The same correspondent's third vision, which Neville reads out: a house of unnumbered rooms, a beautiful dark-haired woman asking her to speak, a church filled with her dead father's friends including her Aunt Margaret, to whom she expounded 2 Samuel 7 and the 2nd Psalm, and who answered that she was talking about David.
Date (happened)
1955
conclusion
Why
dc1-agreement-20261004, pm-actor-551 (PM 8702)
Reasoning
All 2 claims agree on 1955: passage:548012; node:1890.
-
before 1 March 1968
bound · probable
Why
Corrects a misattributed date rather than replacing it; old row left in place per append-only.
Reasoning
The vision has no internal date marker of its own; the 'two years ago' clause in the passage describes Aunt Margaret's stroke, a backstory detail, not the vision's timing, so the existing 1955 stated/certain claim on this event dates the wrong thing (and its arithmetic further rests on the now-refuted 1957 delivery date, not the surviving 1968-03-01 one). The only sound claim is that the vision, as an experience recounted in a letter read out in this lecture, happened before the lecture's certain delivery date.
Told
1 March 1968
conclusion
Why
dc1-agreement-20261004, pm-actor-551 (PM 8702)
Reasoning
1 claim, no conflict: 1968-03-01 (node:1890).
1 March 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 1890 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 1890 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1968-3-1 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1957-??-?? refuted; 1968-3-1 certain; 1968-1-3 refuted; 1968-3-1 certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1968-01-03 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`).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.
3 January 1968
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1890, 1968-1-3) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1968-3-1. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- They Related Their Own Experiences ¶11 (A perfectly beautiful woman came to her. She was young, dark hair, dark eyes, olive skin, and she said to her, “I want you to speak to them. I want you to tell them.”)