The Bible's Buried Secrets

[DWill]

Those are good points. I was thinking how ironic it is that the Bible literalists talk about not following man's way but following God's instead. By sticking to an explanation for the world that has been shown to be wrong, and therefore indisputably the creation of people, they're doing the opposite of what they think they are. And the materialist, by contrast, is not following a man-made system and therefore could be said to be the one closer to "God."

[Azrael]

Rubbish. If it was announced tomorrow that only grant applications for research in support of the Biblical creation story would be approved I bet that a majority of the application writers would suddenly find that area of research fascinating.

We know you believe that. Somehow you've convinced yourself that scientific results follow our desires. It's just not clicking for you that the results follow reality, and they do this in spite of our desires. It doesn't matter what you desire. Scientists all the way back to the 1600's have desired for religious teachings to be true. The simple, undeniable, unfortunate truth is that the reality is giving us answers that don't match up to biblical teachings. Our universe has given us all the information we need to determine where we've come from, and how the universe works. Missing pieces of information do not discredit the substantial evidence that exists(lack of evidence is not evidence of lack). We have more than enough to determine what is true at this point, in many fields of science. Only disconfirming evidence is disconfirming evidence(go figure).

Would people find your "area" of science fascinating? Perhaps some would. But fascinating doesn't equal truthful. The same people who would find it fascinating already exist right now, have existed since the dawn of science, and are able to get grants for research. For example, research into polonium halos. But then such false results cannot hide from peer review. If it's false, it isn't sustainable.

Here is a challenge that proves your position incorrect: I challenge you to think up an experiment that would support creation that hasn't already been performed. If you're able to do this, I will give up my resistance and believe everything you tell me. Just come up with an experiment(be creative!) that tests the truthfulness of the biblical creation account. It must be a novel experiment that hasn't already been performed and peer reviewed. You don't need to perform this experiment, all you have to do is design it, think it up.

That will be one that will be one sided (experiment).....curious to see if he can prove this logical fallacy.

[stahrwe]

The point isn't that scientists run a spectrum of fairness, the point is that with respect to religious orientation the fix is in. Take the smoking example from above; you are assuming that scientists approach the subject objectively, but suppose, in order to be admitted to graduate level studies and more importantly, tenured teaching positions at universities, you have to demonstrate the you believe smoking not only not to be harmful but beneficial. If you even suggest that smoking is harmful you're out. That is the situation faced by people interested in creation science research. Now, I promise you that I can take any study about smoking and spin the statistics to show that it is not harmful.

[stahrwe]

Here is a challenge that proves your position incorrect: I challenge you to think up an experiment that would support creation that hasn't already been performed. If you're able to do this, I will give up my resistance and believe everything you tell me. Just come up with an experiment(be creative!) that tests the truthfulness of the biblical creation account. It must be a novel experiment that hasn't already been performed and peer reviewed. You don't need to perform this experiment, all you have to do is design it, think it up.

Another load of rubbish. It sure sounds fair doesn't it but it is disingenuous because we would have to agree in advance on the experimental protocals, procedure and what would constitute success/proof. Given your inability to even define evidence that would never happen.

But, since you asked.

1) Send a camera back in time to Day 4 of creation.
2) Retrieve the camera and play the recording.

Now, make good on your promise.

Anticipatian your objections.

1) you said be creative.
2) you said I didn't have to perform the experiment.

[Azrael]

Here is a challenge that proves your position incorrect: I challenge you to think up an experiment that would support creation that hasn't already been performed. If you're able to do this, I will give up my resistance and believe everything you tell me. Just come up with an experiment(be creative!) that tests the truthfulness of the biblical creation account. It must be a novel experiment that hasn't already been performed and peer reviewed. You don't need to perform this experiment, all you have to do is design it, think it up.

Another load of rubbish. It sure sounds fair doesn't it but it is disingenuous because we would have to agree in advance on the experimental protocals, procedure and what would constitute success/proof. Given your inability to even define evidence that would never happen.

But, since you asked.

1) Send a camera back in time to Day 4 of creation.
2) Retrieve the camera and play the recording.

Now, make good on your promise.

Anticipatian your objections.

1) you said be creative.
2) you said I didn't have to perform the experiment.

Well, Robert you got what you ask for, moronic it maybe but its what you ask for.

[Frank 013]

It should have been self-evident that the experiment should also be possible... but then I remember what we are working with.

Later

[Robert Tulip]

If you're able to do this, I will give up my resistance and believe everything you tell me....

.. protocals...

Well, Robert you got what you ask for, moronic it maybe but its what you ask for.

sorry, I can't help it if Interbane wants to play cat and mouse. The source of all this is whether the Bible has a theory of history. I just came across an interesting word in an essay on Dostoyevsky - historiosophy. Clearly the theory of biblical literalism is not historiosophical, in that it fails to see the hidden wisdom in history. By the time of the book of acts, a fairly rank fundamentalist propaganda had taken over what ever authentic spirituality had existed in the origins of Christianity. So I think the bigger question is was there a hidden wisdom in the Gospels?

[lady of shallot]

Stahrwe:

1) Send a camera back in time to Day 4 of creation.
2) Retrieve the camera and play the recording.

Actually isn't this just what the powerful telescopes do in viewing the expansion of the universe? Isn't this what Stahrwe says is flawed?

[Interbane]

Another load of rubbish. It sure sounds fair doesn't it but it is disingenuous because we would have to agree in advance on the experimental protocals, procedure and what would constitute success/proof. Given your inability to even define evidence that would never happen.

But, since you asked.

1) Send a camera back in time to Day 4 of creation.
2) Retrieve the camera and play the recording.

Now, make good on your promise.

Anticipatian your objections.

1) you said be creative.
2) you said I didn't have to perform the experiment.

I suppose I asked for it!

That's an excellent experiment Stahrwe, people will be tripping over themselves to give you money to perform it.

[stahrwe]

It should have been self-evident that the experiment should also be possible... but then I remember what we are working with.

Later

Perhaps you are not familiar enough with the history of science to realize that you are presenting a bogus objection. Throughout said history there have been many theories advanced and experiments proposed which were not yet possible because the technology was not available. Some of Einstein's theories have just recently been tested, and there are currently numerous theories about the origin of the universe which are untestable. I submitted an experiment in accordance with the parameters provided by Interbane. Let's see if he will live up to his end of the bargain.