He reads a letter from a lady who, after his November 22nd lecture, heard a voice repeating 'You are the apple of my eye', and two nights later heard 'In God there is no black or white, Jew or Christian', whereupon Ben (present in the audience) and her neighbour Frieda appeared and each declared themselves God.
Date (happened)
22 November 1966
unresolved
22 November 1966
stated · preferred
Told
2 December 1966
estimated · probable
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 1258 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 1258 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1966-12-2 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1967-1-27 refuted; 1966-12-2 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1967-01-27 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1967-01-27 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`). 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.
27 January 1967
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1258, 1967-1-27) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1966-12-2. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
27 January 1967
stated · refuted
Why
Corrects the confidence of the told claim written by run `corpus v1 / phase3b` at delta 0 on this event; that claim is left standing per append-only. Ceiling rule #2132.
Reasoning
Confidence only; the date is not re-adjudicated and is left exactly as written. This claim is derived from the delivery claims of node 1258 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1258 delivery claims: 1967-1-27 possible; 1966-12-2 probable. Walked back to `probable`, the ceiling. Whether the DATE is right is a separate question this row does not touch; if the evidence turns out to support more confidence, it will have to come from a source other than this node. || v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1258, 1967-1-27) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1966-12-2. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- God Plays All the Parts ¶2 (So let me share with you a wonderful experience that came to me through the mail. In fact, I have many to share with you tonight.)