1257 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1966-12-9 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1967-1-26 refuted; 1966-12-9 certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1967-01-26 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`).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.
26 January 1967
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1257, 1967-1-26) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1966-12-9. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- We Are Witnesses ¶24 (Now, a friend of mine, in the audience tonight, she wrote me a letter this past week. She said, “I had this wonderful experience. I woke at three in the morning and I can only remember the last part of my dream.)