Archaeologica.org

To be fair, just because you follow a religion doesn't necessarily make you a mindless robot .... just makes it more likely you could become one.

You really are out of step with the powers-that-be, aren't you?

if you are talking to me, then yes. i have opposed many projects taken up by my undergrad alma matar and would not mindlessly go along with their plans. needless to say, i am persona non grata among that particular group.

Religion is about blindly believing whatever these phony holy joes tell their followers

religion yes, true christianity --no. i say true christianity because a lot that passes for christianity in general really isn't following Christ

How else do you get people to strap themselves with dynamite and blow themselves to kingdom come?

yes, Islam is a good example of this, Jim Jones is another, the cult that committed mass suicide a few years is another. i doubt if you could get christians to kill themselves but to kill others there are a few fanatics that would do that (the inquisition is a prime example, eric rudolph is another)

for me, though i disagree with dever and finkelstein and other minimalists, i do it based upon many factors not just because the Bible says so. the Bible tells us to be able to give an answer for why we believe and i can't do that if i am a mindless robot.

needless to say, i am persona non grata among that particular group.

Be happy that you are not living a few hundred years earlier...your 'good christians' would have burned you at the stake.

More on the so-called "ark."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... s-ark.html

Bridge, the Oxford timber specialist, points out that it would also be impossible for a boat to run aground at 13,000 feet.

"If you put all the water in the world together, melting both the ice caps and all the glaciers, you still wouldn't reach anywhere near the top of the mountain," he said.

Two problems:

1. The scientists are using math to determine how high all the available water on earth would reach and, as we all know, addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division are fallible.

2. These pesky scientists aren't allowing for a miracle when it comes to how much water is actually available on the earth.

You can just mail me a check Arch.

Don't let my old stats prof read #1. According to him as long as you make sure 1+1=2, 1+2=3, 1+3=4, etc. You can't be wrong. His first words were, "If it can't be expressed in figures, it's not fact it's theory."

Otherwise, garbage in, garbage out.

Hehe. If my former physics instructor heard me say that, even in jest, he would turn bright red and likely explode on the spot.

Quote:
Bridge, the Oxford timber specialist, points out that it would also be impossible for a boat to run aground at 13,000 feet.

"If you put all the water in the world together, melting both the ice caps and all the glaciers, you still wouldn't reach anywhere near the top of the mountain," he said.

been through this before, heard it a dozen times, it is redundent and yes coming only from a human perspective. you are missing a vital piece of data in that statement.

These pesky scientists aren't allowing for a miracle when it comes to how much water is actually available on the earth

those pesky scientists aren't reading or including all the sources of water.

If it can't be expressed in figures, it's not fact it's theory."

and you say i have blind faith, that is a prime example of blind faith in the fallible. numbers do not cover everything especially when free will is not within math's control.

nor can math predict what people will do when they have faith. math is limited.

If my former physics instructor heard me say that, even in jest, he would turn bright red and likely explode on the spot.

shall i send him a copy? but then again those remarks sound a lot like arrogance is alive and well in the physics and math departments.

nor can math predict what people will do when they have faith.

Usually they beat the shit out of people who have different faiths. And that is an almost mathematical certainty.

the passage also talks about the fountains of the deep and since we have no idea how much water is under the earth, it remains a strong possibility.

all the available water on earth

those words limit his data right there, he is focused only on the amount of water physically on the earth, i think one would need to factor in the amount of water already present in the clouds.

so limiting one's research does not present the full picture and the conclusion become erroneous (let's not forget a theory of how much mositure is actually in the air as well).

when math and science fail to go beyond certain parameters, then their gathering of data is not complete, especially if they are limited to human logic and understanding which would nullify any objectivity, by the way.

archaeologist wrote:

Quote:
Bridge, the Oxford timber specialist, points out that it would also be impossible for a boat to run aground at 13,000 feet.

"If you put all the water in the world together, melting both the ice caps and all the glaciers, you still wouldn't reach anywhere near the top of the mountain," he said.

been through this before, heard it a dozen times, it is redundent and yes coming only from a human perspective. you are missing a vital piece of data in that statement.

Yes. They are missing the magic, as I already said. I'm beating you to the punch.

archaeologist wrote:

These pesky scientists aren't allowing for a miracle when it comes to how much water is actually available on the earth

those pesky scientists aren't reading or including all the sources of water.

Which sources are they missing? Be explicit.

archaeologist wrote:

If it can't be expressed in figures, it's not fact it's theory."

and you say i have blind faith, that is a prime example of blind faith in the fallible. numbers do not cover everything especially when free will is not within math's control.

So what you are saying is that math is not fallible but that math can be applied incorrectly?

archaeologist wrote:[nor can math predict what people will do when they have faith. math is limited.

Classic case of a little knowledge in the hands of the incompetent. It's obvious you have difficulty separating fiction from non-fiction, but trust me on this one: Hari Seldon was a fictional character and there is no such thing as psychohistory.

archaeologist wrote:

If my former physics instructor heard me say that, even in jest, he would turn bright red and likely explode on the spot.

shall i send him a copy? but then again those remarks sound a lot like arrogance is alive and well in the physics and math departments.

Sure, if you'd like. He is retired from teaching now but the last I knew he still spends his summers at NASA/Ames hunting NEOs.

They are missing the magic

Classic case of a little knowledge in the hands of the incompetent. It's obvious you have difficulty separating fiction from non-fiction

why do you have to go to the personal attack? this could have been a nice discussion. you and it seems others have the same type of blind faith in math, that minimalist accuses christians of having in the Bible.

you feel that math can do everything but guess what..it can't. as an example, when a spaceship is sent into space, math can only calculate the probability that it won't be hit by an asteroid, it cannot say for 100% positive that it won't be. BY EXPERIENCE NOT MATH we know that the odds of being hit are slim.

math cannot predict freedom of choice nor can it control free will nor the giving into temptation, it can only give the probability of an action based upon a control set of previous actions and has no way of factoring in future ones given the mitigating influences that go along with that freedom.


this is why scientists and mathematicians are surprised and confounded when things do not work according to their calculations. einstein so believed in his formulas it is said he declared nature is wrong because the formula is right. what arrogance and ridiculousness. (paraphrase of the quote)

actually i don't have difficulty separating fact from fiction, it is those who limit their understanding, their logic, their perceptions that fail to grasp the innumerable avenues of and solutions to problems.

So what you are saying is that math is not fallible but that math can be applied incorrectly?

are you sure you wrote it correctly as it makes no sense whatsoever especially when you place it next to my quote.

Arch, why is it that every discussion with you turns into "fruit salad." You seem to like to mix apples and oranges then say they are the same because they are both fruit. Math and free will are not the same thing, in fact they're not even both fruit. Math deals with the tangible, whereas free-will deals with the elusive. That's why the bible is so off. It's perceived truth deals only with what cannot be proven. That's why you stick to the same old argument ad nauseum.

why is it that every discussion with you turns into "fruit salad

i am not comparing apples and oranges, i am demonstrating the limitation of mat, just like science, then showing that those people who like those areas display and use the same faith that most christians use with the Bible.

math is like other sciences, it is a tool not the definitive answer mechanism. it is fallible and not all encompassing or all comprehensive. this does not take away its value but puts it in its proper place.

That's why the bible is so off

you have it backwards. the Bible isn't off and it doesn't have to conform to man but the reverse. the limitations placed on math do not allow it to take into account that which it cannot understand or define. math is not infallible nor canit give 100% of the answers that lie outside its territory. yes it can do so for addition, subtraction, etc., but when it attempts to rule over that which is outside its authority, then its weakness is exposed.

again, i am not putting down math or science but trying to get you to see the proper place for each and that is, they are just limited tools which aid us in understanding and knowing what is going on in the world.

putting them beyond their 'talents' leads to problems and false information and that is wrong.

archaeologist wrote:

They are missing the magic

Classic case of a little knowledge in the hands of the incompetent. It's obvious you have difficulty separating fiction from non-fiction

why do you have to go to the personal attack? this could have been a nice discussion. you and it seems others have the same type of blind faith in math, that minimalist accuses christians of having in the Bible.

Don't confuse attacks with statements of fact. Math is simply a tool, not a religion. That's the problem with people like you. You transfer your religious hysteria to everyone else and assume that everyone else views science with the same religious zeal that you view your religion. It's a limitation in your world view.

archaeologist wrote:you feel that math can do everything but guess what..it can't. as an example, when a spaceship is sent into space, math can only calculate the probability that it won't be hit by an asteroid, it cannot say for 100% positive that it won't be. BY EXPERIENCE NOT MATH we know that the odds of being hit are slim.

Thank you Captain Obvious. See my note above.

archaeologist wrote:math cannot predict freedom of choice nor can it control free will nor the giving into temptation, it can only give the probability of an action based upon a control set of previous actions and has no way of factoring in future ones given the mitigating influences that go along with that freedom.

Obviously.

archaeologist wrote:this is why scientists and mathematicians are surprised and confounded when things do not work according to their calculations. einstein so believed in his formulas it is said he declared nature is wrong because the formula is right. what arrogance and ridiculousness. (paraphrase of the quote)

actually i don't have difficulty separating fact from fiction, it is those who limit their understanding, their logic, their perceptions that fail to grasp the innumerable avenues of and solutions to problems.

Some people feel that magic is an acceptable solution when other solutions are too difficult or too slow in the coming. Some people do not.

archaeologist wrote:

So what you are saying is that math is not fallible but that math can be applied incorrectly?

are you sure you wrote it correctly as it makes no sense whatsoever especially when you place it next to my quote.

I'm quite sure.

I think we agree that any tool can be used and/or misused. The creationist's habit of misusing science to justify their own bizarre theories is well known for instance. The place we disagree is on what constitutes viable and useful knowledge and what methods are universally useful in its attainment. In short, the knowledge that makes it through the error-correcting machinery of science is useful to everyone. The knowledge that is attained via faith, mystical works, and tales of magic is only of use to the believer in the magic.

The tragedy of religion is that when the scientific method can't be applied to something, the religous abandon their incredulity and reach out for any answer that satisifies their child-like desire to have answers NOW. In essence, it reduces the believer to little more than a baby with a pacifier.