|
QuickSearch
Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] |
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9024 total) |
| |
Ryan Merkle | |
Total: 882,871 Year: 517/14,102 Month: 517/294 Week: 4/269 Day: 4/45 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Divine signature in the Torah | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Finally you provide a pointer. But Theodoric has already done that for you. He also provided a link to the paper, the published rebuttal, and a lot of other critical material. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Comparing yourself to Galileo is worth 40 points on John Baez's famous crackpot index. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html quote: Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
so, i'm not a mathematician either. but my father is. his erdos number is 2 (i've personally met paul erdos, when i was very young, before he died), and i have pretty close ties to many 2's and 3's and i think a few 1's, big shots in the mathematical community. i've also had pleasure of hearing brendan mckay, the anti-code source linked repeatedly in this thread, speak publicly on the topic at an international mathematics conference attended by many prominent mainstream mathematicians. suffice to say, he represents an authority in the field. michael drosnin does not. though eliyahu rips does seem to be a Ph.D. mathematician, i don't think that is the case for his co-authors (witzum and rotenberg), and his work was largely discredited by, well, brendan mckay. and there hasn't been much other work on the subject, because that was that. this is not the sort of topic that mathematicians usually concern themselves with, even the applied/crypto sorts of mathematicians. at the conference i saw dr. mckay give his lecture, it was scheduled as a "fun aside", and a public lecture (the bible codes were a hot topic then), and trust me when i say, the audience found it all very funny. the smackdown was pretty thorough. i suggest you read his site, and then his papers, if you want more on the topic. because you're looking to the wrong authorities.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16112 Joined:
|
As you're mathematically illiterate, I'm not going to take your word for whose papers are better than whose.
It has fine details? Where? Do I have to read every seventh letter?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16112 Joined:
|
And yet somehow these alleged six papers don't appear in the program of the conference or in the published proceedings of the conference. Nor does Gans himself. So this looks like a great big lie with a topping of bullshit sauce.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member (Idle past 69 days) Posts: 7051 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: |
If anything there may have been papers on the subject included in oral presentations. But from what I understand this is not at all anything like having it having it being part of the conference. Maybe someone familiar with scientific conferences can illuminate us on what an oral presentation is at a conference. I am not even sure these we actually presented it just seems from my research that there may have been oral presentations of torah codes at some of these conferences.
Could our Eliyahu be a fan of Eliyahu Rips? Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16112 Joined:
|
What he said was "In 2006, at the 18th International Pattern Recognition Conference, which took place in Hong Kong, there were six papers published in support of the Torah codes." I don't see what it can mean for a paper to be published (rather than read) at a conference, unless it means that the paper appeared in the Proceedings of the conference, which they didn't.
So what does Gans mean? Does he mean, as you suggest, that he put on his own unofficial unscheduled sideshow at the time and place where the conference was being held? But then the papers were still not published at the conference. All this makes nonsense --- double nonsense --- of his claim that: According to scientific rules, in order for critics to disprove the Torah codes, they would have to find fatal flaws in each of the six papers presenting a different approach and a different code. This happened five years ago, and to date not a single flaw was found in any of these papers. Therefore, for all intent and purposes, the Torah codes have been scientifically proven, and the debate is over. Apart from the fact that science doesn't work like that (which is why no-one has ever been awarded a Nobel Prize In Triviality And Obscurity), if the papers aren't there in the scientific literature for anyone to pick holes in, then the alleged fact that no-one has done so is neither here nor there.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16112 Joined: |
But here of course you're not actually telling the truth. Plainly the acrostics I've made do indeed have another easily identifiable use: a towering, looming, blatantly obvious purpose, since as well as their hidden "bullshit" message these posts also serve the purpose of debunking the frequent mistaken reasonings to be found widely in your posts. That as well as doing this they also give us acrostics more skilled than those you hail as showing God's ability is the icing on the cake. Buthereofcourseyo
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16112 Joined: |
N.B: For "show" read "ignore, misrepresent, cherry-pick, or just plain lie about, as expedience dictates". For "big experts in those fields" read "anyone, no matter how marginal, stupid, wrong or obsolete who said something that Eliyahu thinks he can make use of, since for the purposes of his rhetoric this automatically elevates them to the heights of their profession". For examples of this usage, see Eliyahu's other threads, passim.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1011 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd Wrong. Only SOME authorities say it is bullocks. Others say it is authenic.
Right, and they refused a refutation of the refutation, which is now presented at the 18th International Congres for Pattern Recognition in 2006, together with 5 other peer reviewed papers on the Bible codes. And that "refutation" in Statistical Science did not give a refutation, but it only was a ridiculous accusation of a wide spread conspiracy to cook the data in such a way that it would give a meaningfull result. That the result was meaningfull was something they couldn't deny.
The answer has been given in a peer reviewed refutation.
You have no idea what you are talking about. If there were any flaws in it, it would never have been published in a peer reviewed journal to begin with. Certainly not after six years of studying it and calling in the worlds biggest experts, because of the obvious very controversial content.
Let me tell you again how science works: In 2006, at the 18th International Pattern Recognition Conference, which took place in Hong Kong, there were six papers published in support of the Torah codes. All of these papers were subject to peer review, which means that fellow scientists reviewed the papers and could note any flaw in the research or logic that they might find. Were they to find an uncorrectable flaw, the paper would be rejected. One of the papers that I co-authored proved that the original paper describing the “Great Rabbis Experiment” was not a hoax, and that the experiment with the rabbis and the cities of their birth and death was valid. That paper referenced the critic's 1999 Statistical Science paper, so that the reviewers could easily refer to it. So, for all intent and purposes, the Torah codes have been scientifically proven, and the debate is over. . Edited by Eliyahu, : No reason given. "The only reality is mind and observations." Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16112 Joined:
|
Being wrong twice is no substitute for being right once.
See message #80.
But this is not true, as one can see, and I have just seen, by reading the paper.
Have you gone completely mad? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1011 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd Let me guess: Because you, in all your wisdom, cannot find it, therefore it doesn't exist, and it is all bs?? ICPR 2006: Hong Kong, China 18th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR 2006), 20-24 August 2006, Hong Kong, China. IEEE Computer Society 2006 ISBN 0-7695-2521-0 http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/...f/icpr/icpr2006-3.html Robert M. Haralick: Basic Concepts For Testing The Torah Code Hypothesis. 104-109 Robert M. Haralick: Testing The Torah Code Hypothesis: The Experimental Protocol. 110-115 Eliyahu Rips, Art Levitt: The Twin Towers Cluster in Torah Codes. 408-411 Art Levitt: Component Analysis of Torah Code Phrases. 412-416 Nachum Bombach, Harold Gans: Patterns of Co-Linear Equidistant Letter Sequences and Verses. 1248-1250 Nachum Bombach, Harold Gans: Patterns of Co-Linear Equidistant Letter Sequences and Verses. 149-151 "The only reality is mind and observations." Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eliyahu Member (Idle past 1011 days) Posts: 288 From: Judah Joined: |
Bs'd Whether you like it or not, that's how science works.
See message 87
That is true, as one can see, by just reading the the paper.
Have you gone completely mad that you think flawed papers are published in peer reviewed scientific journals?? "The only reality is mind and observations." Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TrueCreation Inactive Member |
quote: This happens quite often. You also previously referenced conference abstracts as if these were 'peer reviewed literature', demonstrating that you haven't the slightest clue what you are talking about.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16112 Joined: |
.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021