All of you have been weighing heavy on my mind

Just for the record (I know, I know...here he goes again), The Book of Daniel is considered to have originated in the 2nd century, even though it purports to have been written in the early seventh century. Which means it's a fake prophecy. It's generally believed to have been written around or shortly prior to 165BC, as the prophecies it forecasts prior to that date are suspiciously accurate (as if the author was living through the depicted events...hmmm) but later prophecies are highly inaccurate. Please don't take my word for it -- even wikipedia refers to it as a product of the second century (and again, follow the footnotes to better sources).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Daniel#CITEREFBrettler2005

A pretty good rule of thumb is that if one explanation requires supernatural events to have taken place, and the second explanation only requires that someone told a lie, the lie is far more likely.