The Dodwell Data now out!!!!!

[dad]

And they wrote the Bible.

Prove it! I say God did, by proxy.

They might well claim it's divinely inspired, but men are liars.

Virgin birth, and hundreds of other prophesies fulfilled are not wrong. Jesus being seen of us is not wrong, it is right, That is why we are in 2010,

Dodwell didn't figure out anything, he was just creative with the numbers to fit the conclusion he already made, like you're prepared to do.

No. He based it on data. Observations. You should be so lucky. Deal with it.

If the evidence "fits like a glove", why do you have to invoke a different state past with alternate physical rules in order to make your ideas work? Wouldn't it be obvious from physical records if the recorded events matched real history?

Because the different state is WHAT the evidence fits, like a glove!!!

 

[sandwiches]

Humans are not always right.

Strawman.

Masked cursing?? Paranoid much? Science cannot detect spirits, get over it. Ask a scientist. If someone was inspiired or possessed, they have zero clue. They cannot be critical, or even mildly informed!!!! They are blind and dumb, and absolutely in the dark.

Yes. But not all humans!

Well, the supposed fact that some people can detect the spiritual indicates that the spiritual can be scrutinized through the scientific method. After all, science deals with that which can be perceived or observed.

 

[dad]

Strawman.

No. Fact. Humans are not always right. So??

Well, the supposed fact that some people can detect the spiritual indicates that the spiritual can be scrutinized through the scientific method. After all, science deals with that which can be perceived or observed.

Nope. The scientific method deals only with the physical that can be detected! It can't measure anything else. Period.

 

[Nostromo]

Prove it! I say God did, by proxy.

We both agree that humans physically wrote it. It's not out of the ordinary to find a book and presume a human wrote it, when it's written in known human language using known human techniques. You're making the additional claim that it was inspired of God therefore the onus is on you to back it up.

Virgin birth, and hundreds of other prophesies fulfilled are not wrong. Jesus being seen of us is not wrong, it is right, That is why we are in 2010.

Any evidence that those things actually happened?

"I never touched her!"
"Oh right, must be a virgin birth then, makes sense."

No. He based it on data. Observations. You should be so lucky. Deal with it.

The whole argument rests on one data point from Karnak which you could calculate yourself with the information given and show that it's wrong.

Because the different state is WHAT the evidence fits, like a glove!!!

I could claim that little green men came to Earth , created all the animals out of Bird's custard and acted out the Bible as a space opera, then removed all traces of their activity. It fits the evidence, but only in the sense that anything could fit the evidence if you're happy to change the rules by which we interpret and understand the evidence as representative of reality.

The evidence we have is for a same state past, fanciful claims about a different state past have no basis except wishful thinking on your part to make the world fit your interpretation of one particular scripture.

 

[Orogeny]

Easy. There was none. Decay is a feature if THIS, repeat THIS state. Ho hum.

In that case, THIS, repeat THIS state has lasted for ~4.6 billion years, etc.

 

[dad]

We both agree that humans physically wrote it. It's not out of the ordinary to find a book and presume a human wrote it, when it's written in known human language using known human techniques. You're making the additional claim that it was inspired of God therefore the onus is on you to back it up.
Any evidence that those things actually happened?

"I never touched her!"
"Oh right, must be a virgin birth then, makes sense."

Doubting the experiences and record of real people, that changed the world, for no reason is unworthy drivel.

The whole argument rests on one data point from Karnak which you could calculate yourself with the information given and show that it's wrong.

The 66 data points all diverge from the old age cure in a clear pattern. The most distant being Karnak, because that is the most distant record available. The data is clear, the pattern is clear, something is wrong in the same state belief mix.

I could claim that little green men came to Earth , created all the animals out of Bird's custard and acted out the Bible as a space opera, then removed all traces of their activity. It fits the evidence, but only in the sense that anything could fit the evidence if you're happy to change the rules by which we interpret and understand the evidence as representative of reality.

The evidence we have is for a same state past,

No, none actually exists. The same state past is 100% belief. It is used ON the evidence NO evidence exists for IT.

fanciful claims about a different state past have no basis except wishful thinking on your part to make the world fit your interpretation of one particular scripture.

The only records of man and his observations, and God's word that we have agree, nothing fanciful about it. Them's the facts. Science has nothing but godless and insane flights of fancy to create other pasts and futures. Really.

 

[dad]

In that case, THIS, repeat THIS state has lasted for ~4.6 billion years, etc.

It doesn't follow, that decay seen in THIS state existed UNLESS this state existed. That is NOT known. Really. The materials like daughter isotopes were here already, otherwise engaged. (except for the daughter materials produced in the last 4400 years)--you happen along in this state, see them doing what they now do, and assume they always did it! No. Doesn't work that way. That thinking only goes as far as this state can be proven to go, and that ain't very far.

 

[sandwiches]

Nope. The scientific method deals only with the physical that can be detected! It can't measure anything else. Period.

So, you're saying that science does not deal with light, electromagnetism, radiation, entropy, etc?

 

[dad]

So, you're saying that science does not deal with light, electromagnetism, radiation, entropy, etc?

No, why, are you saying that they are somehow spiritual???

 

[sandwiches]

No, why, are you saying that they are somehow spiritual???

They are not physical in the common use of the of the word. Yet we can investigate them scientifically. So, again, if a phenomenon is observable, it can be investigated by science. For instance: If someone claims that they can talk to dead people, this can easily be investigated and tested by having the supposed medium tell us things about the 'ghosts' that one would not normally know and that can be independently verified.

If you claim that you have observed anything spiritual, then this observation can also be put to the test. And when I say observed, I don't mean with our eyes, necessarily; I mean detected in some way. For instance, while can't see infrared light, we can feel it in our skin as heat. Normally we use one of our common senses such as sight, hearing, smell, etc to test, detect, and observe phenomena, but you're claiming that you and possibly other people can also detect the spiritual. Just because you're not detecting this spiritual phenomena with your most common senses, does not mean that it cannot be scrutinized.

 

[dad]

They are not physical in the common use of the of the word. Yet we can investigate them scientifically. So, again, if a phenomenon is observable, it can be investigated by science.

The things you mention are part of the physical universe. Spirits are not observable, unless they want to be observed. They are not part of this physical universe.

For instance: If someone claims that they can talk to dead people, this can easily be investigated and tested by having the supposed medium tell us things about the 'ghosts' that one would not normally know and that can be independently verified.

If you get a spook that wants to tell you things to verify, let us know! I wouldn't hold my breath. God gave us prophesy, and it is verified. Science is in abject denial.

If you claim that you have observed anything spiritual, then this observation can also be put to the test. And when I say observed, I don't mean with our eyes, necessarily; I mean detected in some way. For instance, while can't see infrared light, we can feel it in our skin as heat. Normally we use one of our common senses such as sight, hearing, smell, etc to test, detect, and observe phenomena, but you're claiming that you and possibly other people can also detect the spiritual. Just because you're not detecting this spiritual phenomena with your most common senses, does not mean that it cannot be scrutinized.

Yes, the instruments of science do not include ghost busters. Really. Try to deal with the limitations and realities of science.

 

[sandwiches]

The things you mention are part of the physical universe. Spirits are not observable, unless they want to be observed. They are not part of this physical universe.

If you get a spook that wants to tell you things to verify, let us know! I wouldn't hold my breath. God gave us prophesy, and it is verified. Science is in abject denial.

Yes, the instruments of science do not include ghost busters. Really. Try to deal with the limitations and realities of science.

So, to summarize this little exchange, you argument is special pleading all throughout. Gotcha.

 

[dad]

So, to summarize this little exchange, you argument is special pleading all throughout. Gotcha.

To summarize, science does not cover the spiritual, as you plead. It ain't that special. It has it's little mundane, physical only domain. Thus far, and no further. There is a line in the sand, and it can't cross.

 

[sandwiches]

To summarize, science does not cover the spiritual, as you plead. It ain't that special. It has it's little mundane, physical only domain. Thus far, and no further. There is a line in the sand, and it can't cross.

We're going around in circles basically like this:

Me: Science can scrutinize the spiritual if it can be objectively detected
You: Science can't detect the spiritual
Me: If the spiritual can be detected by humans, then it can be scientifically analyzed
You: Nu uh!

 

[Nostromo]

So dad's relying on two separate phenomena which are beyond the scope of human inquiry. They exist in some spooky and vaguely defined way that allows one to say they've somehow experienced it, but not actually look at it and work out what it is.

Despite the fact he tells us we're not able to scrutinise them, he has by some means (against what appears to be a paradox) acquired enough information to tell us that we're not able to scrutinise them.

 

[dad]

We're going around in circles basically like this:

Me: Science can scrutinize the spiritual if it can be objectively detected
You: Science can't detect the spiritual

You need to learn the difference between circles and a dead end.

Me: If the spiritual can be detected by humans, then it can be scientifically analyzed
You: Nu uh!

It is only detected indirectly most of the time. Seldom do men see demons or angels in a body. If they did, it is a safe bet, that they ain't gonna stick around till science gets there to test them!! I have to tell you this??

 

[dad]

So dad's relying on two separate phenomena which are beyond the scope of human inquiry. They exist in some spooky and vaguely defined way that allows one to say they've somehow experienced it, but not actually look at it and work out what it is.

Well, the physical and spirits are separate, I will agree there. If some really experiences them, science is unable to comment.

Despite the fact he tells us we're not able to scrutinise them, he has by some means (against what appears to be a paradox) acquired enough information to tell us that we're not able to scrutinise them.

It isn't rocket science, to tell you, that you can't do certain things. You can't spring out of a giant toaster, and land on Saturn in good shape. Really. You can't jump from an airplane over the ocean and then come out OK, and just swim to the nearest continent. There are rules, and limits with men. Really. You can't catch an angel, and put it in your pocket. You can't strap one to a wall in a lab, and take blood samples. You need to deal with reality, and what science can and cannot do here. Is that asking too much of you?

 

[sandwiches]

Well, the physical and spirits are separate, I will agree there. If some really experiences them, science is unable to comment.

It isn't rocket science, to tell you, that you can't do certain things. You can't spring out of a giant toaster, and land on Saturn in good shape. Really. You can't jump from an airplane over the ocean and then come out OK, and just swim to the nearest continent. There are rules, and limits with men. Really. You can't catch an angel, and put it in your pocket. You can't strap one to a wall in a lab, and take blood samples. You need to deal with reality, and what science can and cannot do here. Is that asking too much of you?

So, if you can't scrutinize the spiritual, how can you comment on it? How do you know anything about it? Or is that asking too much of you?

 

[Nostromo]

You can't spring out of a giant toaster, and land on Saturn in good shape. There are rules, and limits with men. Really. You can't catch an angel, and put it in your pocket. You can't strap one to a wall in a lab, and take blood samples. You need to deal with reality, and what science can and cannot do here. Is that asking too much of you?

Well this is my point. We know I can't spring out of a giant toaster and land on Saturn in good shape, because we know how that stuff works.

If the spiritual is beyond human scrutiny, how can you tell me what is and isn't possible?

 

[dad]

So, if you can't scrutinize the spiritual, how can you comment on it? How do you know anything about it? Or is that asking too much of you?

Well, we know what a spirit isn't made of. A physical only body! Even Jesus, the Firstborn from the dead of men, had a spiritual as well as physical body. It could go through solid matter, and all sorts of things we cannot do.

But, science can't scrutinize Him. He has plenty on offer about Him, and how He works, what He likes, etc in His manual to man. Science has to line up, like anyone else, and humbly learn the way it is available an revealed. They will be scrutinized by the Great Scrutinizer!