When Literalists have to literally lie to sell their literal truth (AKA Adventures in Ark-itecture)

[skepticalbip]

Why dat ...


Lol .. no probs Lion I did have to look it up though.

Heaps of people drop the term "Dunning Kruger" into conversations in the context of AvT debate.
But not in an intellectual or academic way. There's nothing analytical going on.
Instead it's almost always used as an epithet to ridicule...guess who?

I would disagree. The particular discussion was about how to construct a really large seaworthy wood boat. The experts who actually designed and built large ships found that the largest practical wooden boat (even being strengthened with iron fittings) was about 300 feet. When someone disputes this and claims it would be easy to build a seaworthy wood boat half again larger than the experts found possible and even "explains" how it could be done, then an assumption of DK seems reasonable.

 

[Lion IRC]

Lion, are you suggesting that Noah and his family didn't build the ark themselves, but employed contractors? If Noah and his family built it, then, ipso facto the knowledge needed to build it would have survived. If it didn't, then the people who built these complex systems would have been among the drowned. So we have a case of Noah hiring people to build his boat, knowing that they'd drown. Did he chortle when he paid them? DID he even pay them? "Yeah Eshebenibal, you can count on the payment next week, heh heh heh."

Also, I will note that we have archaelogical traces of civilizations that are older than the dates given for the flood, and they showed no such technological advancement. Also, I must point out that if the flood took place so soon after creation, technology would have had to progress many times faster between creation and the flood than it has since. (which chronology are we using? The accuracy of this statement depends on it. I think that by chance, Ussher's would have roughly similar rates, simply because he calls for a younger earth than the others)

I don't posit a date of the Flood. Certainly not Ussher's

I was just pointing out that we can't dismiss the likelihood there may have been technological skills which were lost as a result of the Flood - knowledge which Noah's descendants couldn't adequately pass on. Methuselah, the oldest person who ever lived, must have known heaps of stuff.

We aren't told in the biblical account whether Noah built the whole thing entirely free from help or advice from others who died in the flood. Some people speculate it may have taken over 60 years to build.

And that's the point. Bible skeptics and bible believers are equally free to speculate in opposite directions. But I won't let the bible skeptic tell me that I'm wrong based on their own personal speculations - speculations which wouldn't be possible except for the fact that the text is missing so many details.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I was just pointing out that we can't dismiss the likelihood there may have been technological skills which were lost as a result of the Flood - knowledge which Noah's descendants couldn't adequately pass on.

Oh! I get it!
It's performance art!

In a thread about people having to make shit up to make a biblical tale seem anywhere remotely possible, specifically the Flood and the Ark, you appeal to the possibility of lost technologies, not found by archaeology or in biblical accounts, to pretend that the Ark was MAYBE more technologically advanced than the biblical record would suggest.

Nicely done.

So, what are you saying, that adding such details is intrinsic to the faith or is it some sort of knee-jerk reaction like Star Trek fans explaining contradictory comments in different Trek episodes?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Build the Ark, fill the Ark and put it in the water.

That will solve at least some of the questions

But that is not what happened. Instead of building an ark and putting it in water, they built an ark and put it in Kentucky. That alone speaks volumes about how much faith the faithful have about their bible stories.

 

[Lion IRC]

Heaps of people drop the term "Dunning Kruger" into conversations in the context of AvT debate.
But not in an intellectual or academic way. There's nothing analytical going on.
Instead it's almost always used as an epithet to ridicule...guess who?

I would disagree. The particular discussion was about how to construct a really large seaworthy wood boat. The experts who actually designed and built large ships found that the largest practical wooden boat (even being strengthened with iron fittings) was about 300 feet. When someone disputes this and claims it would be easy to build a seaworthy wood boat half again larger than the experts found possible and even "explains" how it could be done, then an assumption of DK seems reasonable.

Who claimed it would be "easy" to build the Ark?

In any case, I think people should stick to the specific arguments and logic and reasoning.
How does the label Dunning Kruger relate to the actual topic of debate?
Address the argument not the person.

Do you agree that a person's claims might be factual notwithstanding any cognitive bias or DK factors?

If I unflinchingly, religiously believe something is true because of some fact I cant demonstrably prove, that in no way prevents my belief from actually being true.

And I certainly haven't been arguing for anything on the basis of...well you just gotta believe me, God told me you're wrong, the fossil record is a trick played by satan, the witness of the Holy Spirit, etc etc.

The atheist bible skeptic on the other hand seems intent on arguing from a position of
...God can't do miracles

 

[funinspace]

So, what are you saying, that adding such details is intrinsic to the faith or is it some sort of knee-jerk reaction like Star Trek fans explaining contradictory comments in different Trek episodes?

Nah, it is more like whether Darth Vader or Captain Kirk would win in a battle, when they are both suddenly transported to the surface of a rocky, barren planet. Meanwhile, the UFO (unidentified fucking objects) aliens are voting on who they can play with next....

 

[skepticalbip]

I would disagree. The particular discussion was about how to construct a really large seaworthy wood boat. The experts who actually designed and built large ships found that the largest practical wooden boat (even being strengthened with iron fittings) was about 300 feet. When someone disputes this and claims it would be easy to build a seaworthy wood boat half again larger than the experts found possible and even "explains" how it could be done, then an assumption of DK seems reasonable.

Who claimed it would be "easy" to build the Ark?

In any case, I think people should stick to the specific arguments and logic and reasoning.
How does the label Dunning Kruger relate to the actual topic of debate?
Address the argument not the person.

Do you agree that a person's claims might be factual notwithstanding any cognitive bias or DK factors?

If I unflinchingly, religiously believe something is true because of some fact I cant demonstrably prove, that in no way prevents my belief from actually being true.

And I certainly haven't been arguing for anything on the basis of...well you just gotta believe me, God told me you're wrong, the fossil record is a trick played by satan, the witness of the Holy Spirit, etc etc.

The atheist bible skeptic on the other hand seems intent on arguing from a position of
...God can't do miracles

You apparently haven't actually read the discussion.

The problem was lerner explaining how the ark could have been built as a seaworthy craft. Had he simply claimed that the ark was a "miracle ark" built by Noah that god then magically made both seaworthy and with an inside volume great enough to contain the thousands and thousands of animals and their food despite the outside dimensions, then it would be a statement of faith not statements of engineering.

 

[Lion IRC]

In a thread about people having to make shit up to make a biblical tale seem anywhere remotely possible, specifically the Flood and the Ark, you appeal to the possibility of lost technologies, not found by archaeology or in biblical accounts...

Um...it wasn't me or Learner who made the original claim about what technology they did or didn't have.
It was a bible skeptic who claimed to have certain knowledge that Noah's civilization didn't know how to build stuff.
Making up shit???? Yeah - you guys are. You're saying Noah didn't know what metal was? Nails?

...to pretend that the Ark was MAYBE more technologically advanced than the biblical record would suggest.

Here is what the bible 'suggests'.

"As for Zillah, she also gave birth to Tubal-cain, the forger of all implements of bronze and iron; and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

For those who haven't read the bible, Tubal-Cain lived before Noah.

 

[Keith&Co.]

So, what are you saying, that adding such details is intrinsic to the faith or is it some sort of knee-jerk reaction like Star Trek fans explaining contradictory comments in different Trek episodes?

Nah, it is more like whether Darth Vader or Captain Kirk would win in a battle, when they are both suddenly transported to the surface of a rocky, barren planet. Meanwhile, the UFO (unidentified fucking objects) aliens are voting on who they can play with next....

So, you're not even trying to be serious, that's what you're saying. Okay.

 

[Sarpedon]

Ok, fine. You say we are unjustified in assuming Noah only had access to the technologies available at the time estimated by Ussher. Fine. I don't agree that this is a reasonable suggestion, but it is fair.

Please tell us what the correct time was.
Please tell us what the time between the Creation and that time was.
Please tell us what the equivalent technological level was in terms of recorded history.
Please tell us why you think they could have achieved this technological level in the time between Creation and the Flood.

Now, you have presented biblical 'evidence' that metalworking was known before the flood. And apparently, you believe after the flood, the ability to forge iron (and possibly bronze) was lost. Now please explain to me why this, possibly THE MOST useful skill ever, was lost. Iron is not scarce, especially not in Turkey near mount Ararat. I said, 'they couldn't build the ark without iron'. You replied, 'they did know how to make iron' (Gen 4). So, why was iron working forgotten? Are you saying absolutely none of the principle people involved knew how to work iron? Hell, why wouldn't the ark be equipped with a smithy? Virtually all large vessels in the real life Age of Sail were. I don't know how to work iron myself, but I have friends who are master smiths, and they are all very confident of their ability to extract iron from the environment, and fashion their own tools. Heck, they wouldn't even have to do any mining, they could have scavenged all the iron they needed from the ark itself, after the waters receded.

Oh, and why would ironworking be lost and bronzeworking not be lost? It's much easier to find iron than it is to find copper and tin. In real life, bronzeworking was invented first because it required lower temperatures, and copper and tin were found in relatively pure native deposits, while iron ore needs to be processed. But if we are starting with people who already know how to do it, why would they lose the ability to make the more useful and economical metal, rather than the rare and expensive one?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Um...it wasn't me or Learner who made the original claim about what technology they did or didn't have.
It was a bible skeptic who claimed to have certain knowledge that Noah's civilization didn't know how to build stuff.
Making up shit???? Yeah - you guys are. You're saying Noah didn't know what metal was? Nails?

YEah, well, we don't know of any evidence for a global flood.
So we don't know of any evidence for a pre-flood civilization.
So our 'speculation' is pretty much 'the known historical timeline.'
But what i was referring to was your stated intention that if there was going to be speculation, you were intending to speculate on the generous side. Adding pre-flood civilization and pre-flood technology. Not for any really good historical, archaeological or biblical reasons, but just for the sake of the story.

 

[Learner]

Heaps of people drop the term "Dunning Kruger" into conversations in the context of AvT debate.
But not in an intellectual or academic way. There's nothing analytical going on.
Instead it's almost always used as an epithet to ridicule...guess who?

I got you Lion. My reply ' fair enough' was more of a 'If you say so' intent. My replies are sometimes too hasty. I will have to slow down a bit and read before I post.

 

[Learner]

Sure there are lots of flood stories, as it seems to be a common human theme. I’ve even read a portion of the Epic of Gilgamesh, which we have nearly complete copies from 1800 BCE, well before the purported time of Moses. But having lots of differing flood stories doesn’t make the Jewish Deluge any more real. The geological record is quite clear in that there was never a global flood as described in the OT.

Even around 10,000 BC, the sea level was substantially lower (40-60 meters), as the last ice age receded. And there are archaeological ruins like Göbekli Tepe from that time period:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Göbekli_Tepe

I can relate to you on this ,the fascination of Sumerians. I was pointing out that there were floods great and small during the times of early civilizations. There are controversies or theories if you like on the Egyptian cronological dating for example. Are we sure that their timeline really doesn't match the biblical accounts.? Sure I'm no expert but I am also a sceptic. Not because of being a Christian but because of human error or to put it another way having the controversy rise up has put more doubt in my mind.

As far as the ‘ruins’ of Yonaguni Japan, one might as well start chasing for the Loch Ness Monster:

I agree but only because we know know very little of the Japanese ruins.

There is plenty of geological data that contradicts the notion of a world engulfing flood in human history, unless one believes in a trickster god.

Floods happened is my point!

When do you think this Noah Deluge could have happened?

4500 years ago maybe ? I don't know .

 

[Keith&Co.]

if you like on the Egyptian cronological dating for example. Are we sure that their timeline really doesn't match the biblical accounts.?

Yes.
See, in Egyptian mythology, the world was not destroyed by a flood. Floods were good things for the Egyptians. The annual Nile floods allowed them to cultivate.
There are other cultures that lived far inland, their mythologies include a previous world destroyed by fire, not flood. The speculation is that they found seams of coal and determined that was the burnt remains of the previous world, the Golden Time when a glorious pre-fallen civilization ruled the world.

Other civilizations and culture have their flood myths, with the representative samples of humanity saved by islands, by giant goldfish, by boat, by barge and by turtle. Depends on what was around them when they made up the story.
Some themes just seem common to humanity's psyche.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The Greeks had tall tales of ancient floods that wiped out most of humanity. Why? Because they had observed fossil fish and shells high on mountains. How did they get there? Floods of course. Plato theorized that from time to time such floods occurred and humanity had to start over basically from the beginning. Floods did occur but never the type of floods of the tall tales. But the fossils.....

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Um...it wasn't me or Learner who made the original claim about what technology they did or didn't have.
It was a bible skeptic who claimed to have certain knowledge that Noah's civilization didn't know how to build stuff.
Making up shit???? Yeah - you guys are. You're saying Noah didn't know what metal was? Nails?

YEah, well, we don't know of any evidence for a global flood.
So we don't know of any evidence for a pre-flood civilization.
So our 'speculation' is pretty much 'the known historical timeline.'
But what i was referring to was your stated intention that if there was going to be speculation, you were intending to speculate on the generous side. Adding pre-flood civilization and pre-flood technology. Not for any really good historical, archaeological or biblical reasons, but just for the sake of the story.

^^^
THIS!!

"Just for the sake of the story"

That is what is wrong with the Ark Adventure. So much of it isn't even in the Bible but simply there for the sake of the story. Speculation, generous or miserly, doesn't add to arguments and it doesn't negate or stand equal to the natural record.

 

[Keith&Co.]

the Ark Adventure. So much of it isn't even in the Bible but simply there for the sake of the story.

Well, they're competing with a lot of other stories that are better fleshed out. Of the 8 people that survived the flood, we only have 4 names. How can this compete with Star Wars where characters that didn't even have any dialogue in the first movie have an entire Wiki page on their name, history, what they were doing in the Mos Eisly Cantina, how they got to Tattooine and so on...

Without adding details to the theme park, there just isn't that much story to be told.

 

[Learner]

As opposed to Blackmailed Man, which according the Faith, is what he is now. God does not want contented good people, but flawed people He can bribe with heaven and threaten with hell and in the end, on a righteous judgement day, damn in multitudes to infinite torture in order to pay for finite sins. And all the while, He loves us all. Your God is sick. And as for love, God created that too and could with but a whisper on the wind instill it in all of us along with a great value of it, no suffering necessary.

You know man is very easily corrupted. He will be teased and tempted by voices in his head seeded by the dazzling marvels of doing things against his good nature. It will go so far that the human being will be something else,desensitized of human decency, if you will become an abomination in Gods eyes.

Where pray tell? Divine providence hidden is no provision, it is nothing but a cruel parlor game played for the amusement of a crueler gamesman.

As the above reply

People's disbelief comes from the God. He has but to make himself know, not in signs and wonders, but in blatant acts that leave no question. Your God demands we take His existence on faith, then plagues us all with reason which demands we doubt. Your God is sick.

What can I say Athena, although your words are quite angry to something you don't believe in. It must be me/Christians for believing in God and not actually God himself.

That was 2000 years ago. What has He done lately? and why send His son? Why torture His son? Why must there be a blood sacrifice? Why all the suffering when with a wave of his hand, suffering could be no more? Which is what will happen after we all stand the test the judgement. A new heaven and new earth where the wicked shall cease from troubling and the weary shall be at rest. After that great gettin' up morning, for all eternity God will be surrounded by loving and good people who will praise him forever and never wane, never tire. Like Robomen.

I think we would never be tired to be with our parents and grandparents,close friends and family in that world. So what more of God and the son that makes it all happen? This is pure Joy!

But your God is responsible for nothing and to no one. He can and according to the Book has, caused great suffering and madness in the world, all of it unnecessary. Your God is sick.

As with my first reply

God created the world and Satan. If Satan owns the world, it is by God's will. What kind of father turns his children and their home over to the enemy?

One who knows man can believe enough to overcome his enemy.

What do you mean today? You know of time when evil did not exist in the world? People do profane things. People do profound things. And this has been true ever since there have been people. The only difference today is that WE can bring about the end of the world, no deity required.

Yes indeed the only difference now.

Yes he will destroy the world the unfair world not the Earth!

Revelation 21:1

1And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth are passed away; and the sea is no more.
.

More or less the same thing, I am trying.

 

[Learner]

Yes.
See, in Egyptian mythology, the world was not destroyed by a flood. Floods were good things for the Egyptians. The annual Nile floods allowed them to cultivate.
There are other cultures that lived far inland, their mythologies include a previous world destroyed by fire, not flood. The speculation is that they found seams of coal and determined that was the burnt remains of the previous world, the Golden Time when a glorious pre-fallen civilization ruled the world.

Other civilizations and culture have their flood myths, with the representative samples of humanity saved by islands, by giant goldfish, by boat, by barge and by turtle. Depends on what was around them when they made up the story.
Some themes just seem common to humanity's psyche.

It is interesting and I could sort of go with that .

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Someone once said that the difference between man and God is that if most men saw someone raping a small child, they'd try to stop it. But it's us who become abominations to him.