Is YEC science? Is is even really a theory?

[AV1611VET]

See:

Belief Bias: When People Rely on Beliefs Rather Than Logic​

Depends on the object of your belief.

For Shoko Asahara, it was Shiva, the god of destruction.

For Christ, it is love thy neighbor.

For Allah, it is convert-or-die.

For Darwin, it is fight-or-flight.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The old testament is sorta (with much bias) history of a nomadic tribal cultural

While I don't agree with AV's take on the nature of "accuracy," I think we all know there's bias on both sides where ancient Israelite history is under scrutiny.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

What you call "bias" we call "accuracy."

What I call "bias" is just that ... but everyone can have this, even those who deny that they do.

 

[Frank Robert]

While I don't agree with AV's take on the nature of "accuracy," I think we all know there's bias on both sides where ancient Israelite history is under scrutiny.

Yes, we all have biases yet most of us are logically able to correct our biases when we become aware of evidence to do so.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yes, we all have biases yet most of us are logically able to correct our biases when we become aware of evidence to do so.

...oh, I don't know about that. Where the Bible and/or "the Past" are concerned, I think there's a lot of unaccounted for speculation on all sides.

 

[Frank Robert]

...oh, I don't know about that. Where the Bible and/or "the Past" are concerned, I think there's a lot of unaccounted for speculation on all sides.

The~40,000 Christian denomination is proof that there will always be speculation on the meaning of biblical writing.

By the other side I am assuming you are referring to proponents of science in general and evolution in particular where the major source of bias is from Christian creationist as epitomized by the "same evidence, but different interpretations" claim. It is easy to come up with interpretations that can, maybe, possibly, challenge accepted science that is challenged by religious creationists yet the creationists' organizations such as AIG are unable to produce actual science/evolution research.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The~40,000 Christian denomination is proof that there will always be speculation on the meaning of biblical writing.

Yep. I'm not going to argue about that.

By the other side I am assuming you are referring to proponents of science in general and evolution in particular where the major source of bias is from Christian creationist as epitomized by the "same evidence, but different interpretations" claim.

It is easy to come up with interpretations that can, maybe, possibly, challenge accepted science that is challenged by religious creationists yet the creationists' organizations such as AIG are unable to produce actual science/evolution research.

Yeah, I hear what you're saying. Some 'Creationists' may say "same evidence, different interpretations," but the reality is that a lot of them are just looking at different things, calling it evidence, or denying various bits of other scientific evidence.................and then offering interpretations of varying quality about how they "wish to see it." As you know, one perspective (or opinion) isn't always equal to another, and sometimes, some Christians are just wrong.

 

[AV1611VET]

The~40,000 Christian denomination is proof that there will always be speculation on the meaning of biblical writing.

1 Corinthians 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

 

[Estrid]

I used to think it was all ditchwater too. That was before I became a Christian. But go figure.

Hey if it fills some hole, gopher it.

 

[Estrid]

Logic doesn't guarantee much of anything, especially where the past and the act of writing history about it is concerned.

Logic as in " philosophy" yes. You are on to something.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Logic as in " philosophy" yes. You are on to something.

You're showing that you're not familiar with philosophy as a field of study at the university level. It might be good for you to bump into it a bit more so you know just how "lame" we in the U.S. tend to think it is:

L - Logic (...with the typical intro text book being something like: Introduction to Logic - Iriving M. Copi & Carl Cohen, or others like it)

A - Axiology

M - Metaphysics

E - Epistemology

[And the many subdisciplines like Philosophy of History that plays into the typical historian's craft, or Philosophy of Science which deals with things like Popperian Falsification or Kunh's Paradigm shifts, or Philosophy of Law, which...................well, you get the picture.)

 

[Estrid]

You're showing that you're not familiar with philosophy as a field of study at the university level. It might be good for you to bump into it a bit more so you know just how "lame" we in the U.S. tend to think it is:

L - Logic (...with the typical intro text book being something like: Introduction to Logic - Iriving M. Copi & Carl Cohen, or others like it)

A - Axiology

M - Metaphysics

E - Epistemology

[And the many subdisciplines like Philosophy of History that plays into the typical historian's craft, or Philosophy of Science which deals with things like Popperian Falsification or Kunh's Paradigm shifts, or Philosophy of Law, which...................well, you get the picture.)

You is trying to argue both ends of the broomstick.

I took a Philosophy course that was recommended
for LSAT prep.

I also observed that the education majors are
the dumbest, the phil majors the most tiresome
people on campus.

 

[AV1611VET]

Axiology

JESUS IS THE REASON FOR THE SEASON

Is than an axiological statement?

 

[Platte]

Explain the fact of the settlement of Dolní Věstonice, a Paleolithic settlement which includes art and engravings, and is dated to have be lived in between 27,000 and 20,000 BC, with your view of history.

Explain how you do not understand the difference between History (recorded) and pre history....you think there is no difference between the two? That there is a nonsensical distinction between the two? Like somehow I created that distinction.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Explain how you do not understand the difference between History (recorded) and pre history....you think there is no difference between the two? That there is a nonsensical distinction between the two? Like somehow I created that distinction.

Because the start of recorded history is just the start of RECORDED history. That's all it is. It is not the start of history.

Now, explain the fact of the settlement of Dolní Věstonice, a Paleolithic settlement which includes art and engravings, and is dated to have be lived in between 27,000 and 20,000 BC, with your view of history.

 

[Platte]

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap7778

"...Hoffmann et al. used uranium-thorium dating of carbonate crusts to show that cave paintings from three different sites in Spain must be older than 64,000 years. These paintings are the oldest dated cave paintings in the world...."

Human created art is probably older than that:

An abstract drawing from the 73,000-year-old levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa - Nature

A silcrete flake with a 73,000-year-old cross-hatched ochre drawing, from Blombos Cave, South Africa, demonstrates that early Homo sapiens used a range of media and techniques to produce graphic representations.

www.nature.com

"....Here we report a cross-hatched pattern drawn with an ochre crayon on a ground silcrete flake recovered from approximately 73,000-year-old Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa. Our microscopic and chemical analyses of the pattern confirm that red ochre pigment was intentionally applied to the flake with an ochre crayon...."

If those don't satisfy you, there are plenty of other examples of human art in the 30,0000 to 40,000 year old range:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abd4648

."...This image from Leang Bulu’ Sipong 4 in the limestone karsts of Maros-Pangkep, South Sulawesi, was created at least 43,900 years ago (43.9 ka) based on Uranium-series

U-Th dating of carbonate crusts reveals Neandertal origin of Iberian cave art?​

 

[AV1611VET]

Explain how you do not understand the difference between History (recorded) and pre history....you think there is no difference between the two? That there is a nonsensical distinction between the two? Like somehow I created that distinction.

History = His Story

 

[Platte]

Because the start of recorded history is just the start of RECORDED history. That's all it is. It is not the start of history.

Now, explain the fact of the settlement of Dolní Věstonice, a Paleolithic settlement which includes art and engravings, and is dated to have be lived in between 27,000 and 20,000 BC, with your view of history.

I'd have to see how this was done. It dates to approximately 26,000 BP, as supported by radiocarbon dating. What was radiocarbon dated? How was a dated - what baseline was used....what atmospheric carbon level was assumed? But most importantly - what was carbon dated?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You is trying to argue both ends of the broomstick.

I took a Philosophy course that was recommended
for LSAT prep.

I also observed that the education majors are
the dumbest, the phil majors the most tiresome
people on campus.

Now you're just saying something off of the cuff like AV would ...

C'mon now, Estrid! It's not like the the quote, "phil majors are the most tiresome people on campus," isn't a meme ... I've heard it already from others more than once. It's been around in one form or another since at least the time of Socrates.

But there's a funny thing about memes ... sometimes they turn out to be mere rhetoric.

 

[Estrid]

I'd have to see how this was done. It dates to approximately 26,000 BP, as supported by radiocarbon dating. What was radiocarbon dated? How was a dated - what baseline was used....what atmospheric carbon level was assumed? But most importantly - what was carbon dated?

Do you always deny any research that
doesn't match religious beliefs?