Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Mythical Bible
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 16 of 87 (106460)
05-07-2004 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by crashfrog
05-07-2004 8:07 PM


crashfrog writes:
The distance from Earth can be calculated by parallax, and once you know the distance to all the other bodies you can place them in order from the sun.
Nice frog. This is a preemptive strike at the numerous people on this forum that always ask the question "how do you know such and such works?"
I can personally testify that paralax works! I've done calcultions. In fact, every student that has taken astro-physics should be able to testify this. Unless you are desdamona, which doesn't believe that mathematics and physics are genuine, it is wise on your part not to question this.

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by crashfrog, posted 05-07-2004 8:07 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Chiroptera, posted 05-07-2004 8:35 PM coffee_addict has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 87 (106463)
05-07-2004 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by coffee_addict
05-07-2004 8:20 PM


Astrophysics? Anyone who knows anything about surveying here on earth knows about parallax.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by coffee_addict, posted 05-07-2004 8:20 PM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by coffee_addict, posted 05-07-2004 9:03 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
jt
Member (Idle past 5596 days)
Posts: 239
From: Upper Portion, Left Coast, United States
Joined: 04-26-2004


Message 18 of 87 (106467)
05-07-2004 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by crashfrog
05-07-2004 8:07 PM


Ned said:
In the end, if it is important to get the best possible answer. I do agree that each issue stands on its own.
How do we evaluate the truth of statements like "The sun stood still..." or "cloud by day and fire by night" which refer to events that didn't leave evidence?
Crashfrog said:
In other words, you could apply textual criticism techniques to determine who wrote what in your encyclopedia, where.
So, apply it to the Bible. Does the Bible give a consistent account of all events? Or are there just as many inconsistences as you would expect for a written account of several oral histories plus some epistemological material from the early Church?
This was the point of my first post. PecosGeorge said (and Rocket implied) that we could not evaluate the reliability of the Bible. I claimed that we could evaluate the reliability of the Bible. We do that by answering the type of questions you just asked.
There is another thread somewhere to debate whether or not the Bible is reliable, all I was saying was that it is possible to tell if the Bible is reliable or not.
The distance from Earth can be calculated by parallax, and once you know the distance to all the other bodies you can place them in order from the sun.
Do you have first hand proof that the methods used to calculate parallax are accurate? Have you seen the parallax measured to know that the correct method was used? How about the equipment. Did you make it, so you know it works properly? Did you actually read the results and do the calculations for yourself?
If the answer is no to any of those questions, you had to trust someone about the distance of Mars from the earth. And if you have not had the same level of involvement in the measuring of the distances to the other planets, you are trusting that those measurements are valid, too.
This is what I meant by "it is necessary to trust something as a whole."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by crashfrog, posted 05-07-2004 8:07 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 05-07-2004 9:22 PM jt has replied
 Message 29 by crashfrog, posted 05-07-2004 10:32 PM jt has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 19 of 87 (106470)
05-07-2004 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Chiroptera
05-07-2004 8:35 PM


Chiroptera writes:
Astrophysics? Anyone who knows anything about surveying here on earth knows about parallax.
Damn, I forgot about surveying. Too much astro-physics on my part.
Anyway, I just thought I'd make the statement about it. Too many creos are doubting math and stuff these days.

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Chiroptera, posted 05-07-2004 8:35 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 9:24 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 20 of 87 (106474)
05-07-2004 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by jt
05-07-2004 8:43 PM


Some are easy
How do we evaluate the truth of statements like "The sun stood still..."
Since the earth stopping would leave a lot of evidence (a LOT) the lack of it demonstrats that this one didn't happen.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 8:43 PM jt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 9:25 PM NosyNed has replied

  
jt
Member (Idle past 5596 days)
Posts: 239
From: Upper Portion, Left Coast, United States
Joined: 04-26-2004


Message 21 of 87 (106475)
05-07-2004 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by coffee_addict
05-07-2004 9:03 PM


For the record, I do not doubt that we can accurately measure the distance between planets by using parallax, nor do I doubt that we can accurately conduct surveys using parallax. Nor am I doubting math; I just did an afternoon full of calc homework, and actually enjoyed most of it.
I just wanted to set the record straight before it got all bent up.

Benoit Mandelbrot is not a type of wine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by coffee_addict, posted 05-07-2004 9:03 PM coffee_addict has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by NosyNed, posted 05-07-2004 9:34 PM jt has not replied

  
jt
Member (Idle past 5596 days)
Posts: 239
From: Upper Portion, Left Coast, United States
Joined: 04-26-2004


Message 22 of 87 (106476)
05-07-2004 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by NosyNed
05-07-2004 9:22 PM


Re: Some are easy
Since the earth stopping would leave a lot of evidence (a LOT) the lack of it demonstrats that this one didn't happen.
Like what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 05-07-2004 9:22 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by NosyNed, posted 05-07-2004 9:26 PM jt has replied
 Message 24 by jar, posted 05-07-2004 9:26 PM jt has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 23 of 87 (106477)
05-07-2004 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by jt
05-07-2004 9:25 PM


Re: Some are easy
Like what?
What would happen if you take things moving at 700 to 900 mph and stop it suddenly?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 9:25 PM jt has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by jt, posted 05-08-2004 2:40 PM NosyNed has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 24 of 87 (106478)
05-07-2004 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by jt
05-07-2004 9:25 PM


Re: Some are easy
Well, what happens to passengers in a car if it hits a tree and suddenly stops?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 9:25 PM jt has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by NosyNed, posted 05-07-2004 9:36 PM jar has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 25 of 87 (106479)
05-07-2004 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by jt
05-07-2004 9:24 PM


Of course
Didn't think otherwise. You might have picked a better example or maybe that one does make the point. We all have limited time and resources and make judgement calls about which information to accept and which to check.
You can try the measurement method out yourself. If you are concerned that the answer is wrong you can, at least in principle, reproduce the measurement.
Any such measurements are published with details on how they are done so one can review them.
In general we can't go to that level of detail. Mostly we might try to think through what we are being told and see if it hangs together with what else we accept.
Any measurement of the distance of Mars should jib with it's behaviour in the sky. We can also tie it in with our experience (or even measurements) of the behavior of gravity. Does all this hang together?
At some point we may simply not have the deep understanding necessary to check things. If someone tells me that string theory and M-branes produces math that "works" I might have to accept that. I'm sure as heck not going to check the math. I like it that someon is and I can if I'm willing to put in the effort.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 9:24 PM jt has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 26 of 87 (106480)
05-07-2004 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by jar
05-07-2004 9:26 PM


A car?
We're talking about speeds 10 to 15 times higher and energy levels 100 to 200 times higher!
Imagine the tidal waves!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 05-07-2004 9:26 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by jar, posted 05-07-2004 9:48 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
SRO2 
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 87 (106482)
05-07-2004 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by jt
05-07-2004 4:43 PM


Oh really?
You compared "The Wizard of Oz" to the bible, and it seems like you set up the debate in such a way as to show that "The Wizard of Oz" is not falsifiable. Then you were going to return to the comparison between the Bible and the wizard of oz and claim that the Bible is not falsifiable.
If you have a good analogy you can do something like that, but the analogy you made is very flawed, so you can't draw valid conslusions from it.
How is the analogy "flawed"? I would like an example rather than an unsupported statement.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 4:43 PM jt has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 28 of 87 (106484)
05-07-2004 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by NosyNed
05-07-2004 9:36 PM


Re: A car?
Yup. Just to put things in perspective, 60 MPH is 88 feet per second.
Now depending on where you are on the earths surface you may be moving at around 1000 miles an hour or or about 1400 feet per second.
Now if the Earth stops, you, and everything that is not locked down (water, trees, rocks, cattle, soldiers, etc) will continue moving at 1400 feet per second.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by NosyNed, posted 05-07-2004 9:36 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 29 of 87 (106498)
05-07-2004 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by jt
05-07-2004 8:43 PM


There is another thread somewhere to debate whether or not the Bible is reliable, all I was saying was that it is possible to tell if the Bible is reliable or not.
I agree, and I'm pleased that you do, too.
I just want to nail down the scope, though. Pretend for a moment that the Bible consists entirely of two statements: Verse 1 and Verse 2.
It's possible to know if these verses are reliable or not. But it's a mistake to prove the reliability of Verse 1 and then pretend that you've simultaneously established the reliablity of Verse 2.
I'm not accusing you of doing this, yet. It's just that I'd like to pre-empt a situation where a creationist cherry-picks the accurate parts of the Bible and claims that, because the Bible is accurate for those statements, it must be accurate for all statements.
Statements are accurate based only on their own merits. Agreed?
Do you have first hand proof that the methods used to calculate parallax are accurate?
Sure. I did it in Boy Scouts, once. And the trigonometry is pretty simple, and well-proven.
If the answer is no to any of those questions, you had to trust someone about the distance of Mars from the earth.
Again, though, I don't have to trust that person. I can do it myself. I do choose to trust the astronomical authorities, but only because I'm satisfied that their methodology is valid, not because they're authorities.
But I don't have that option with religion. I can't choose to be a prophet - no amount of study is going to get me a vision of/from God unless he chooses to send one.
I don't trust anybody because they're an authority. If I do trust, it's because I'm satisified the methodlogy is valid, and because I'm sure that if I bothered to, I could replicate their results. I can't do that with the statements in the Bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 8:43 PM jt has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 30 of 87 (106499)
05-07-2004 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by jt
05-07-2004 7:04 PM


This is where people make the BIG Error,,,
one that is so big they can't recover from it.
They say:
Faced with a glaring inconsistency, I would probably assume that the majority ws right and that Mars is the fourth planet from the sun.
That is just an appeal to authority. They have a specific question there that can easily be verified. It is NOT a matter of of who has the majority opinion.
If everybody in the world believed that Mars was the ninth planet, it would still be the fouth planet and you personally can verify it.
If you watch the planets, some will pass in between the Earth and the Sun. Those that do are inside the orbit of Earth. You count them.
You can do the same looking in the other direction. You can physically see that Mars is between the Earth and Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus.
When you say you would assume that the majority is right, you are falling in the old trap of Authority, and Science does not work like that.
This is very important when looking at the Mythical Bible or the real Bible. When there are things in the Bible that simply could not have happened, or where all of the evidence seems to show that they did not happen, then you need to assume that the Bible was meant to be read figuratively and not literally.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by jt, posted 05-07-2004 7:04 PM jt has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024