Is science at odds with philosophy?

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Even more interesting is that some rocks (like obsidian) can actually fracture to give a "blade" that is as sharp as a scalpel.

Sharper than a steel scalpel. Obsidian blades are the sharpest known; in surgery, they leave wounds that heal faster and with less scarring.

The earliest obsidian blades are around 700,000 years old, but came into their own in the Neolithic. In Europe they appear in the Paleolithic (300,000-30,000 years ago)

 

[Mountainmike]

I am still struggling with this. If it were highly degraded I could sorta kinda see this point? But if it is identifiable as DNA what does it mean for it to not be sequenceable?

I have addressed this.
Dna identity used in crime is not a full sequence.

indeed it is a count of the number of repeats of some agreed groups of otherwise redundant DNA. They are not needed to function.

By analogy That there are zero repeats might mean Jesus had bar code all zero, where most people have only numbers. Serafinis book deals with this. Also the issue of Mt DNA.

 

[Mountainmike]

Sharper than a steel scalpel. Obsidian blades are the sharpest known; in surgery, they leave wounds that heal faster and with less scarring.

The earliest obsidian blades are around 700,000 years old, but came into their own in the Neolithic. In Europe they appear in the Paleolithic (300,000-30,000 years ago)

I am repeating linolis comment on the thinness of the heart section. Heart surgery , like even blood groups is new in history. All the groups are AB.

All this focus on lanciano origin being anecdotal is so much sophistry. There are plenty of recorded incidents of so called Eucharistic miracles.

You cannot make similar claims of surgical origin about the more modern ones. Focus there, as I repeatedly suggest.

Lanciano is worthy of note as the first demonstration of cardiac tissue.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I am repeating linolis comment on the thinness of the heart section. Heart surgery , like even blood groups is new in history.

Heart surgery is not relevant, post-mortem dissection is.

All this focus on lanciano origin being anecdotal is so much sophistry. There are plenty of recorded incidents of so called Eucharistic miracles.

The Lanciano documentation leaves plenty of room for doubt of origin, and no evidence of the supernatural.

As I said, other claims have no bearing on the Lanciano claim. If you'd like to discuss other claims, please provide the documentation, as previously requested.

You cannot make similar claims of surgical origin about the more modern ones. Focus there, as I repeatedly suggest.

Lanciano is worthy of note as the first demonstration of cardiac tissue.

I'm not making any claims about the 'more modern' ones until I've seen the documentation.

The Lanciano document wraps a limited and unremarkable scientific examination of a sample of blood and heart muscle of indeterminate age (scientific dating would be interesting) in an enthusiastic cloud of assumption, confirmation bias and wishful thinking. Claims that it's miraculous in some way may enthuse believers, but the document gives no reason to suggest anything supernatural.

 

[Opdrey]

By analogy That there are zero repeats

I thought they were unable to sequence it. How can you say there were no repeats if it couldn't be sequenced?

might mean Jesus had bar code all zero,

I would dearly love to know what that means in terms of DNA. But I am guessing you aren't the guy to tell it.

where most people have only numbers. Serafinis book deals with this. Also the issue of Mt DNA.

The MT DNA should be of a human being, that being Mary. Since Mitochondrial DNA comes exclusively from mom if I recall correctly.

 

[partinobodycular]

Sorry everybody, I've been busy lately, so I haven't had much time to devote to this thread. However I just wanted to mention that from what I've been able to ascertain so far the forensic/pathological examinations conducted on @Mountainmike's favorite Eucharistic miracles are highly dubious at best.

The documentation for these miracles can seemingly be found in one place, and one place only, Dr Tesoriero and Dr Castanon's books, videos, and lectures. Dr Tesoriero is a lawyer and documentary film maker. Dr Castanon is a clinical psychologist, who before teaming up with Dr Tesoriero was actually working as a supernatural/mystical phenomena researcher, who claimed to have proven the authenticity of a number of inexplicable mystical events.

The two of them decided to team up, and after receiving donations from some wealthy donors set about the task of proving the authenticity of a number of religious miracles.

I would give citations for these claims but unfortunately they're mostly taken from Dr Franco Serafini's book "A Cardiologist Examines Jesus: The Stunning Science Behind Eucharistic Miracles". Which although it's available free online is none-the-less copyrighted so I will refrain from linking to it. But it is at times quite forthright in questioning unsubstantiated claims.

Unfortunately for me as the weather gets nicer my free time diminishes, and following up on wild goose chases becomes less pressing.

So y'all have fun.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I am repeating linolis comment on the thinness of the heart section. Heart surgery , like even blood groups is new in history. All the groups are AB.

The ABO blood groups go back millions of years and are found in apes and old world monkeys.

 

[Mountainmike]

The ABO blood groups go back millions of years and are found in apes and old world monkeys.

AB is old. That is not the point.

I have said this many times. It is the coincidence that matters. They are only 5% of the population, and in central south america only 1 in 1000. It is most prevalent in the holy land.

I point at the coincidence that several eucharistic miracles , and the three holy cloths all show AB blood. Not only a massive numerical coincidence, but also at least four of those were before blood type was even known, so that alone reduces the chance of combined forgery to almost nothing.

As Einstein said "coincidence is how God remains anonymous"

That is why the blood group of lanciano is significant. It is the same as the others.
On one of the holy cloths - the linceul- the mtDNA showed a recessive defect that is ONLY known in the holy land!

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

AB is old. That is not the point.

I have said this many times. It is the coincidence that matters. They are only 5% of the population, and in central south america only 1 in 1000. It is most prevalent in the holy land.

No, it's most prevalent in North & South Korea, then Japan, then Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, etc. Israel is 21st for AB+ (10th for AB-), Jordan around 36th for AB+, Lebanon much further down the list.

In Israel, AB+ is 7%, AB- is 1%.

Nowhere is less than 1 in 200 for AB+ (0.5%), lots of countries are 1 in 1,000 (0.1%) or less for AB-.

Blood Type by Country 2022

 

[partinobodycular]

No, it's most prevalent in North & South Korea, then Japan, then Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, etc. Israel is 21st for AB+ (10th for AB-), Jordan around 36th for AB+, Lebanon much further down the list.

In Israel, AB+ is 7%, AB- is 1%.

Nowhere is less than 1 in 200 for AB+ (0.5%), lots of countries are 1 in 1,000 (0.1%) or less for AB-.

Blood Type by Country 2022

But that's according to the internet. You should know by now that @Mountainmike won't believe it unless it's in one of his books.

 

[Mountainmike]

You are so Wrong.

You are also not honest ,Serafini DID NOT contest any of the principle conclusions. White cells. Traumatized Cardiac tissue. Mingling with bread.

Which do you say he contests at tixtla? White cells? Myocardium? Intermingling with bread?

The documentation is in the forensic reports of which some are collected in those books, They confirm What I have said.

Castarnons book was the investigation of tixtla. All the forensic reports are in the back, including the labs that performed
Which one precisely do YOU disagree with?

( YOU who was not there, who has no experience, has never even owned a book, and did not investigate anything- the normal basis on which sceptics comment)

Which of the statements of such as Lawrence , Engels or soubaniec or zugibe ( who are some of many) do you disagree with? Are you accusing the Italian labs of bad science on mtDNA?

The definitive books on legnica and sokolka are in polish! The work was done in polish labs. It was Not authored by any of those you name, I declined to mention them because of the usual refusal to study anything even in English! .


They had nothing to do with either willesee or tesoriero ( although the witnesses were interviewed by them later - so on that You told an untruth.
Serafini interviewed some of them too. Is interviewing a problem? Tesoriero arranged translations from polish.

You know NOTHING about it.

You also fail to state that willesee was one of the worlds foremost - and sceptic - investigative journalists. Tesoriero used his own money. Lots of it.

So your entire post is creative based on what you wanted to be there, not what actually is.

Sorry everybody, I've been busy lately, so I haven't had much time to devote to this thread. However I just wanted to mention that from what I've been able to ascertain so far the forensic/pathological examinations conducted on @Mountainmike's favorite Eucharistic miracles are highly dubious at best.

The documentation for these miracles can seemingly be found in one place, and one place only, Dr Tesoriero and Dr Castanon's books, videos, and lectures. Dr Tesoriero is a lawyer and documentary film maker. Dr Castanon is a clinical psychologist, who before teaming up with Dr Tesoriero was actually working as a supernatural/mystical phenomena researcher, who claimed to have proven the authenticity of a number of inexplicable mystical events.

The two of them decided to team up, and after receiving donations from some wealthy donors set about the task of proving the authenticity of a number of religious miracles.

I would give citations for these claims but unfortunately they're mostly taken from Dr Franco Serafini's book "A Cardiologist Examines Jesus: The Stunning Science Behind Eucharistic Miracles". Which although it's available free online is none-the-less copyrighted so I will refrain from linking to it. But it is at times quite forthright in questioning unsubstantiated claims.

Unfortunately for me as the weather gets nicer my free time diminishes, and following up on wild goose chases becomes less pressing.

So y'all have fun.

 

[Mountainmike]

No, it's most prevalent in North & South Korea, then Japan, then Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, etc. Israel is 21st for AB+ (10th for AB-), Jordan around 36th for AB+, Lebanon much further down the list.

In Israel, AB+ is 7%, AB- is 1%.

Nowhere is less than 1 in 200 for AB+ (0.5%), lots of countries are 1 in 1,000 (0.1%) or less for AB-.

Blood Type by Country 2022

I meant "MORE prevalent" (than the 1 in 1000 - which is where a couple of the events took place)
Indeed what I said was spot on for general world prevalence and particularly true in the other countries involved with the cloths and miracles.

The point I made is the likelihood of all those blood groups matching by accident is incredibly low. It cannot have been fraud with the cloths, because at the time of the cloths Blood group was unknown.

There is a big discussion of AB Group in serafinis book. Not that any of you read, so you will have to take it on trust.

Then there are interesting details - like a recessive genetic defect found on one of the cloths that is indicative of jewish population because it is mostly restricted there..

 

[Mountainmike]

I made it clear earlier.
They were not sequencing the entire genome, they did a standard ID test, which probes parts of the genome and counts specific sequences at those locations. They were ( almost all) not there.

It’s all in Serafinis book.

But you don’t read. So we are stuck.

it is outrageous you saying “ not the guy to tell it” when I Keep referring you to those who do know!

I am not repeating Serafinis entire chapter on mtDNA or tesorieros. And it irritates me I should have to explain what you could find with a little effort.

mtDNA is as much of an enigma as nuclear.
But then some mtDNA Is heteroplasmic.
The haplogroup is Middle Eastern, the individual haplotype is not clear. But then the nuclear type is not clear either.

As a scientist you should ask “ what is there” and accept it , whether or not it conforms to your preconception, . You cannot force it to be what it is not, as the daters tried to do with homogeneity.

In any event , I’ve given you a summary of the kinds of thing you will find if you ever bother to look. I won’t hold my breath.

On the shroud I can only suggest you buy the books or work through shroud.com. It will take a lot longer.

I thought they were unable to sequence it. How can you say there were no repeats if it couldn't be sequenced?



I would dearly love to know what that means in terms of DNA. But I am guessing you aren't the guy to tell it.



The MT DNA should be of a human being, that being Mary. Since Mitochondrial DNA comes exclusively from mom if I recall correctly.

 

[Opdrey]

But you don’t read.

I can almost guarantee you I am more well read than you are overall.

Please STOP BEARING FALSE WITNESS.

As a scientist you should ask “ what is there” and accept it , whether or not it conforms to your preconception, . You cannot force it to be what it is not, as the daters tried to do with homogeneity.

On my bookshelf behind me here I have a copy of a book which makes a case that there was actual evidence of life found on Mars back in the 1970's when the Viking landers did their tests. It has a lot of detailed science. Yet, today, almost no one accepts that it is as definitive as the author and a small cadre of people back in the 70's.

More information came back that helped explain some of the possible reasons for a "positive find". It took about 40 years for that additional information to come in.

So I can tell you from personal experience that it is possible to find a book that provides lots of science that still does not result in a settlement of the debate.

And, again, since you ignore it (so you can presumably keep bearing false witness against me) I am not saying the Shroud is ipso facto from the Medieval timeframe. Right now the most accurate, accepted methods (14-C) are lining up with the first mention of the Shroud. Yes, there are issues with the 14-C dating. But the ONLY DATING METHODS that put the Shroud anywhere near the supposed time of Christ are non-standard developmental concepts.

You nit pick standard science as you should, but you FAIL TO DO SO FOR THE NON-STANDARD SCIENCE.

It confirms your bias so you accept it without caveat.

On the shroud I can only suggest you buy the books or work through shroud.com. It will take a lot longer.

I guess it is not acceptable to you to read scientific articles on these topics is it? They are all "corrupt" or "incompetent".

But someone making a quick buck telling you something, well, as long as it confirms your faith it's all good! No need to even question it!

 

[Mountainmike]

I can almost guarantee you I am more well read than you are overall.

Except you never read before comment.
That tells its own story.

making a quick buck

You mean Adler ( whose entire book on the shroud is a compendium of his more important chemistry papers on the shroud or an extension of them?
Rogers. Ditto.
Fanti. Ditto.
Marino. Ditto,
Meacham. Ditto.
Jackson. Ditto.
Antonacci. Ditto.
….I could go on……..
I’ve read lots of books and hundreds of papers on it.
You ? At a guess zero, since it all seems to be a surprise including the sample chemistry , that showed it was made of different stuff, the date gradient, and then they fiddled the data.

I know a lot more because I read a lot more-
before I comment, that is.

The shroud is a minority interest.
I read a LOT more on my primary interests.

 

[Opdrey]

Except you never read before comment.

Please stop bearing false witness.

Of course I read some things before commenting. We engaged on a paper or two in this very thread.

May I ask why you like to lie about other people so much?

 

[Mountainmike]

Please stop bearing false witness.

Of course I read some things before commenting. We engaged on a paper or two in this very thread.

May I ask why you like to lie about other people so much?

I take people as I find them @Opdrey.

When you contradicted the manipulation of data , it means you clearly had never read anything about it, so I presented a paper that showed the reality, of gradients not homogeneity, and of manipulated data without justification. I am not spoon feeding you on every topic, there is too much of it.

You read books about Viking landers on Mars and Bigfoot so you say.
I don’t.

I only read non fiction,
- eg I read a lot of science books about the shroud before comment, by all the main protagonists in the field, mainly extensions of their papers. Between them I read papers, when there is anything significant, but it always appears in the next book if it stands the test of time. It’s a way of sorting wheat from chaff. A good place for beginners to start.

I am not convinced by all of it.
I think parts of whangers argument on coins in his book, and amendoim Danins book on botany may be wishful thinking. But at least some of the conclusions are verified of both authors: there is a place for speculation too.

Anyone who has studied it long enough knows it is neither mediaeval or a fake( in the sense of an artwork- it really is a crucified man) and the misdating was a triumph of hubris over competence, by people who knew nothing about the shroud They ignored all the warnings and protocols.

As I pointed out on the radiation hypothesis for the shroud, there is a lot of parts to that argument that you will not find in one single paper or even one single book.

My thoughts on the shroud are down to the science of it. Nothing to do with faith, despite your attempt at a repeated straw man. - just as my thoughts on the bleeding statue of civatecchia is that it is a fraud because of DNA. It has no consequence for me either way.

But like everything else.
You can either study it and be informed, or stay illinformed.
Take your pick.
Believe what you will.

 

[Opdrey]

I take people as I find them @Opdrey.

Judge not lest ye be judged.

You read books about Viking landers on Mars and Bigfoot so you say.
I don’t.

Just stop insulting. You want a list of the books on my bookshelf right now? Will that make you feel good? OK:

Oppenheimer biography by Goodchild
"The Secret Mesa" (about Los Alamos)
"Demon Haunted World" Sagan
"The Crusades"
"Germs" Miller et al.
"The Hot Zone" Preston
"Ablaze" (about Chernobyl)
"The History of the Catholic Church" Bokenkotter
"The Plutonium Files"
"David and Solomon" Finkelstein and SIlberman
"One Point Safe" (about nuclear non-proliferation)
"The Making of the Atomic Bomb" Richard Rhodes
"Dark Sun" (H-bomb history) Richard Rhodes
"Stalin and the Bomb"
"The Bible Unearthed"
The Bible (NRSV)
"Geochemical Thermodynamics"
"The Jesus Mysteries" Freke and Gandy
"Atomic Harvest"
"Storms of my Grandchildren" Hansen
"They All Laughed" Ira Flatow
"The God Delusion" Dawkins
"It Ain't Necessarily So" (Biblical Archeology)
"Misquoting Jesus" Ehrman
"God's Secretaries" (about the KJV)
"Lost Christianities" Ehrman
"The Idea Factory" (about Bell Labs)
"Neutrino" Close
"In Search of Schroedinger's Cat"
"The Curve of Binding Energy"
"Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman"
"god is not great" Hitchens
"Why People Believe Weird Things" Shermer
"Who is Fourier?"
"Manual of Mineralogy after JD Dana"
"Physical Chemistry" Atkins
"Discovering Statistics using R" Fields
"Introductory Statistics"
"A Distant Mirror" Tuchman
"Fear" Bob Woodward
"The New Jim Crow"
Jeff Tweedy autobiography
The Lord of the Rings (two sets)
"The Silmarillion"
"The Plague Dogs" Adams
"Annapurna" Herzog
"The Rape of Nanking"
"Dracula: a history of Vlad Tepes"
"In the Heart of the Sea"
"Beowulf"
Parliament of harlots" O'Rourke
"The Middle Ages"
"The Prince" Macchiavelli
"The First World War"
"The Spanish Inquisition"
"Close to Shore"
"Safe Return Doubtful" (about arctic exploration)
"Into Thin Air"
"The Perfect Storm"
"Alive"
"Cadillac Desert"
"A Wizard A True Star" (about Todd Rundgren's Production work)
"Passing Strange" Citro
"And the Band PLayed On"
"Vital Dust" (about panspermia)
"Mars: A living Planet"
"Confederacy of Dunces"
"The Demon in the Freezer" (about smallpox)
"The GOd Particle"
"A Brief History of Time"
"A Beautiful Mind"
"The Taking of K-129"

And this doesn't count the other bookshelves in the house or the countless fiction titles that are on my e-reader and more that are piled into boxes in the closet.

On top of this I have several more statistics textbooks. Several dictionaries. Numerous language books/dictionaries, conference proceedings that I have presented at over the last 30 years.

So just stop it. You know NOTHING about me.

 

[Mountainmike]

Now let’s get back to where this started.

The shroud. Eucharistic miracles. I have every important book ever written on both. I noted your shroud comments were illinformed , and on Eucharistic miracles you appeared to have read nothing at all.

Have you read Rogers book on the shroud yet? Or adlers? Meachams? Fantis? Marinos? Whangers? Antonacci Etc etc etc
Several on sudarium, linceul.

Have you read Serafinis book on Eucharistic miracles? Or tesorieris*3 ? Castarnons *2 ? Bialous? Samacecchia? Etc etc

Till you do read them you are illinformed on both topics.
That is the context in which I raised it. I stand by it. You can hardly deny it!

….
On the wider point , it is scarcely of relevance,

I have rooms full of books opdrey. I told you I am a book worm.
I was actually ridiculed for it!!
Some of us are. I have read several a week for decades.
You cannot mock me for reading books, then presume you actually read more!

It won’t surprise you that as a believer my Christian books including a lot of history, early fathers, lives of saints , etc is an entire large book case. Rough guess 500, just on that. I’ve never actually counted them, but 7 shelves sounds right.
They are in several languages…

It won’t surprise you I have most of dawkins too. Books about philosophy of science, quantum reality, Schrödinger’s cat , all sorts.

But Then It shouldn’t surprise you my maths physics books are extensive, but that was professional. I’ve also got all the books ( for sentimental reasons) from which I learned electronics and built a valve oscilloscope when just a kid. Like many geeks I played a lot of chess, I have a shelf of books on chess and bridge. I was a kid in Fischer’s day. A shelf full of books on golf too.

Other topics that fascinate from business perspective are copywriting and persuasion ( several shelves), theories of money and economics particularly of eurozone, ( a couple of shelves).
A shelf of books on accounts and law since I ran several companies too!

Signed biographies of business people I know and have met.
Music from bands that interest me ( 1 shelf) . Need I go on?

Its fascinating:
On the one hand you attack because I comment I read a lot of books.

On the other , you then want to claim you are better read on the basis of nothing at all. Certainly not with that motley collection!

I do credit you with some taste though, as a rock climber I also have a collection of mountaineering books too. Including into thin air. I could list those too. But I don’t believe in Willy waving contests.

Judge not lest ye be judged.



Just stop insulting. You want a list of the books on my bookshelf right now? Will that make you feel good? OK:

Oppenheimer biography by Goodchild
"The Secret Mesa" (about Los Alamos)
"Demon Haunted World" Sagan
"The Crusades"
"Germs" Miller et al.
"The Hot Zone" Preston
"Ablaze" (about Chernobyl)
"The History of the Catholic Church" Bokenkotter
"The Plutonium Files"
"David and Solomon" Finkelstein and SIlberman
"One Point Safe" (about nuclear non-proliferation)
"The Making of the Atomic Bomb" Richard Rhodes
"Dark Sun" (H-bomb history) Richard Rhodes
"Stalin and the Bomb"
"The Bible Unearthed"
The Bible (NRSV)
"Geochemical Thermodynamics"
"The Jesus Mysteries" Freke and Gandy
"Atomic Harvest"
"Storms of my Grandchildren" Hansen
"They All Laughed" Ira Flatow
"The God Delusion" Dawkins
"It Ain't Necessarily So" (Biblical Archeology)
"Misquoting Jesus" Ehrman
"God's Secretaries" (about the KJV)
"Lost Christianities" Ehrman
"The Idea Factory" (about Bell Labs)
"Neutrino" Close
"In Search of Schroedinger's Cat"
"The Curve of Binding Energy"
"Surely You're Joking Mr. Feynman"
"god is not great" Hitchens
"Why People Believe Weird Things" Shermer
"Who is Fourier?"
"Manual of Mineralogy after JD Dana"
"Physical Chemistry" Atkins
"Discovering Statistics using R" Fields
"Introductory Statistics"
"A Distant Mirror" Tuchman
"Fear" Bob Woodward
"The New Jim Crow"
Jeff Tweedy autobiography
The Lord of the Rings (two sets)
"The Silmarillion"
"The Plague Dogs" Adams
"Annapurna" Herzog
"The Rape of Nanking"
"Dracula: a history of Vlad Tepes"
"In the Heart of the Sea"
"Beowulf"
Parliament of harlots" O'Rourke
"The Middle Ages"
"The Prince" Macchiavelli
"The First World War"
"The Spanish Inquisition"
"Close to Shore"
"Safe Return Doubtful" (about arctic exploration)
"Into Thin Air"
"The Perfect Storm"
"Alive"
"Cadillac Desert"
"A Wizard A True Star" (about Todd Rundgren's Production work)
"Passing Strange" Citro
"And the Band PLayed On"
"Vital Dust" (about panspermia)
"Mars: A living Planet"
"Confederacy of Dunces"
"The Demon in the Freezer" (about smallpox)
"The GOd Particle"
"A Brief History of Time"
"A Beautiful Mind"
"The Taking of K-129"

And this doesn't count the other bookshelves in the house or the countless fiction titles that are on my e-reader and more that are piled into boxes in the closet.

On top of this I have several more statistics textbooks. Several dictionaries. Numerous language books/dictionaries, conference proceedings that I have presented at over the last 30 years.

So just stop it. You know NOTHING about me.

 

[Opdrey]

Now let’s get back to where this started.

Did you get tired of bearing false witness? There's 9 other Commandments and time's awastin'!

On the wider point , it is scarcely of relevance,

I have rooms full of books opdrey. I told you I am a book worm.

And you seem to assume that those who don't read YOUR favorite books don't read books at all. You are wrong.

You cannot mock me for reading books, then presume you actually read more!

More lies. I don't mock you for reading books. Jeez, dude. What is your malfunction????

Its fascinating:
On the one hand you attack because I comment I read a lot of books.

YET ANOTHER LIE!!! WOW! You are swingin' for the fences today!

STOP LYING ABOUT WHAT I HAVE SAID.

Wow. Honestly, what good is this Faith of yours if you spend most of your time just lying about other people?

If you can't be trusted to actually describe back to me what I've said why would I believe what you say about anything else?????

Stop it. Mike. Just. STOP.

I'm getting to my limit with your mendacity.