The Mythical Bible

I agree in that each item should be, if it is contentious in anyway, be examined on it's own merits.However, in the real world, we have to make some short cuts. If a source has proven to be reliable under a wide range of circumstances then I might accept something from there more easily. The converse is, of course, also true.However, even that has some subtleties. We should consider the particular class of information we are getting. I will tend to believe my doctor on health issues as he has shown himself to be reliable in the past. I might not be any quicker to accept financial advice from him than my mechanic.The Bible is not intending to be a science book. If it gets that wrong I might not let that tarnish the rest of it's message anymore than I would let poor financial advice from my doc influence my acceptance of his medical advice.In the end, if it is important to get the best possible answer. I do agree that each issue stands on its own.

Since the earth stopping would leave a lot of evidence (a LOT) the lack of it demonstrats that this one didn't happen.

What would happen if you take things moving at 700 to 900 mph and stop it suddenly?

Didn't think otherwise. You might have picked a better example or maybe that one does make the point. We all have limited time and resources and make judgement calls about which information to accept and which to check.You can try the measurement method out yourself. If you are concerned that the answer is wrong you can, at least in principle, reproduce the measurement.Any such measurements are published with details on how they are done so one can review them.In general we can't go to that level of detail. Mostly we might try to think through what we are being told and see if it hangs together with what else we accept.Any measurement of the distance of Mars should jib with it's behaviour in the sky. We can also tie it in with our experience (or even measurements) of the behavior of gravity. Does all this hang together?At some point we may simply not have the deep understanding necessary to check things. If someone tells me that string theory and M-branes produces math that "works" I might have to accept that. I'm sure as heck not going to check the math. I like it that someon is and I can if I'm willing to put in the effort.

We're talking about speeds 10 to 15 times higher and energy levels 100 to 200 times higher!Imagine the tidal waves!

Oooops, sounds like a miracle. If you don't want to stick to creation "science" then I'm happy to leave you to your beliefs. You stay in your church -- you stay out of the classroom and the legislature.Miracles will get you tossed by most western demcocracies to protect your religious rights. That is why there is an ID "movement". They are trying so hard to avoid any magic. LOL, we have a whole thread on that, believe it or not. I get comflicing opinions on that thing. I am going to change it but there are a few women on MSN who are glad to see it appear .I explained in the latter part of my post how I might go about deciding when to trust a source. It is a lot more complex than that of course and I don't usually trust any one source. It's been a fair while but I recall the description being Biblical-like. That is, it is not all that detailed, it makes a bunch of assumptions that you understand the view of the author (eg. firmament) and isn't trying to be a geography lesson. With that I couldn't falsify the book based on it's description of Kansas. Not enough to go on.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 05-08-2004 01:51 PMThis message has been edited by NosyNed, 05-08-2004 01:51 PM

I think I know what you mean, but as worded there are others. Panspermia being one. Ok, then we don't have any disagreement. There is at least one thread around that discusses what a religion is. Hard to figure out how humanism is a religion unless a lot more things are religion than most people would accept (or allow tax exempt status to). However, surprise!, I think that there are those who attempt to carry humanism in a direction that starts to make it look a bit like a religion. Now, just what does that have to do with biology. The majority of Christians also accept evolution, does that make it a tenant of their religion?

Actually I think it requires a bit more than that. You need the total number of prophecies made and find the percentage of hits out of that. Otherwise I can predict the outcome of any election, the location of earthquakes the date of a meteor stike and so on. As long as you ignore all my failures I can produce a very impressive record indeed.I think however, that you're right. I doubt that there is a good count of the "prophecies" made in either case. In fact, you'd have a tough time being clear when something is a "prophecy" and not something else.

I think JT is being very clear, precise and strong.I think there are some holes in the logic but I'll wait to see how things unfold.