The Divine signature in the Torah

Bs'dThe only problem with that statement is, that it is the rantings of a layman, who cannot bring the slightest proof for his blabber.The fact of the matter is, that the religion hating scientific community has had now 8 years to refute these papers, and they came up with exactly nothting.There are plenty mathematicians out there with a lot of time on their hands who, just like you, hate religion and the Bible codes, who could have written a rebuttal in the past eight years, and made a name for themselves as the one who debunked the Bible codes.That just didn't happen, for the simple reason that there is no rebuttal, and they didn't want to make a fool of themselves.

[duplicate]Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Except that the rebutting has already been done by a very capable mathematician. There is no longer any name to be made by rebutting Bible codes and outside of discussions like this, very little interest. It's already the case that essentially nobody capable of doing the math believes in this stuff. People believe in God or don't complete independent of this stuff.Again, a proper discussion for those who cannot evaluate the codes first hand starts with discussion of the paper and the rebuttals. Since your guys published last, they have had the last word.But just as we don't declare the lawyer who has the last closing statement the winner, we don't declare the person who published the last article to be the winner either. At some point all arguments, just like this one, must end. Absent an "I yield", we decide based on the presentation.I would welcome a discussion with someone ready to defend the Bible codes on their merits according to the papers you've referenced. But I don't think that's going to happen here. Not with you anyway.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Does this nonsense even convince you?You think, seriously, that mathematicians would "make a name for themselves" by stooping to re-debunk an already-debunked bit of trivial crackpottery?I have to wonder about the mental world that you live in. Can you think of one scientist or mathematician, just one, whose reputation rests on publicly humiliating a harmless crank?

Not that your entire rep rests on it, but I did cheer your post.

Bs'dExcept that that rebuttal is rebutted. You are erroneously mixing up law with science.See here how it works in science:

You keep going on about "proof". You're a religionist. You believe in "proof" ( and, no, I'm not speaking of the mathematics type). This is a science forum. The rest of us know there is no such thing. You sure have that christian martyr complex down pat. Fact is science is at best totally ambivalent to your religions and at worst ignore your religions altogether. When it comes to science folks doing science stuff your religions are given no more thought than a lion gives a flea.Don't flatter yourself that the scientific community is out to get you. They couldn't care less about you or your fictitious codes. They have already shown that it's bunk and there is no more to consider. That a few yahoos continue to push the subject isn't even a source of amusement anymore. Your codes, like your religions, shown to be false, are ignored. Have you read any of the papers? They deal with the preparations of the data and the algorithms of the search. Even in the mathematical sense they are not "proofs", nor were they meant to be "proofs", of anything. They do not prove your codes. They mean nothing.Your bible codes are a dead fable propped up by a handful of religious fanatics. They are useless. You cannot show anyone otherwise no matter how much BS you put up on this site.

You are literally advertising your ignorance in your signature.Seriously? You actually believe that the scientific method is to believe whoever last published an article?

And it's in italics and bold and green - just so you know for sure he's a fruitloop.

No. No.---You need some new lies. Or the truth, that has some merits.

Honest question:Are there any scientists or mathematicians who support the Bible Codes that aren't Jewish?

Harold Gans obviously is clueless about a number of things.I sure would love to see some official verification that he actually worked for the NSA as a code breaker.

I have yet to see any scientists that support the bible code. I guess Rips may qualify as a scientist, but other than him who else is there.

He is not interested in actual dialog. He just wants to use this forum as a pulpit for his crackpot ideas. And the moment he is finally talked into a corner, he will quietly step away. Check out his other idiotic thread regarding how the Jews and the Torah were responsible for 'predicting' the benefits of circumcision. Except that once he was faced with proof that it was actually a practice started by the Egyptians almost a thousand years before Jews or the Torah even existed, rather than fessing up, he just merely faded away.I'll give him credit on being a little more relentless here. Although it just makes him look like a loon.

Bs'dYes. Yes.Bring arguments, don't be just a naysayer.