Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8951 total)
25 online now:
DrJones*, GDR, Hyroglyphx, jar, RAZD, Theodoric (6 members, 19 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 866,934 Year: 21,970/19,786 Month: 533/1,834 Week: 33/500 Day: 33/96 Hour: 2/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Intelligent Design and Bible Codes
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 830 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 1 of 49 (244434)
09-17-2005 5:46 PM


You all know me, but I want to put my biases up front just in case it's a new reader.

I don't believe in Intelligent Design. I am an abiogenesis ToEr supporter. I don't believe that there is a supernatural being holding court over the universe.

Having said that, I recently saw a special on the "Bible Codes".

For those who don't know what this is, the Bible Codes are a collection of hidden messages found within the ancient Hebrew texts. Basically they take all the words/letters of the text and make giant grids out of them. Then, in sort of a word search fashion look for predictions.

Apparently Lincoln's assassination, Rabin's assassination, etc. have been found.

I'm wondering if Intelligent Design supporters believe in the Bible Code.

Here's why I ask:

The Bible Code takes a collection of "random information", looks for patterns within it, then proclaims what it finds to be proof that the information was not random to begin with.

This strikes me as being very much what the IDers are doing. They look at complex things which exist today (at the end of the process) and deduce that therefore someone must have set out to achieve them.

It's backwards reasoning. Neither of these theories describe mechanics, they simply imply them by looking at results.

In striking opposite sits ToE which describes mechanics and implies results. (There is an elephant therefore there is an Intelligent Designer vs. There is Natural Selection and, hey whatya know, an Elephant)

In the Bible Code, no attention is paid to the 99.99 percent of letter/word combinations that don't result in any sort of meaningful sentence, let alone prediction.

Further, the same process of gridding out a text and doing a word search on "Moby Dick" turns up hundreds of predictions as well.

If the Bible Codes are holy, then doesn't that imply that the Moby Dick codes are likewise holy?

Patterns appear when you look for them. We, as a species, are good at finding patterns and discarding background noise.

Do IDers feel that Bible Code is a mathmatical trick, or proof that their is a God pre-ordaining our entire existance?

If you don't believe in Bible Code, which uses the same top down principles of results proves means that ID uses, then how do you reconcile that?

This message has been edited by Nuggin, 09-17-2005 07:05 PM


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminBen, posted 09-17-2005 6:37 PM Nuggin has responded
 Message 9 by ramoss, posted 10-09-2005 2:20 PM Nuggin has not yet responded
 Message 10 by joshua221, posted 10-09-2005 8:50 PM Nuggin has responded
 Message 15 by arachnophilia, posted 10-10-2005 5:14 PM Nuggin has responded
 Message 25 by Gospel Preacher, posted 10-30-2005 9:46 AM Nuggin has not yet responded
 Message 27 by captainbucky, posted 12-24-2005 4:53 PM Nuggin has not yet responded
 Message 29 by ReverendDG, posted 12-26-2005 12:43 AM Nuggin has not yet responded
 Message 30 by inkorrekt, posted 02-05-2006 7:50 PM Nuggin has responded

  
AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 49 (244440)
09-17-2005 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
09-17-2005 5:46 PM


A question
Hi Nuggin,

I'm having a little trouble connecting the dots in your post. Let me run a simple query by you:

Do IDers feel that Bible Code is pattern or mathmatical trick? If trick, then how do you reconcile that belief with the same methodology used to support ID?

It would be really helpful for me, in understanding your post, if you could outline what methodology is being used to support ID. Can you add that in? More specifically, I'm unclear on how ID methodology is different than that used in hypothesis-building in say, abiogenesis or cosmology. Why is this a special problem for ID proponents and not scientists in general?

If you could address those issues in your post, that would really help me see how well the discussion will get of the ground. That really helps when considering a topic for promotion.

Thanks as always.


Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 09-17-2005 5:46 PM Nuggin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Nuggin, posted 09-17-2005 6:53 PM AdminBen has not yet responded

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 830 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 3 of 49 (244442)
09-17-2005 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminBen
09-17-2005 6:37 PM


Re: A question
Right-o! Check for an edit in a bit.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminBen, posted 09-17-2005 6:37 PM AdminBen has not yet responded

  
AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 49 (244493)
09-17-2005 10:18 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by ausar_maat, posted 10-08-2005 7:01 AM AdminBen has responded

  
ausar_maat
Member (Idle past 3837 days)
Posts: 136
From: Toronto
Joined: 10-04-2005


Message 5 of 49 (249994)
10-08-2005 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by AdminBen
09-17-2005 10:18 PM


quote:
It would be really helpful for me, in understanding your post, if you could outline what methodology is being used to support ID. Can you add that in? More specifically, I'm unclear on how ID methodology is different than that used in hypothesis-building in say, abiogenesis or cosmology. Why is this a special problem for ID proponents and not scientists in general?

Thanks as always.


I'm not familiar with ID, just bought the Micheal Behe book. But that's a very good point.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by AdminBen, posted 09-17-2005 10:18 PM AdminBen has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by AdminBen, posted 10-08-2005 7:32 AM ausar_maat has responded
 Message 13 by Yaro, posted 10-10-2005 8:36 AM ausar_maat has responded

  
AdminBen
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 49 (249995)
10-08-2005 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by ausar_maat
10-08-2005 7:01 AM


ausar_maat,

From what I saw last night (and now), looks like you're clicking "reply" to random post, including your own, when posting. Clicking "reply" on the post that you're actually replying to is important because:

  • The person you reply to gets a mail notification
  • If you don't, it's really hard to tell whose post you're replying to
  • The posts no longer "link" to each other, and newcomers to the thread can't follow the conversation.
  • Can you try and click the little "reply" button from each post that you reply to? It will make everything a lot easier for everybody else in the end.

    Thanks.


    Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
    General discussion of moderation procedures
    Thread Reopen Requests
    Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

    New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

    Other useful links:

    Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 5 by ausar_maat, posted 10-08-2005 7:01 AM ausar_maat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 7 by ausar_maat, posted 10-08-2005 9:47 AM AdminBen has responded

      
    ausar_maat
    Member (Idle past 3837 days)
    Posts: 136
    From: Toronto
    Joined: 10-04-2005


    Message 7 of 49 (250018)
    10-08-2005 9:47 AM
    Reply to: Message 6 by AdminBen
    10-08-2005 7:32 AM


    little newbie error there sorry

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 6 by AdminBen, posted 10-08-2005 7:32 AM AdminBen has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 8 by AdminBen, posted 10-08-2005 9:49 AM ausar_maat has not yet responded

      
    AdminBen
    Inactive Member


    Message 8 of 49 (250020)
    10-08-2005 9:49 AM
    Reply to: Message 7 by ausar_maat
    10-08-2005 9:47 AM


    No problem at all. Figured that's all it was. Hope you're enjoying the board, and welcome to EvC! :)

    Below are some links that may come in useful during your stay at EvC. When you have a moment, take a look at some of them. You'll find them linked in most admin's signatures.

    Thanks.

    Abe: posted in "regular mode"

    This message has been edited by AdminBen, Saturday, 2005/10/08 06:49 AM


    Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
    General discussion of moderation procedures
    Thread Reopen Requests
    Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

    New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

    Other useful links:

    Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 7 by ausar_maat, posted 10-08-2005 9:47 AM ausar_maat has not yet responded

      
    ramoss
    Member
    Posts: 3123
    Joined: 08-11-2004


    Message 9 of 49 (250284)
    10-09-2005 2:20 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    09-17-2005 5:46 PM


    I happened to disagree with both.. but I see that in both ID and in the bible codes , you do see the HUMAN desire to see patterns. Anytime someone finds a "prediction" in the bible codes, it is always after the fact, and retrofitting it into place.. any book of significent size you can do the same thing. People have done it with the old testament, the new testament, the koran, and Gone with the Wind.

    Now, if someone was able to give me a prediction from an event that has not happened eyt, and was signifigent accurate, and came to pass , I would be more impressed. It hasn't, of course.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 09-17-2005 5:46 PM Nuggin has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 34 by inkorrekt, posted 02-25-2006 4:27 PM ramoss has not yet responded

      
    joshua221 
    Inactive Suspended Member


    Message 10 of 49 (250321)
    10-09-2005 8:50 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    09-17-2005 5:46 PM


    I don't like your style very much, you try to set someone up with your opening posts, and when someone (usually new here, or new in general to debate) says something in accordance to what you ask, you pounce on them. It's really not right. You have also pretended to believe that the earth was flat, that wasn't as funny as you may have thought it to have been, especially as it was an insult to some Christians on the forum. I don't see how you learn with this process, why do you do it? To increase your "reputation" as a good poster? I dunno, it seems like your a little out of control in the fashion of your OP's. Maybe it's just me.


    I am smiling.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 09-17-2005 5:46 PM Nuggin has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 11 by crashfrog, posted 10-09-2005 9:16 PM joshua221 has not yet responded
     Message 12 by Lammy, posted 10-09-2005 11:25 PM joshua221 has not yet responded
     Message 14 by Nuggin, posted 10-10-2005 4:14 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

      
    crashfrog
    Inactive Member


    Message 11 of 49 (250331)
    10-09-2005 9:16 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by joshua221
    10-09-2005 8:50 PM


    I dunno, it seems like your a little out of control in the fashion of your OP's. Maybe it's just me.

    I think it's just you. I think it's a great OP, and it really gets right to the heart of the matter - why is it that, when the same act of "intelligence detection" ID proponents use to justify their ideas is applied to other fields, they dismiss it?

    Another way to phrase the question: what basis is there for rejecting the "Bible Code" phenomenon as an intelligent signal that doesn't also apply to the detection of intelligent signals in biology?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by joshua221, posted 10-09-2005 8:50 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

      
    Lammy
    Member
    Posts: 3616
    From: Chicago
    Joined: 03-29-2004


    Message 12 of 49 (250359)
    10-09-2005 11:25 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by joshua221
    10-09-2005 8:50 PM


    It's not his fault some people just don't have that great of a reading comprehension score.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by joshua221, posted 10-09-2005 8:50 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

      
    Yaro
    Member (Idle past 4834 days)
    Posts: 1797
    Joined: 07-12-2003


    Message 13 of 49 (250388)
    10-10-2005 8:36 AM
    Reply to: Message 5 by ausar_maat
    10-08-2005 7:01 AM


    ...just bought the Micheal Behe book

    Careful with that one ausar, be advised that Behe's ID has been thuroughly debunked.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 5 by ausar_maat, posted 10-08-2005 7:01 AM ausar_maat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 16 by ausar_maat, posted 10-10-2005 9:57 PM Yaro has not yet responded
     Message 35 by inkorrekt, posted 02-25-2006 4:29 PM Yaro has not yet responded

      
    Nuggin
    Member (Idle past 830 days)
    Posts: 2965
    From: Los Angeles, CA USA
    Joined: 08-09-2005


    Message 14 of 49 (250473)
    10-10-2005 4:14 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by joshua221
    10-09-2005 8:50 PM


    Confused by this personal attack
    Well Prophex I have to say I'm confused by this very personal and complete out of left field attack on me as a poster.

    I don't like your style very much, you try to set someone up with your opening posts, and when someone (usually new here, or new in general to debate) says something in accordance to what you ask, you pounce on them.

    How am I "setting someone up" here? I went out of my way to put my views in the first few sentences. Something that I haven't seen on any other threads.

    Further, in what way am I "pouncing" on them. I am asking a question. If you choose to answer it, answer it. I don't have any special argument up my sleeve. In fact, I spell out my entire argument in my OP.

    You have also pretended to believe that the earth was flat, that wasn't as funny as you may have thought it to have been, especially as it was an insult to some Christians on the forum.

    How would my beliefs in a flat earth be insulting to Christians? Care to explain that one to me?

    I don't see how you learn with this process, why do you do it? To increase your "reputation" as a good poster?

    Is there some poster reputation ratings guide that I'm unaware of? I understood it to be pretty much take it as you see it. Are we voting on most popular poster or something?

    it seems like your a little out of control in the fashion of your OP's. Maybe it's just me.

    Care to give me an example of how my OP here was "out of control"?


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by joshua221, posted 10-09-2005 8:50 PM joshua221 has not yet responded

      
    arachnophilia
    Member (Idle past 316 days)
    Posts: 9069
    From: god's waiting room
    Joined: 05-21-2004


    Message 15 of 49 (250505)
    10-10-2005 5:14 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Nuggin
    09-17-2005 5:46 PM


    brendan mckay
    biblecodes are pure unadulterated bs.

    http://cs.anu.edu.au/people/bdm/dilugim/torah.html

    this is brendan mckay's page. if you saw the special i think you saw, they gave him about 30 seconds -- never mind the fact that he has totally refuted nearly every claim the coders make. i've heard him speak in person, as an invited lecturer at southeastern conference on graph theory, combinatorics and computing.

    arguments like this one are especially convincing.

    it's basically another case of "unintelligent design." actual intelligence can make much, much better codes.

    This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 10-10-2005 05:15 PM


    אָרַח

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Nuggin, posted 09-17-2005 5:46 PM Nuggin has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 17 by Nuggin, posted 10-11-2005 1:42 AM arachnophilia has responded

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019