Skeptic's Challenge

[Tom Sawyer]

Saying that the military, not science, developed the internet is a lot like saying that Engineers did not build the Golden Gate Bridge, instead it was Welders.

Wouldn't it be more like saying the city council build the Golden Gate bridge, since they're the ones who hired the engineers and welders (neither of which should be capitalized) to build it?

 

[DLH]

What is the highest level of education that you reached in science DLH? Elementary school? High-school? Undergrad? Grad?

As Keith said, science doesn't do proves. It also is neutral on anything having to do with supernatural by its very definition, including God. I think the real issue here is that you don't know what science is.

Can you please give us the scientific method and a quick example of how it might be used to say...oh I don't know...how old a tree is?

Everything I was taught about evolution, the primary focus of science in school, is now obsolete. Oh, it was true then, but that has changed because it was really bullshit then like it is now. Evolution is a failed metaphysical experiment.



I'm a little rusty on that since it has been a while, I don't know if I can deduce anything as complicated as a tree, but . . . well, I have this documentary video from that time, quite old. A short clip . . .



Science thought that the Earth rested on giant turtles and elephants when the Bible said it was spherical and rested upon nothing. When science said the daylight came from vapors from the sky and the night's darkness came from the vapors in the ground the Bible had a more accurate explanation.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

It always makes me laugh when people rail against science while on a computer using the internet.

The personal computer was invented by two college dropouts in one of their parent's garage, the Internet was invented by the U.S. Military. Science invented chemical and thermonuclear weapons of mass destruction.

"Science" never invented anything. People invent things, using science. Without the science which was done by people coming before them, nobody would or could ever have invented the PC, the internet or WMD's. Or anything much beyond the basic necessities.

 

[beero1000]

What is the highest level of education that you reached in science DLH? Elementary school? High-school? Undergrad? Grad?

As Keith said, science doesn't do proves. It also is neutral on anything having to do with supernatural by its very definition, including God. I think the real issue here is that you don't know what science is.

Can you please give us the scientific method and a quick example of how it might be used to say...oh I don't know...how old a tree is?

Everything I was taught about evolution, the primary focus of science in school, is now obsolete. Oh, it was true then, but that has changed because it was really bullshit then like it is now. Evolution is a failed metaphysical experiment.



I'm a little rusty on that since it has been a while, I don't know if I can deduce anything as complicated as a tree, but . . . well, I have this documentary video from that time, quite old. A short clip . . .



Science thought that the Earth rested on giant turtles and elephants when the Bible said it was spherical and rested upon nothing. When science said the daylight came from vapors from the sky and the night's darkness came from the vapors in the ground the Bible had a more accurate explanation.

:laughing-smiley-014:laughing-smiley-014:laughing-smiley-014

 

[Keith&Co.]

When science said the daylight came from vapors from the sky and the night's darkness came from the vapors in the ground the Bible had a more accurate explanation.

Yes.
The Books says night is when the sun goes below the compass of the Earth and sleeps in a little house somewhere under the Earth. Right before dawn, the sun rushes to a spot near the sunrise and then climbs up into the hollow area beneath the solid sky.

That's much superior to naturalist attempts to explain the Earth's shape and relationship with the sun.

- - - Updated - - -

Saying that the military, not science, developed the internet is a lot like saying that Engineers did not build the Golden Gate Bridge, instead it was Welders.

Wouldn't it be more like saying the city council build the Golden Gate bridge, since they're the ones who hired the engineers and welders (neither of which should be capitalized) to build it?

Much better, actually, thanx.

 

[KeepTalking]

Heli was Joseph's father in law. That was explained in my post above. They didn't use the term father in law and genealogically that is the way it was done.

The problem with this is that Luke unequivocally states that Heli was Joseph's father, "Joseph, son of Heli". If they had no term for father in law, then there are other ways that relation can be described. If it is true that in that time Jewish genealogy was simply done that way, you need to show that using an unbiased source. I don't know enough about 1st century Jewish genealogy to know if that is the case, and I am not simply going to accept your word for it..

Remember, the Jews in Jesus' time didn't protest his chronology and they surely would have if there were any discrepancies. You are looking at it with a logical, but untrained eye.

I can't remember that because I don't know it to be true. The author who wrote Luke did not write it in Jesus' time. The most charitable dates for that gospel have it being written 50 years later, after the fall of Jerusalem. Those early dates are no longer considered accurate by most scholars, and the most likely date is closer to the beginning of the 2nd century. So, who would have known if there were any discrepancies? Matthew was writing his gospel around the same time, so perhaps he noted a discrepancy, and that is why he has it different. Perhaps it was the other way around, and Luke was correcting Matthew. There are multiple possibilities, one or the other got it wrong, they both got it wrong, or they both got it right, despite the differences. Only the last possibility requires mental gymnastics to overcome, pending your verifiable explanation of 1st century Jewish genealogy.

Then there is the problem that they both seem to agree on Joseph's grandfather, Matthan/Matthat (the names being so similar that they are likely the same person and some examinations of the genealogies treat them as the same person). Did Joseph marry his first cousin, then?

Matthan was the grandfather of Joseph, there were two people named Matthat the firs at Luke 3:29 and the second one, Mary's grandfather at Luke 3:23, 24.

I am referring to the Matthat from Luke 3:24. I will reiterate that Luke presents him as Joseph's grandfather, not Mary's. My other point was that given the very similar names, Matthat and Matthan, there is a likelihood that they are actually the some person, compounding the genealogical issue. They were basically the same name in Hebrew, as they are both derived from the same Hebrew root word, natan, meaning 'to give', and Matthat is never used in the Hebrew bible. Matthat is considered a transliteration. But let's leave the Matthat/Matthan issue aside, and concentrate on your understanding of 1st century Jewish genealogy for the time being.

Further, if you want to claim that Luke was actually tracing the genealogy through Mary, while telling us that he is tracing it through Joseph, that makes Luke a liar. If he would lie about that, what else does he lie about? If we have known liars writing books of the Bible, and lieing about the most mundane and boring aspects of the narrative like genealogies why should we believe the fantastic stuff about gods and miracles?

Luke didn't get it wrong, you did.

Oh, and here I thought the purpose of this thread was to "successfully refute" our challenges. This response seems to fall woefully short of that mark. It certainly looks like one or both of the gospel authors got it wrong, until you are able to prove your contention regarding 1st century Jewish genealogy. And, since you want to claim that Luke said one thing, while a different thing is true, I have no choice but to regard Luke as a liar for the time being.

Next up, and since it is on the same topic I am going to go ahead and ask it now: How is it that Matthew has 41 generations from Abraham to Jesus, and Luke has 56? That is a pretty big difference, don't you think?

That too was explained in the copy and paste and link I supplied on the subject above. You didn't need to have everyone listed in the genealogy, just the relevant ones, and anyway, they were doing different sides of the family.

First off, if you want to present an unbroken line from an ancestor to a descendant, yes, you do need to have everyone in that line listed in the genealogy. Secondly, 15 generations at 20 years per generation is a difference of 300 years, which their tracing different sides of the family does not adequately explain. A few generations would not be a problem, but 15 is. So, pick your poison.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

What is the highest level of education that you reached in science DLH? Elementary school? High-school? Undergrad? Grad?

As Keith said, science doesn't do proves. It also is neutral on anything having to do with supernatural by its very definition, including God. I think the real issue here is that you don't know what science is.

Can you please give us the scientific method and a quick example of how it might be used to say...oh I don't know...how old a tree is?

Everything I was taught about evolution, the primary focus of science in school, is now obsolete. Oh, it was true then, but that has changed because it was really bullshit then like it is now. Evolution is a failed metaphysical experiment.



I'm a little rusty on that since it has been a while, I don't know if I can deduce anything as complicated as a tree, but . . . well, I have this documentary video from that time, quite old. A short clip . . .



Science thought that the Earth rested on giant turtles and elephants when the Bible said it was spherical and rested upon nothing. When science said the daylight came from vapors from the sky and the night's darkness came from the vapors in the ground.

Again, "science" never said those things. If anybody did say them, they might have believed they were "doing science" at the time, but they themselves were not "science". Some who might have been doing science include Pythagoras of Samos who, in the 6th century BCE, proposed that the Earth was a sphere which revolved around the Sun, and Eratosthenes of Cyrene, who measured the circumference of the Earth to a remarkable degree of accuracy in the 3rd century BCE. Meanwhile, the bible claimed the Earth was a circle, not a sphere.

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in."

And it did not "rest upon nothing", according to the bible:

... for the pillars of the earth are the LORD's, and he hath set the world upon them.

 

[Keith&Co.]

And it did not "rest upon nothing", according to the bible:

... for the pillars of the earth are the LORD's, and he hath set the world upon them.

As a contradiction to the foundations of the earth, it says elsewhere:

Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over the empty place, and hangs the earth on nothing.

Of course, a stretched out sphere isn't a sphere. That's an egg. But what's the 'empty place' that it's stretched over?

I think that the stretching refers to the Northern Star, or the spot where the star spends the nights. The spot in the vault of heaven that rises the highest over the earth, which is spread out over the Waters Below like a mud pie. The empty place is the hollow dome between the Waters Above and the Waters Below, under the solid firmament. Kind of an inside-out snow globe.

 

[fta]

Swearing? That's a different issue. It was common in Jesus' day to swear to God, Heaven, the Scriptures etc. Swear to things they had no authority over, and Jesus said not to swear.

I wasn't talking about Jesus saying "Swear not at all" (e.g. courtroom oaths), I was referring to the fact that St. Paul says Christians should not use vulgar or obscene langage. Would St. Paul (or Jesus for that matter) approve of your casual utterance of naughty words like "fuck" and "shit"?

Alright! Alright . . .

We won't go into the debate about whether "alright" is a misspelling of "all right". (I note that 'alright' has even crept into modern translations of the Bible.)

And let's not forget the report of St. Papias, a second-century bishop of Hierapolis. He assures us that Judas died not by hanging, but in a tragic chariot accident:

Judas walked about in this world a sad example of impiety; for his body having swollen to such an extent that he could not pass where a chariot could pass easily, he was crushed by the chariot, so that his bowels gushed out.

Interesting, but not necessarily relevant. I can't say either way because I'm not that familiar with the reference to Judas and don't have the time to research it right now. Are you sure he is talking about the same Judas?

But I can answer your question: yes, he's talking about the same Judas. What makes it (at least semi-)relevant is that it's just another example, like the growth in detail from Mark to Matthew and Luke, of accretion in the retelling of the story, each new storyteller adding a bit of his own imagining to what he heard from the last one.

Indeed. As Cassels pointed out over a hundred years ago, despite apologists assuring us that the New Testament was written by the disciples of Jesus in the first century, this is evidence that that St. Papias, writing as late as the second century, was ignorant of (or disbelieved) the accounts of Matthew and Luke regarding the death of Judas.

There is another fact to which we may briefly refer, which, from another side, shows that the work of Matthew, with which Papias was acquainted, was different from our Gospel. In a fragment from the fourth book of his lost work, which is preserved to us by Oecumenius and Theophylact, Papias relates the circumstances of the death of Judas Iscariot in a manner which is in contradiction to the account in the first Gospel. In Matthew 27:5 the death of the traitor is thus related: "And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed and went and hanged himself." The narrative in Papias is as follows: "Judas walked about in this world a great example of impiety; for his body having swollen so that, on an occasion when a waggon was moving on its way he could not pass it, he was crushed by the waggon, and his bowels gushed out." Theophylact, in connection with this passage, adds other details, also apparently taken from the work of Papias; as, for instance, that, from his excessive corpulency, the eyes of Judas were so swollen that they could not see, and so sunk in his head that they could not be perceived even by the aid of the optical instruments of physicians; and that the rest of his body was covered with running sores and maggots, and so on in the manner of the early Christian ages, whose imagination conjured up the wildest "special providences" to punish the enemies of the faith. As Papias expressly states that he eagerly inquired what the Apostles and, amongst them, what Matthew said, we may conclude that he would not have deliberately contradicted the account given by that Apostle, had he been acquainted with any work attributed to him which contained it.

 

[Kharakov]

It always makes me laugh when people rail against science while on a computer using the internet.

The personal computer was invented by two college dropouts in one of their parent's garage, the Internet was invented by the U.S. Military. Science invented chemical and thermonuclear weapons of mass destruction.

Well, you know how God loves punishing people. Cat-holic mass destruction is next.

 

[Eldarion Lathria]

Friends Be Charitable

DLH has TCS, caused by his severe Jesus addiction. He's not responsible for what he says. It's not him, it's the jesus opium talking. DLH, you CAN get help. Go to new.exchristian.net. They can direct you to where you can get help kicking the jesus habit and get clean and sober.

Eldarion Lathria

 

[dystopian]

It always makes me laugh when people rail against science while on a computer using the internet.

The personal computer was invented by two college dropouts in one of their parent's garage,

No, it wasn't.

The first commercial personal computer was created by Olivetti, an Italian company, in the form of the Programma 101; which came to market in 1964.

the Internet was invented by the U.S. Military.

No, it wasn't.

The internet is not a single 'invention' that can be attributed to any one country or organization.

The fundamental technology at the root of all later internet developments was Packet Switching, a concept developed independently at around the same time by an American scientist (Paul Baran of the RAND corporation), and the British Donald Davies of the National Physics Laboratory. It was the latter's work in particular which would come to greatly influence the creation of ARPANET, which would eventually be the first network to implement TCP/IP (the internet protocol). The military did NOT invent either TCP/IP or ARPANET; they just funded the latter (funding something, and creating something, are two different things you'll note). The internet, however, consists of a great deal more in the way of technology. For instance, the international nature and public use of the modern Internet can not be attributed to any US (or military) efforts; but rather to the European X.25 protocol; which is ultimately to thank for the fact that you're able to connect to the internet instead of the internet being this thing that only militaries and research laboratories have access to. And of course, then there's the World Wide Web, so integral to the modern internet. That was developed by the Englishman Tim Berners-Lee while working at CERN.

Really, if you don't know what the hell you're talking about... maybe you shouldn't try to come up with soundbite-ready arguments.

 

[Kharakov]

DLH has TCS, caused by his severe Jesus addiction. He's not responsible for what he says. It's not him, it's the jesus opium talking. DLH, you CAN get help. Go to new.exchristian.net. They can direct you to where you can get help kicking the jesus habit and get clean and sober.

For all you know, he could be more of an atheist than you are. Welcome to the intertubes.

 

[DLH]

DLH has TCS, caused by his severe Jesus addiction. He's not responsible for what he says. It's not him, it's the jesus opium talking. DLH, you CAN get help. Go to new.exchristian.net. They can direct you to where you can get help kicking the jesus habit and get clean and sober.

For all you know, he could be more of an atheist than you are. Welcome to the intertubes.

:devil-smiley-029::devil-smiley-029::devil-smiley-029::devil-smiley-029:

 

[DLH]

The personal computer was invented by two college dropouts in one of their parent's garage,

No, it wasn't.

The first commercial personal computer was created by Olivetti, an Italian company, in the form of the Programma 101; which came to market in 1964.

the Internet was invented by the U.S. Military.

No, it wasn't.

The internet is not a single 'invention' that can be attributed to any one country or organization.

The fundamental technology at the root of all later internet developments was Packet Switching, a concept developed independently at around the same time by an American scientist (Paul Baran of the RAND corporation), and the British Donald Davies of the National Physics Laboratory. It was the latter's work in particular which would come to greatly influence the creation of ARPANET, which would eventually be the first network to implement TCP/IP (the internet protocol). The military did NOT invent either TCP/IP or ARPANET; they just funded the latter (funding something, and creating something, are two different things you'll note). The internet, however, consists of a great deal more in the way of technology. For instance, the international nature and public use of the modern Internet can not be attributed to any US (or military) efforts; but rather to the European X.25 protocol; which is ultimately to thank for the fact that you're able to connect to the internet instead of the internet being this thing that only militaries and research laboratories have access to. And of course, then there's the World Wide Web, so integral to the modern internet. That was developed by the Englishman Tim Berners-Lee while working at CERN.

Really, if you don't know what the hell you're talking about... maybe you shouldn't try to come up with soundbite-ready arguments.

Uh-huh. Nah . . . you know . . . how it feels.

I'll just keep on spoutin' off stupid shit anyway. I seen it on the History Channel in between Bible Propaganda shows. Or I read it on some Theist Science website.

 

[Sajara]

No, it wasn't.

The first commercial personal computer was created by Olivetti, an Italian company, in the form of the Programma 101; which came to market in 1964.

the Internet was invented by the U.S. Military.

No, it wasn't.

The internet is not a single 'invention' that can be attributed to any one country or organization.

The fundamental technology at the root of all later internet developments was Packet Switching, a concept developed independently at around the same time by an American scientist (Paul Baran of the RAND corporation), and the British Donald Davies of the National Physics Laboratory. It was the latter's work in particular which would come to greatly influence the creation of ARPANET, which would eventually be the first network to implement TCP/IP (the internet protocol). The military did NOT invent either TCP/IP or ARPANET; they just funded the latter (funding something, and creating something, are two different things you'll note). The internet, however, consists of a great deal more in the way of technology. For instance, the international nature and public use of the modern Internet can not be attributed to any US (or military) efforts; but rather to the European X.25 protocol; which is ultimately to thank for the fact that you're able to connect to the internet instead of the internet being this thing that only militaries and research laboratories have access to. And of course, then there's the World Wide Web, so integral to the modern internet. That was developed by the Englishman Tim Berners-Lee while working at CERN.

Really, if you don't know what the hell you're talking about... maybe you shouldn't try to come up with soundbite-ready arguments.

Uh-huh. Nah . . . you know . . . how it feels.

I'll just keep on spoutin' off stupid shit anyway. I seen it on the History Channel in between Bible Propaganda shows. Or I read it on some Theist Science website.

Well, that was a coherent apology. No...no it wasn't.

Also, these guys really look like military types:
http://manhattanproject-rui-uhs.weebly.com/development.html

 

[dystopian]

Uh-huh. Nah . . . you know . . . how it feels.

I have no idea what this sentence is supposed to mean.

I'll just keep on spoutin' off stupid shit anyway. I seen it on the History Channel in between Bible Propaganda shows. Or I read it on some Theist Science website.

Why can't you simply acknowledge that you were wrong instead of acting like a sarcastic twit? Oh right, that would invalidate the argument you made based on the claim you're wrong about. And if you acknowledge that just one of your arguments is wrong... well! The whole house of cards could come crashing down!

 

[Keith&Co.]

I have no idea what this sentence is supposed to mean.

It means he's not taking the discussion seriously. Which is fair enough, i guess, as people stop taking him seriously...

 

[funinspace]

No, it wasn't.

The first commercial personal computer was created by Olivetti, an Italian company, in the form of the Programma 101; which came to market in 1964.

the Internet was invented by the U.S. Military.

No, it wasn't.

The internet is not a single 'invention' that can be attributed to any one country or organization.

The fundamental technology at the root of all later internet developments was Packet Switching, a concept developed independently at around the same time by an American scientist (Paul Baran of the RAND corporation), and the British Donald Davies of the National Physics Laboratory. It was the latter's work in particular which would come to greatly influence the creation of ARPANET, which would eventually be the first network to implement TCP/IP (the internet protocol). The military did NOT invent either TCP/IP or ARPANET; they just funded the latter (funding something, and creating something, are two different things you'll note). The internet, however, consists of a great deal more in the way of technology. For instance, the international nature and public use of the modern Internet can not be attributed to any US (or military) efforts; but rather to the European X.25 protocol; which is ultimately to thank for the fact that you're able to connect to the internet instead of the internet being this thing that only militaries and research laboratories have access to. And of course, then there's the World Wide Web, so integral to the modern internet. That was developed by the Englishman Tim Berners-Lee while working at CERN.

Really, if you don't know what the hell you're talking about... maybe you shouldn't try to come up with soundbite-ready arguments.

Uh-huh. Nah . . . you know . . . how it feels.

I'll just keep on spoutin' off stupid shit anyway. I seen it on the History Channel in between Bible Propaganda shows. Or I read it on some Theist Science website.

Well, this post is at least accurate...

The funny thing about the whole PC side show, is that the TRS-80 and the PET 2001 were launched along with the Apple I/II as part of what was later labeled the '1977 Trinity'. Never mind that in those early years the Trash-80 greatly outsold the Apple. And the PC was an evolution of incremental computer technological innovations, miniaturizations, and cost reductions over several decades, not an "invention" by someone.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I remember the TRS-80. I was excited when we upgraded it to 16K from 8K because Polaris became soooo fast.