Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Scientific errors in the Bible
Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 7577 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001


Message 61 of 163 (21041)
10-29-2002 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by w_fortenberry
10-29-2002 12:55 PM


quote:
Originally posted by w_fortenberry:
Allow me to quote myself once again. In my first post on this thread I stated: "You appear to be proposing that the falsity of the geocentric theory is proof of the errancy of the Bible. However, I have not as yet discovered conclusive proof of such falsity."
I'm trying to work out your position, but it's not very clear. For example, you appear to be making a distinction between:
Prove X is false.
and
If Y is True then X is false.
Prove Y is True.
Is that correct? If so, on what grounds do you make the distinction?
Or perhaps you are suggesting that heliocentrism and geocentrism may both be true? If that is not the case, then you would accept that proof of heliocentrism is logically disproof of geocentrism?
But perhaps you are trying a different tack? You are perhaps saying that the evidence for heliocentrism is not conclusive proof, but can also be explained by geocentrism? If you do hold this latter position, then you are digging a deeper hole for yourself, because you cannot hold such a view without knowing what the evidence for heliocentrism is. Therefore, as you hold the minority opinion, and in order to hold your particular opionion must be aware of our evidence, and indeed, must be aware of it in some detail, and as we are unaware of what your evidence or objections may be - the ball is very much in your court. What is your evidence for geocentrism, or objection to heliocentrism?
I think that is fair and reasonable. If you do not, I would interested to hear why.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by w_fortenberry, posted 10-29-2002 12:55 PM w_fortenberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-10-2002 5:12 PM Mister Pamboli has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22393
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 62 of 163 (21044)
10-29-2002 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by w_fortenberry
10-29-2002 12:55 PM


The different responses are interesting, and remind me of a couple old engineer, scientist, mathematician jokes.
An engineer, a scientist and a mathematician are placed in a room across from a beautiful girl and are told that every 10 seconds a bell will ring, and that each time it rings they may advance half the distance to the girl. The scientist and the mathematician laugh at this, and when the bell rings only the engineer advances toward the girl. The scientist and the mathematician laugh and scoff at the engineer's foolishness, and after the bell has rung a few more times finally call to him, "Don't you know you'll never get there."
"I know," replied the engineer, "but very soon I'll be so close as to make no difference."
This represents my approach. You can play all the semantic games you like, but the wrongness of the geocentric view and the evidence falsifying it have been public knowledge for centuries. Seriously entertaining the possibility of geocentrism is silly.

An engineer, a scientist and a mathematician are spending the night in a hotel room. During the night the wastebasket catches on fire. The engineer wakes up, sees the fire, runs to the bathroom, fills a glass with water, dumps it on the fire and goes back to sleep.
A little later the wastebasket catches on fire again. This time the scientist wakes up, sees the fire, scribbles equations furiously on a piece of paper for a minute, runs to the bathroom, fills a glass with water, dumps it on the fire and goes back to sleep.
A little later the wastebasket catches on fire once again. This time the mathematician wakes up, sees the fire, scribbles equations furiously on a piece of paper for a minute, shouts, "Aha! A solution exists," and goes back to sleep.
This represents the more rigorous logical, mathematical approach some others, like Mister Pamboli, have taken.

I don't have a scientist joke (I used to, I've forgotten it), but that approach has also been taken by Karl when he listed some phenomena that falsify geocentricity, which is exactly what you requested.
Yet despite all this you inexplicably continue in your chosen vein anyway. Do you really believe you're going to convince anyone that geocentricity hasn't really been falsified, and that therefore the Bible isn't really wrong?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by w_fortenberry, posted 10-29-2002 12:55 PM w_fortenberry has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Percy, posted 10-29-2002 7:43 PM Percy has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22393
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 63 of 163 (21050)
10-29-2002 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Percy
10-29-2002 5:59 PM


Just to drive everyone crazy, here are some more engineer, scientist, mathematician jokes.
An engineer, a scientist and a mathematician are asked to prove or disprove the theorem that all odd numbers are prime.
Mathematician: 1 is prime, 3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is not prime, the theorem is disproven.
Scientist: 1 is prime, 3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is not prime but that could be experimental error, 11 is prime...
Engineer: 1 is prime, 3 is prime, 5 is prime, 7 is prime, 9 is prime...

A team of engineers are asked to measure the height of a flag pole. They only had a measuring tape, and were getting quite frustrated trying to climb the skinny flag pole while holding the tape.
A mathematician comes along, finds out their problem, and proceeds to remove the pole from the ground, lie it down and measure it easily. When he leaves, one engineer says to the other: "Just like a mathematician! We need to know the height, and he gives us the length!"

An engineer, a physicist, and a mathematician were asked to fence off the largest possible area with the least amount of fence. The engineer made the fence in a circle and proclaimed that he had the most efficient design. The physicist made a long, straight line and proclaimed 'We can assume the length is infinite...' and pointed out that fencing off half of the Earth was certainly a more efficient way to do it. The Mathematician just laughed at them. He built a tiny fence around himself and said 'I declare myself to be on the outside.'

A math/computer science convention was being held. On the train to the convention, a bunch of math majors and a bunch of computer science majors were on the train. Each of the math majors had his/her train ticket. The group of computer science majors had only ONE ticket for all of them. The math majors started laughing and snickering. Then, one of the CS majors said "here comes the conductor" and then all of the CS majors went into the bathroom. The math majors were puzzled. The conductor came aboard and said "tickets please" and got tickets from all the math majors. He then went to the bathroom and knocked on the door and said "ticket please" and the CS majors stuck the ticket under the door. The conductor took it and then the CS majors came out of the bathroom a few minutes later. The math majors felt really stupid.
So, on the way back from the convention, the group of math majors had one ticket for the group. They started snickering at the CS majors, for the whole group had no tickets amongst them. Then, the CS major lookout said "Conductor coming!". All the CS majors went to the bathroom. All the math majors went to another bathroom. Then, before the conductor came on board, one of the CS majors left the bathroom, knocked on the other bathroom, and said "ticket please."

Three hungry cannibals --- who were a chemist, a physicist and an engineer --- found a human thigh bone.
  • The chemist licked it, and put it in water to try to dissolve it.
  • The physicist tried to break it open to get at the marrow.
  • The engineer took it, hit the other two over the head, and ate them.
Apologies...
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Percy, posted 10-29-2002 5:59 PM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by doctrbill, posted 10-29-2002 9:51 PM Percy has not replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2765 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 64 of 163 (21054)
10-29-2002 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Percy
10-29-2002 7:43 PM


Delightful comic relief! Thank you sir.
db

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Percy, posted 10-29-2002 7:43 PM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Mister Pamboli, posted 10-29-2002 10:06 PM doctrbill has not replied

  
Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 7577 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001


Message 65 of 163 (21055)
10-29-2002 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by doctrbill
10-29-2002 9:51 PM


quote:
Originally posted by doctrbill:
Delightful comic relief! Thank you sir.
db

Surely that should have been addressed to our geocentric friend?
But thanks Percy - they were very funny.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by doctrbill, posted 10-29-2002 9:51 PM doctrbill has not replied

  
doctrbill
Member (Idle past 2765 days)
Posts: 1174
From: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Joined: 01-08-2001


Message 66 of 163 (21061)
10-29-2002 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by w_fortenberry
10-28-2002 1:23 PM


quote:
Originally posted by w_fortenberry:
Doctorbill has claimed that the falsity of the geocentric view as evidence of error in the Bible. ... If no evidence can be presented in support of that claim, then doctorbill's statements regarding error in the Bible are themselves erroneous.

What I wrote:
quote:
doctrbill:
Seems to me that espousing antiquated theory for the sole purpose of validating scripture is about as regressive as regressive gets.

To which you replied:
quote:
w_fortenberry: Please ... present proof of the errors in the geocentric view found in the Bible.
The view found in the Bible is a pretty good example of geocentric thought. I do not think of it as error in the Bible. It is, however, evidence of the Bible's antiquity and of its inadequacy as a scientific text for today. Parts of the Bible contain timeless wisdom and eternally delightful imagery. The Hebrew in the first chapter reads like epic poetry, complete with puns and idiomatic expressions sometimes impossible to translate. But it is no match for today's insight on the origin and structure of the universe.
db
------------------
Bachelor of Arts - Loma Linda University
Major - Biology; Minor - Religion
Anatomy and Physiology - LLU School of Medicine
Embryology - La Sierra University
Biblical languages - Pacific Union College
Bible doctrines - Walla Walla College

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by w_fortenberry, posted 10-28-2002 1:23 PM w_fortenberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-10-2002 4:56 PM doctrbill has not replied

  
w_fortenberry
Member (Idle past 6107 days)
Posts: 178
From: Birmingham, AL, USA
Joined: 04-19-2002


Message 67 of 163 (22119)
11-10-2002 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by doctrbill
10-29-2002 10:32 PM


quote:
Originally posted by doctrbill:
It is, however, evidence of the Bible's antiquity and of its inadequacy as a scientific text for today...But it is no match for today's insight on the origin and structure of the universe.
Please explain to me how holding to a geocentric perspective is proof of scientific inadequacy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by doctrbill, posted 10-29-2002 10:32 PM doctrbill has not replied

  
w_fortenberry
Member (Idle past 6107 days)
Posts: 178
From: Birmingham, AL, USA
Joined: 04-19-2002


Message 68 of 163 (22120)
11-10-2002 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Mister Pamboli
10-29-2002 3:50 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Mister Pamboli:
Therefore, as you hold the minority opinion, and in order to hold your particular opionion must be aware of our evidence, and indeed, must be aware of it in some detail, and as we are unaware of what your evidence or objections may be - the ball is very much in your court. What is your evidence for geocentrism, or objection to heliocentrism?
Please notice that I have not, as yet, expressed my position in this particular debate. This being the case, I fail to see why you are so insinstent on demanding that I provide proof for my position. All I have done is request proof of doctorbill's claims.
You have responded to that request rather negatively. In fact, I could compare the responses to my questions to those Copernicus received to his questions. He stated, there are so many authorities for saying that the Earth rests in the center of the world that people think the contrary supposition inopinable and even ridiculous; if however we consider the thing attentively, we will see that the question has not yet been decided and accordingly is by no means to be scorned. I only ask that you consider the "contrary supposition...attentively" and tell me why you propose that geocentricity is false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Mister Pamboli, posted 10-29-2002 3:50 PM Mister Pamboli has not replied

  
w_fortenberry
Member (Idle past 6107 days)
Posts: 178
From: Birmingham, AL, USA
Joined: 04-19-2002


Message 69 of 163 (22121)
11-10-2002 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by John
10-29-2002 1:42 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
Ok. Define geocentric.
Geocentricity is the concept that the earth is located at the geometric and gravitational center of the universe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by John, posted 10-29-2002 1:42 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by John, posted 11-10-2002 5:16 PM w_fortenberry has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 163 (22122)
11-10-2002 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by w_fortenberry
11-10-2002 5:14 PM


quote:
Originally posted by w_fortenberry:
quote:
Originally posted by John:
Ok. Define geocentric.
Geocentricity is the concept that the earth is located at the geometric and gravitational center of the universe.

So the two are the same then?
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-10-2002 5:14 PM w_fortenberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-11-2002 10:51 PM John has replied

  
w_fortenberry
Member (Idle past 6107 days)
Posts: 178
From: Birmingham, AL, USA
Joined: 04-19-2002


Message 71 of 163 (22307)
11-11-2002 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by John
11-10-2002 5:16 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
So the two are the same then?
According to the geocentric model, both the geometric and the gravitational center of the universe coincide with earths locality within the universe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by John, posted 11-10-2002 5:16 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by John, posted 11-11-2002 11:12 PM w_fortenberry has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 163 (22308)
11-11-2002 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by w_fortenberry
11-11-2002 10:51 PM


quote:
Originally posted by w_fortenberry:
quote:
Originally posted by John:
So the two are the same then?
According to the geocentric model, both the geometric and the gravitational center of the universe coincide with earths locality within the universe.

That is very interesting because the two do not have to be the same.
How does one test this theory, since the Earth is definitely not the gravitational center on any scale that we can measure?
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-11-2002 10:51 PM w_fortenberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-12-2002 8:19 AM John has replied

  
w_fortenberry
Member (Idle past 6107 days)
Posts: 178
From: Birmingham, AL, USA
Joined: 04-19-2002


Message 73 of 163 (22340)
11-12-2002 8:19 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by John
11-11-2002 11:12 PM


quote:
Originally posted by John:
How does one test this theory,
That is a very good question. Doctorbill has claimed that the geocentric view of the Bible is evidence of its scientific inadequacy. How did he test the theory of geocentricity to find out that it is inadequate? Percipient has stated that the evidence of the falsity of the geocentric model is well known. What tests were done to obtain this evidence? If you are of the same mind as these two, please inform me of what tests you have performed and explain how their results prove that the geocentric model is false.
quote:
since the Earth is definitely not the gravitational center on any scale that we can measure?
There are those who would disagree with you. What proof can you provide for this statement?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by John, posted 11-11-2002 11:12 PM John has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by John, posted 11-12-2002 9:07 AM w_fortenberry has replied
 Message 75 by Percy, posted 11-12-2002 9:53 AM w_fortenberry has replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 163 (22344)
11-12-2002 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by w_fortenberry
11-12-2002 8:19 AM


quote:
Originally posted by w_fortenberry:
If you are of the same mind as these two, please inform me of what tests you have performed and explain how their results prove that the geocentric model is false.
Well, we observe the smaller thing to orbit around the bigger thing (or about the common center of gravity, more accurately) The moon orbits the Earth, the moons of Jupiter orbit Jupiter. We can point a telescope at these things and watch. In every case that we can observe, this is what we see. So why would we bet against all that observation and think that the much much much bigger thing orbits around the much much much smaller thing?
And secondly, the math doesn't work with geocentrism.
quote:
since the Earth is definitely not the gravitational center on any scale that we can measure?
There are those who would disagree with you.
oooo.... scary cryptic. Why not name names so we can all have a look?
quote:
What proof can you provide for this statement?
hmmmm... tie a golf ball to a bowling ball and throw them like a bolo. Note which orbits the other.
The light thing orbits the heavy thing, right? Lets say the less massive orbits the more massive. This is measurable in the lab.
Well, Earth is smaller than the Sun. Add up all the mass in the solar system, factor in its distibution and you get an center of gravity that is definitely not the Earth.
The same can be done with the galaxy. By far the most massive area is the galactic core and we are far from it.
------------------
http://www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-12-2002 8:19 AM w_fortenberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-13-2002 5:50 PM John has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22393
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 75 of 163 (22346)
11-12-2002 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by w_fortenberry
11-12-2002 8:19 AM


Let's assume that your pose is not really a pose, but that you're really and truly ignorant of the evidence against the geocentric view. In that case the truly interesting question is how this dismaying lapse in your education could have happened. Were you excused from all science classes? Raised by bears in the woods? Did you recently suffer some mysterious brain malady? Come on now, tell us, we want to know! I'm sure there must be an intriguing story behind this.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-12-2002 8:19 AM w_fortenberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by w_fortenberry, posted 11-13-2002 6:02 PM Percy has replied
 Message 137 by Geodesic, posted 08-02-2003 10:42 AM Percy has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024