A nominee comments

I get crazies posting comments at times, but the most wack to date has been one John Charles Webb, Jr. who posted comments here and here. You’ll note he made some grandiose claims but was unable to back any of them up (big surprise), except to point me to his website – a veritable maze of nonsense that he proudly claims “has been continually nominated for a Templeton Prize in Religion”. (Note “nominated”, not “won”. And as anyone can nominate anyone else for the prize… er, you get the idea.) Here’s a taste:

Noting that the Star of Bethlehem and the capstone of The Great Pyramid are both ancient astrological configurations, this site attempts to document discoveries that may provide solutions for mysteries that have puzzled humanity for eons.Astroarchaeologist John Charles Webb, Jr., has done extensive mathematical and astronomical research in order to identify the Star of Bethlehem and discover the birth date of Christ.

As far as I can tell, he applies some kind of numerology to prove when Jesus was born, and where the capstone of the great pyramid is located, and other such valuable information.

Don’t think about any of this too hard, but look at how he calculates when Jesus was born:

Mystical Pi and the precise Birth Chart of the biblical Jesus Christ 
To find the exact birth time of the biblical Jesus Christ, "pi" (3.141592654) is transposed to time. This same method is the one which I used to locate the Star of Bethlehem using "Egyptian Pi" (22/7).

3.141592654
transposes to
3 years - 14 months - 15 days - 92 hours - 65 minutes - 40 seconds
or
4 years - 2 months - 18 days - 21 hours - 5 minutes - 40 seconds
or
February 18th 5 BC at 9:05:40 PM

If I’m reading him correctly, he converts the value of Pi to a value of “time” (for no rational reason I can ascertain) and claims this value is the amount of time prior to 1 Jan 0001 Jesus was born (again, for no rational reason I can think of). He determines it would be 4 years - 2 months - 18 days - 21 hours - 5 minutes - 40 seconds prior to 01-01-0001. Hold on to that thought for a minute.

He calculates this date as February 18th 5 BC at 9:05:40 PM. But surely the 2 months - 18 days etc should be counted back from the end of the year (Dec 31,) to give a date in October - Oct 11, I think.  (I could be wrong here but I think that’s how you do it.) He’s taken 5 full years off and then added the 2 months - 18 days to arrive at Feb 18. Actually even that’s wrong – that way would be March 18 not February 18. What the hell, it makes no sense anyway.

And all this because I asked how was astrology was derived, to which he replied:

It was derived by the Chaldeans (Pre-Egyptians), practiced by The Magi (Sect of powerful High Priests) and the ancient Egyptians (Sun Worshippers). The most convincing evidence is encoded in The New Testament, Gospel of Matthew in the account of the birth of Christ which is synonymous with the "birth" of the Sun into a new Great Astrological Year (Age of Pisces).

Additional proof can be gleaned from the observed "fact" that the way that western astrology is presently practised (divination) is subject to much scorn and criticism.

Astrology is subject to much scorn and criticism – at last, one thing we both agree on!

Comments

[Adam Roberts]

But why do the decimals translate into days, hours, etc? Why doesn't the .1415... mean ".1415... of a year" -- about 52 days? But then again, as you say, given the loopiness of the premises, what's a little more loopiness along the way?

His site is a blast. He has a bee in his bonnet about the existence of 'year zero' throwing astrologicaly calcuation off; but he's wrong about that too, as the invaluable Wikipedia makes plain:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_zero

[jegstuff]

ummmm...didn't the calendar change at some point? is he taking that into account?

[jegstuff]

nevermind...he mentions it. i wasn't going to read through all that, but my curiosity got the best of me. i have a headache now...

[mw]

Astroarchaeology? Is that an actual discipline? Which universities are handing out degrees?

[Ariel]

The good old University of Life? Or maybe the Scientologists are branching out... ;)

[Marion McKenna]

He does explain the link between Pi and time. He says, " It may seem unusual, at first, to apply or "convert" Pi, a geometric ratio, to time. However, time (as we measure it) is simply another way of measuring the geometric movements of the Earth (circular) as it rotates upon its axis and in her orbit around the Sun.
Time, like degrees of arc, is founded upon a numbering scheme called "decimal base 60" which was used by the ancient Chaldeans. Sixty seconds makes a minute, sixty minutes makes a degree. (Just like your wristwatch operates. The hour hand on your wristwatch actually tracks the Sun's movement across the sky and a second of time is an entire geometric year [360 days] in microcosm.).
Time, therefore, is geometry expressed as a "duration".
Pi has a hidden relationship with time which expands from the microcosmic (milli seconds) to the macrocosmic (the speed of light and the length of Ages). Time, as we measure it, and the circumference of a circle are "one" and Pi is the mystical number which unites them.

I can't exactly explain it, but I understand what he is saying. It seems that using his method he turned up an ancient celestial configuration that coincides with the start of the Age of Pisces.
The calculations do show a date of February 18th and not in March as the article (above) states. The progression is
12-12-30-24-60-60 (years, months, days, hours, minutes, seconds). There is something there, almost undescernable, about a numbering system based upon Pi and time. In our calendar we count up 60 seconds to arrive a 1 (a minute), 60 minutes to arrive at 1 again (an hour). This is base 60. The process continues from hours to days (24 = 1) etc., etc. So a day - minus 1 second, in Webb speak, would be 0 23 59 59 and plus one second would change the countung to 1 0 0 0. His analysis sets up a type of logarithm based upon our measurement of time: years-months-days-hours-minutes-seconds. He then plugged Pi into the logarithm and decoded it. It has never been done before as far as I know.

[Marion McKenna]

I got it!
The 1st posting "A nominee comments" says,
"He calculates this date as February 18th 5 BC at 9:05:40 PM. But surely the 2 months - 18 days etc should be counted back from the end of the year (Dec 31,) to give a date in October - Oct 11, I think. (I could be wrong here but I think that’s how you do it.) He’s taken 5 full years off and then added the 2 months - 18 days to arrive at Feb 18. Actually even that’s wrong – that way would be March 18 not February 18. What the hell, it makes no sense anyway".

The solution!!!
The Old Testament links the "Messiah" with The Great Pyramid (an altar in the desert) and a star. Webb took the Great Pyramid's PI dimension and transposed it into a time/date. The result gave him an 8+year window to look for the star, 4 years - 2 months - 18 days - 21 hours on either side of year "0". Herod, is an historical figure tied in with Christ and Herod died in 3 BC, supposedly a few years after the birth of Christ, so Webb knew to look in BC. He transposed Pi to a time/date and made an astrological chart. Not a traditional astrological chart but a sun-centered heliocentric chart and located a star configuration that Webb claims is the star that the Persian Magi knew about but which western astronomers could not locate for 2000 years. Goosebumps!
I am looking for a freeware astrology program to see if I can duplicate the result.
The site is one of the most unusual websites that I have ever seen (4 surfing years). I agree with Adam Roberts, the site is a blast.

[Raj]

Quote:
"Attacking the person instead of the argument they present is intellectually lazy. It’s a substitute for thinking. It’s also 100% flawed reasoning: you don’t arrive at the conclusion from the argument presented."

[Skeptico]

Raj:

I’m glad you’ve learned something from my posts. Of course, you’ll note John Charles Webb, Jr. made many claims he was unable to back up: the person making the claim has to back up his claim, and if he can’t we have no reason to give his claims credence. You’ll also note I attacked his arguments as well as him personally. Thanks for raising the point though.

[S. Parker]

quote from 1st article above: (Note “nominated”, not “won”. And as anyone can nominate anyone else for the prize… er, you get the idea.)
end quote.

There is a difference between being nominated by "anyone' and having the nominee accepted and acknowledged as a prize candidate by the Templeton Organization. Webb is an official nominee.

I think that the problem here is that you can't wrap your mind around Webb's research. Briefly, it is profound.

You have to read it between the lines. He has made a clear association between ancient astrology/astronomy and characterizes The New Testament as an astrological/astronomical allegory taught as literal truth.
The Templeton Prize is the Noble Prize of Religion. Nothing to be scoffed at, especially if you can't understand the work.

Webb is not endorsing astrology, he researched ancient astrological methods and symbols and presents a strong argument that Christianity's roots is hidden deeply in ancient astrology and astronomy.

There is a significant difference between contemporary and ancient astrological methods. Webb pierces the veil of religious bullshit to reveal the roots of one of the world's major religions.

Some of the work is very abstract because it flys in the face of the straight-jacket of the western scientific/educational model.

One would have to thoroughly research the virtually transcendental mathemetical associations of The Great Pyramid in order to fully understand Webb's work.

This stuff is beyond the reach of the education factory graduates who are not really taught how to think abstractly.

It is a work to be studied, not just simply read and casually dismissed and/or criticized.

Webb drives a stake into the heart of the religion-beast that sceptics so love to skewer. He shows why it is bullshit, but you have to read it closely.

[BronzeDog]

The Templeton Prize is the Noble Prize of Religion. Nothing to be scoffed at, especially if you can't understand the work.

So, it's the Nobel Prize of Nonsense? Isn't that something like Randi's Pigasus Award?

Some of the work is very abstract because it flys in the face of the straight-jacket of the western scientific/educational model.

I smell an "Appeal to other ways of knowing."

One would have to thoroughly research the virtually transcendental mathemetical associations of The Great Pyramid in order to fully understand Webb's work.

Such associations typically involve a lot of rounding and/or "cheating" with significant digits.

This stuff is beyond the reach of the education factory graduates who are not really taught how to think abstractly.

Sorry, but I just went to school for learning a large number of facts. I got my critical thinking skills from my parents, videogames (usually in puzzle mode), and people like James Randi.

It is a work to be studied, not just simply read and casually dismissed and/or criticized.

Then address Skeptico's criticisms. One problem I notice is that he doesn't explain his logic. For example, why convert Pi in base ten to hours, minutes, etc? Base ten and our human units of time are artificial constructs. If you can't address casual criticisms, you won't survive any sort of deep scrutiny.

[S. Parker]

Please explain the logic about:

Pi X D = Circumference

[Skeptico]

S. Parker:

That can be demonstrated empirically – it’s clearly a fact.

Now, answer my question: why convert Pi to a value of “time” and claim this value is the amount of time prior to 1 Jan 0001 Jesus was born?

[S. Parker]

This is fun!

quote(s) below from skeptico

That ( Pi X D = Circumference) can be demonstrated empirically – it’s clearly a fact.

Now, answer my question: why convert Pi to a value of “time” and claim this value is the amount of time prior to 1 Jan 0001 Jesus was born? (end quote)

first off - (some of this is obtuse)
from (link) http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:UMLreJktahwJ:fitelson.org/il.pdf+is+pi+logical%3F&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3&client=opera
(from the link)
What does it mean for a
quantitative relation to be objective and logical? Carnap (1950) explains his understanding as follows:
That is, an objective concept means this: if a certain value holds for a certain
hypothesis with respect to a certain evidence, then this value is entirely
independent of what any person may happen to think, just as the relation of logical consequence is independent in this respect. (43)
The principal common characteristic of the statements in both fields [viz.,
deductive and inductive logic] is their independence of the contingency of facts
[viz., facts of nature]. This characteristic justifies the application of the common term ‘logic’ to both fields. (200) (end quote of seeming bullshit)
However:
Translation - To determine whether or not something is considered logical you must consider the result that is produced. For instance, many of Einstein's conclusions were contra-intuitive and seeming to be illogical.

According to the quoted analysis for "logical" and just like Pi x D = Circumference, Webb's use of Pi produced a result.

The use of Pi to calculate the circumference of a circle is only ONE use of pi. The many other uses of pi have been subsequentally determined to be 'logical' because of the analysis of the result.
This approach raises the question whether pi has an existence independent of circles and the answer is yes.
For instance: (general google search for 'uses of pi').
Quote: Pi has many uses beside the obvious, it can be used to do more than just calculate the area and perimeter of a circle and are shown below;
Pi can be used to calculate the area and perimeter of a circle, or any other shape involving circles.
Pi is used in hundreds of scienific calculations, some of which include;
Describing:
DNA
A rainbow
Ripples from rain drops
Einstein's Gravitational Feild Equation
Waves
Testing the accuracy of super computers
Cryptography
Generation of a Random Number.

All of these processes (mentioned above) are considered 'logical' ONLY in light of the results that they produce. Webb's approach produced (also) a result, which, according to the 'logical test' must be deemed to be logical because of the result.
That IS the test.
It would have been illogical and irrational for Webb to ONLY decide to transpose pi to a time and date. He did not do that. He noticed that Pi was the most predominant mathemetical expression of The Great Pyramid (AN ASTRONOMICAL AND ASTROLOGICAL COMPENDIUM) and determined that pi was not the final result intended by the pyramid's builders. Rather, pi was a clue or a reference to something else, something more abstract to be discovered. So, apparently being aware of the many uses (seeming irrational) of pi (for instance the difference between a tropical year and a sidereal year is 3.14 seconds of time a day) Webb then, it seems, transposed pi to a time/date. He noted in his writing that time, as we measure it, is a function of two circles. The earth's circle around the sun and the earth's circle on her (his word) axis. So there is, at least, an association between time (measurements of circles) and pi.
Webb's transposition of pi to a time/date produced A RESULT. The result is a celestial configuration, in the form of an ancient astrological chart that is in the form of an ancient Seal of Solomon AND an astrological 'grand cross'. A configuration that was considered so important as to have it pointed to by The Great Pyramid and to have the configuration's ancient astrological interpretation to be translated into an astrological/astronomical allegory that became The New Testament.

It seems illogical, just like using pi in DNA matters.

The result speaks for itself. The equation "Circumference = Pi D" is illogical BUT ONLY UNTIL IT IS TESTED.

Wikipedia has much to state about pi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi#Definition
and all of it is irrational and illogical UNTIL the results are examined. The uses of pi go way beyond mere geometry. Pi is a transcendental number (from Wikipedia).
Its use is illogical.
Webb also observed that the life of Christ, according to timelines in The New Testament is 30 plus pi years! Which, coincidentally, is the geometric length of one astrological sign (30 degrees) plus a cusp (between 3 and 4 degrees).

Ok - the big summary
Any use of pi is illogical because of pi being an irrational and transcendental number. The logic of pi's uses can only be evaluated by the result it produces.
Webb has demonstrated a possible link between pi and time. A link that was employed by the builders of The Great Pyramid. A structure that 3rd millennium technology CAN NOT EXACTLY REPRODUCE.

Webb's unusual use of pi is every bit as logical as all other uses of pi. His method produced a result. It is illogical to determine that his method is illogical because of his result.
Here is another tidbit from Wikipedia:
An easy to remember approximation for the number of seconds in a year is pi×10 to the 7th seconds.
The Great Pyramid employs math that uses factors like 10 to the 7th power and 10th power.

The "illogical" analysis is to limit pi to geometry. And just as in any other calculation using pi, one must examine the result to determine the validity of the equation.
The criticism is aimed at Webb's result but, in reality, is aimed at pi generally.
This is why pi is said to be a transcendental number. It goes way beyond our rational 'senses' (trans-sensory).

Webb also claims that the entire DNA sequence is included, numerologically, in Pi.

The only rational answer to pi calculations and demonstrated uses of pi is IT JUST IS.
WE, NONE OF US, KNOW WHY. IT JUST IS.

[S. Parker]

P.S.

The Wikipedia quote that I used in my previous post comes directly from Webb's work. Here is the quote:
An easy to remember approximation for the number of seconds in a year is pi×10 to the 7th seconds." (end quote)

This is almost a direct quote from Webb's work and has its genesis in his analysis of The Great Pyramid. It is not a copyright violation because it is a 'discovery', an observable fact after somebody (Webb in this instance) realizes it.

Prior to Webb's work (1997- 2006) there was no scientific association between Pi and the length of a year (time).
I am certain of this.

[Skeptico]

Skeptico replies to S. Parker:

A lot of words, but you still didn’t answer the question “why?”.

Re: Webb's unusual use of pi is every bit as logical as all other uses of pi. His method produced a result.

No. To demonstrate it is logical you would also have to demonstrate the result is correct. You haven’t explained why the exact way Webb uses Pi produces the birth date of Jesus, and you haven’t demonstrated that this method calculates the correct birth date of Jesus.

[S. Parker]

Quote: " To demonstrate it is logical you would also have to demonstrate the result is correct. You haven’t explained why the exact way Webb uses Pi produces the birth date of Jesus, and you haven’t demonstrated that this method calculates the correct birth date of Jesus. (end Skeptico quote)

Here is what convinced me.
The Great Pyramid has three definite shapes:
1) viewed from the ground and
2) viewed from above it and
3) viewed from beneath it

The greatest mathematical expression of The Great Pyramid is pi.

Webb transposed pi to a time and date and used that data to create ancient astrological charts. The resulting star charts are perfect depictions of The Great Pyramid's three dimensions as mentioned above.
I have reproduced these charts and the result is beyond question. One of the charts occurs only once in (30?) millions of years.

The time of the star charts fits perfectly within the timeline of Mathew's account of Christ's birth and the appearance of a star that was witnessed ONLY by members of a sect of highly advance astrologer/astronomer priests. Plus Webb demonstrates that the biblical language used is astrological as well as conveying a mundane meaning. For instance a house as ahome or a house as a component of a star chart.

The Star of Bethlehem stuff is relevant but not to the pi transposition issue.
The pi transposition produced star charts that look like the blueprints of The Great Pyramid.

Belief is subjective. I am convinced, beyond any doubt Webb's method is valid and logical.

Part of ancient Egypts cosmology was that the heavens (Milky Way = Nile River) were projected on to the earth. The Great Pyramid is the physical manifestation of the star charts that Webb discovered by the transposition of Pi.
Virtual blueprints marked out by the western geometric approach to astrology charts. Play around with an astrology program that can create star charts for remote periods. See how many charts you can come up with that produce the shape perfect pyramids and then add in the recently discovered planets and have them perfectly form an additional side to the pyramid. A one in a zillion enterprise.
Actually, a once in over 30 million years
configuration.

Webb cracked the pi code. The resulting charts demonstrate this beyond even the faintest doubt.

Over and out!

[BronzeDog]

Still haven't seen anything done to really demonstrate the accuracy of that Jesus DOB "calculated" by Pi. His very existence is on somewhat shaky ground to begin with. Of course, there's also some question of the various calendar changes between then and now, etc. I'm not about to take Matthew's word for it, if he can't agree about the details with his contemporaries.

An easy to remember approximation for the number of seconds in a year is pi×10 to the 7th seconds.

First, that isn't terribly impressive. That sort of thing is easy to come up with if you're willing to spend some time.

Second, there's a problem when you raise units to an exponent. Years aren't measured in seconds^7. They're measured in seconds.

Here is what convinced me.
The Great Pyramid has three definite shapes:
1) viewed from the ground and
2) viewed from above it and
3) viewed from beneath it

Square, triangle, and square. That's what square-based pyramids look like.

Virtual blueprints marked out by the western geometric approach to astrology charts. Play around with an astrology program that can create star charts for remote periods. See how many charts you can come up with that produce the shape perfect pyramids and then add in the recently discovered planets and have them perfectly form an additional side to the pyramid. A one in a zillion enterprise.

You'll have to explain how this "geometric approach to Astrology" works. After you've done that, I doubt the process will produce a "perfect pyramid" for any time: It's probably just a matter of looking at stars long enough until you see what you want to see. At least, that's the feeling I get from you.

[Skeptico]

Skeptico replies to S. Parker:

I’m reluctant to get into this any more, but here are a few thoughts.

Re: The greatest mathematical expression of The Great Pyramid is pi.

That is basically a meaningless sentence, but in any case has nothing to do with whether Pi is related to Jesus’ DOB.

Read Martin Gardner on this subject:

The only Pyramid "truth" which cannot be explained easily in terms of such juggling is the value pi. The Egyptians may have pur­posely made use of this ratio, but it seems more likely that it was a by-product of another construction. Herodotus states that the Pyramid was built so the area of each face would equal the area of a square whose side is equal to the Pyramid's, height. If such a construction is made, it fits the Pyramid perfectly, and the ratio of height to twice the base will automatically be a surprisingly accurate value for pi.

It’s nothing special, and in any case has nothing to do with Jesus’ DOB.

Re: The time of the star charts fits perfectly within the timeline of Mathew's account of Christ's birth and the appearance of a star

I would agree that it may be “within the timeline” but so what? That does not mean it is correct to the degree Webb claims.

Re: witnessed ONLY by members of a sect of highly advance astrologer/astronomer priests.

I would say that “highly advanced astrologer/astronomer priests” is an oxymoron. The ancients may have thought they were “highly advanced”, but then they probably thought comets were an omen too. You’re validating this stuff with reference to data of doubtful provenance from people who were, frankly, ignorant of how the universe really works.

Re: Plus Webb demonstrates that the biblical language used is astrological as well as conveying a mundane meaning.

He thinks he demonstrates this, but he really just looked for data to confirm his pre-conceived belief. When you adopt this approach, you tend to find what you are looking for, regardless of what is really there. But even if he did demonstrate this – so what?

Re: Belief is subjective.

Evidence is not. And I’m afraid Webb doesn’t have any.

Re: I am convinced, beyond any doubt Webb's method is valid and logical.

You are easily convinced.

Re: Webb cracked the pi code. The resulting charts demonstrate this beyond even the faintest doubt.

No they do not. He did not crack any “code” – he found data to fit what he was looking for. This isn’t how critical thinking or science is done.

For another example of how you can fool yourself this way, checkout my post on - the Bible Code. Follow the links in the article. Webb’s work is just wishful thinking.