|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member Posts: 9197 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Colors proof of Divine origin of Bible? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 310 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Some of them have synonyms, in particular there are various words for "blue".
I have listed them in ascending order of their gematric values (left column). 55 red אדימ 64 blue כחול 71 blue מדוכא 99 purple סגול 103 yellow צהוב 246 red מסומק 270 purple ארגוני 316 green ירוק 456 blue תכול 546 purple מתולע 653 blue פורנוגרפי 850 blue תכלת 994 purple ארגמן 1026 yellow/orange כתום
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9197 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
The book he presents this argument in seems to be Coincidences in the Bible and in Biblical Hebrew
It is published by iUniverse which is a self-publishing company.Mr. Shore is a professor of engineering. Here are some excerpts from the book.
Excerpt 1 Excerpt 2 The first excerpt talks about colors on page 13. The graph is not included in this excerpt. I am not sure but the major typo at the verystart of the second excerpt may speak volumes. Edited by Admin, : Fix links. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 760 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined:
|
Let's see what I can remember here - oh, yeah, Wikipedia helps some. "Red" corresponds to wavelengths from 630 to 740 nm or so, "blue" to 440 to 490. "green" to 520 - 570. That leaves a pretty big zone of slop for drawing straight lines.
And like Dr A says, magenta doesn't have a wavelength. It's white light with the green removed. I'm not stumped at all, except at how this argument is even held to be interesting by its proponents. "God is Santa Claus for adults." - Mad Kallie |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3986 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.1
|
Well, god spelled backwards is dog.
If you add up the ordinal number for each letter (d=4, o=15, g=7), you get 25; add those together, you get 7, the sacred prime, and the day on which God rested because He was dog tired! Coincidence? Not likely. This is an incredible breakthrough. I think Hawkins and Dawking will soon be changing their demeanor. I know there's a balance, I see it when I swing past. -J. Mellencamp Real things always push back.-William James
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trae Member (Idle past 4332 days) Posts: 442 From: Fremont, CA, USA Joined: |
To echo some of what you said. As an aside, my first ‘real job’ was in 4-color prepress where I often did color separation and scanning.
The fourth color in 4-color printing is indeed black (represented as K on CMYK for ‘key’). Additionally, the ‘C’ in CMYK is cyan. While cyan is a blue it isn’t what one would normally pick up in a paint store when instructed to get blue paint. My first question would be how well does the person making this claim understand color and are they simply saying cyan == any point in the blue spectrum (same with yellow/yellow and magenta/red). Edited by Trae, : removed a redundant and confusing section of a sentence: "calling it ‘blue’ could easily lead to which while cyan is a blue"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 438 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Jon writes:
So what do the slope and y-intercept represent? ... the 'numbers' in the Hebrew word for 'red', for example, are added up, and that sum assigned as the X value in a coordinate set. That color's corresponding wave frequency value (as determined by, or measured by what I do not know) becomes the Y value. Thus, for each of the colors we have an (X,Y) point to plot on the graph. When we plot them in a given order, for the colors available, we get a straight line. "I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined:
|
Theodoric writes about a coincidence of color terms and "four-color printing."
This is not surprising at all. In fact, all languages that have more than a bare minimum of color terms will have this fact because it seems to be a common factor of linguistics. That is, various languages have different numbers of pure color terms. This doesn't mean that they cannot describe colors outside of those terms. It means that the words used to describe those other colors are in relation to objects that happen to have that color. For example, English has a pure color term for a light shade of red: "Pink." It does not have a color term for the similar shade of blue. That doesn't mean we can't describe such a color. It simply means that the words we use are based upon something other than pure color: "Sky blue," "baby blue," "turquoise." Russian, on the other hand, does make that distinction. It turns out that languages seem to have a set pattern for color terms. There are no languages with no color terms or only one. There are some with only two and they are always "black" and "white." If a language has three, "red" joins the mix. Things get a bit interesting after that, but there is still a pattern. At four, you get either "green" or "yellow." At five, you get the one you missed. At six, "blue" separates out. Ancient Greek, for example, only has five color terms. There is no term for "blue." That doesn't mean they didn't see blue for Athena has blue eyes (though many translations put it as "grey-eyed Athena"...but again, it isn't that they couldn't distinguish "grey"...it's that the term used is not a pure color term.) You then start getting a bit more free-wheeling. "Brown," "grey," "purple," they aren't nearly as regimented in adoption. So I'm not at all surprised to find that the colors listed in the Bible are sufficient to describe a four-color process system. That's simply the way language works. That said, the descriptions are off. When a language has a color term, there is a distinct color that it matches. When you say, "red," to someone, they have a particular shade of red in mind and it is common across cultures. That is, if you present a speaker of a language with a color-chip board with all the various shades of a color and ask them to find the chip that best represents a pure color term, then if that language has that color term, people gravitate toward the same shade. "Red" is a deep, intense, blood red. "Blue" is a dark, cobalt blue. "Green" is deep and organic like grass or leaves. "Orange," of course, is the color of oranges. So while the languages have terms that correspond to what we might use in a 4-color process system, the particular shades of them are not actually representative of what you would use. It's why the subtractive color model uses cyan rather than blue. What we think of when we say, "blue," is not the color we need. Similarly, the additive color model isn't quite right, either. The "blue" of RGB is a bit bright for what most people think of when they say, "blue." It's much closer than cyan is, but it's still not there. This isn't surprising. The reason additive and subtractive color models work has to do with physics: In order to match the entire visual spectrum, you need to be able to disperse light mathematically so that with a limited number of base colors, you can mix them to interfere in the right way such that other colors are dispersed. But the pigments in our eyes that allow us to see color are not mathematically arranged. That's why no 4-color process has ever managed to match the visual spectrum. Now, if you really wanted to prove an amazing thing in the Bible with regard to color, you would have to show that ancient Hebrew didn't use 4-color terminology at all. If it had used, say, HSL, then that would have really been interesting. Of course, it would be difficult to talk in such a way, but who said miracles were easy? Edited by Rrhain, : I dropped a "n't" up there...beyond six color terms, things get interesting as the terms that come next are *NOT* regimented the way the first ones are. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Omnivorous writes:
quote: No, you get 26. 4 + 15 = 19. 19 + 7 = 26. I guess you get the next-door neighbor to god. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time. Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trae Member (Idle past 4332 days) Posts: 442 From: Fremont, CA, USA Joined: |
Let’s look at what is being glossed over by the author. 4-color is simply a more practical attempt to get 3-color (CMY) subtractive color to work. K or black is introduced to compensate issues in printing (impurities in CMY inks, muddy colors, inability to produce consistent colors, issues with ink concentrations, bleeding, etc.).
So why doesn’t the person argue this is divine evidence of subtractive color theory? Do they not understand 4-color printing well enough to know that 4-color and subtractive color are fundamentally similar? Perhaps they realize that that scientists (especially physicists), artists, and even more laypeople are far more likely to understand subtractive color than 4-color printing? It seems odd to me that what is presented as a scientific discovery is instead being presented in an area (trade-skill) that most scientists may be unfamiliar with. Seems a bit of a smoke screen. What happens if we replace 4-color with subtractive color, do the claims still hold up? It seems to me that RGB and CMY values have to relate to each other, and cannot be simply isolated random colors that fit somewhere in the frequency we might give a similar name. It isn’t some red, any other blue, and some random yellow. Also, RGB and CMY values must stand both in relation to as well as independently. Some physicist can correct me, but as I see it the following has to be correct: R+G+B = White light, C+M = B, M+Y = R, etcetera. I don’t know to what extent, if any, you can fiddle with the various ratios, but some ratios I would think must hold. Lastly, if CMY is correct why is RGB being glossed over?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anglagard Member (Idle past 862 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
Trae writes: Let’s look at what is being glossed over by the author. 4-color is simply a more practical attempt to get 3-color (CMY) subtractive color to work. K or black is introduced to compensate issues in printing (impurities in CMY inks, muddy colors, inability to produce consistent colors, issues with ink concentrations, bleeding, etc.). The entire purported argument would carry more weight if the Bible had given the exact measurement of wavelength in angstroms or indeed, billionths of cubits instead of using rather ambiguous terms like red, yellow, or blue. Last time I saw a spectrum of the visible wavelength it appeared rather continuous as opposed to discrete. In that light, I find this apologetic considerably unconvincing, however this discussion about color is rather interesting so please carry on. Edited by anglagard, : Change millionths of cubits to billionths, showed this to the daughter and she reminded me angstroms would be measured in nanocubits. The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes. Salman Rushdie This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3986 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.1 |
Rrhain writes: No, you get 26. 4 + 15 = 19. 19 + 7 = 26. I guess you get the next-door neighbor to god. I knew I'd skipped a finger. I guess that would be Cthulhu, soon to be the Speaker of the House. P.S. Everything else in that post is wrong, too, except the dog. I know there's a balance, I see it when I swing past. -J. Mellencamp Real things always push back.-William James
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 310 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Here are some excerpts from the book. In order to get his data to fit his hypothesis, he has to claim that magenta lies between yellow and green on the spectrum of visible light! BWAHAHAHAHA! I am not sure on what basis he is calculating the values of words, but he doesn't seem to be using standard gematria, which gives different results. For example, he gives a "color numerical value" for the word אדום of 51. In standard gematria, it's 611. I think I see his mistake in that particular case. In Hebrew, the initial/medial letter mem is written as מ and has the value 40 in gematria. But the final letter mem is written as ם and has the value 600. I haven't looked to see if that accounts for all of his errors.
(I notice that my table above has a similar problem, presumably because I was using a crappy English-Hebrew dictionary which didn't use the correct final letter forms. My apologies.) Applying the actual gematric values to the word list in his book, we get (in ascending gematric value): Yellow 97 צהב Red 611 אדום Blue 850 תכלת "Magenta" 944 ארגמן Green 1016 ירקון His claims are therefore evidence not so much of divine wisdom as of human stupidity. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
So what do the slope and y-intercept represent? Damned if I know... Jon Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple! Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.4 |
I'm not sure that this quote from Haim Shore
quote: is not more damning: what a load of utter bollocks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 331 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
abcčdefghijklmnoprstuvz
g o d8 16 5 8 16 5 (8+16+5)=29 9-2=7 So it works you just have-to use the right alphabet namely the Slovenian alphabet the one true god blessed alphabet (sure we spell god bog tough im sure it works for that name of god to
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024