A friend of Neville's, Bill, present in the audience, fell asleep watching TV, dreamed he was driving his car with his wife, became lucid in the dream, proclaimed "I AM" and woke in his chair; he shared the experience with Neville.
Date (happened)
before 15 September 1969
bound · probable · preferred
Reasoning
Neville says he received Bill's letter 'last Monday night' in a lecture whose surviving delivery claim is 1969-09-19, a Friday; that Monday was 1969-09-15. Bill's driving dream had already occurred when he wrote the letter, so it happened before 1969-09-15. Confidence is capped at probable by the surviving carrier claim. This replaces in substance, but does not delete, the existing 1965-02-22 point date derived from the carrier date that L7 refuted; the passage dates receipt of the letter, not the dream itself.
14 April 1969
stated
Source
"tonight", told in Behold the Dreamer Cometh (nid 1439)
22 February 1965
stated · refuted
Why
pm-actor-529: refuted by M7 (529) before merging into 16901 (M7-C0419): it rests on lecture 1758's catalogue date, refuted elsewhere; the telling is dated by lecture 1439's own claim, 1969-04-14
Told
19 September 1969
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 1758 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 1758 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1969-9-19 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1965-2-23 refuted; 1969-9-19 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1965-02-23 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1965-02-23 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`).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.
14 April 1969
stated · refuted
Source
Behold the Dreamer Cometh (nid 1439), telling 1439-1, told 1969-04-14
Why
pm-actor-525: M7 dating (525): Rests on this lecture's old catalogue/telling date, corrected elsewhere (event 536) to 1969-09-19.
14 April 1969
stated · refuted
Source
Behold the Dreamer Cometh (nid 1439), telling 1439-1, told 1969-04-14
Why
pm-actor-525: M7 dating (525): Rests on this lecture's old catalogue/telling date, corrected elsewhere (event 536) to 1969-09-19.
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 1439 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1439 delivery claims: 1969-4-14 doubtful; 1969-9-19 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.
23 February 1965
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1758, 1965-2-23) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1969-9-19. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Dreamer 2 ¶9 (A very dear friend of mine is in the audience tonight. I am so thrilled for him and for anyone who comes and has such an experience and shares it with me.)
- Dreamer 2 ¶9 (You can’t give me anything in this world concerning money or things that money could buy that compares to a letter that I got from him last Monday night.)