The Mariana Trench

[Strathos]

... Haven't heard that expression in years!

So did you last hear it before or after you created this thread?

 

[AV1611VET]

So did you last hear it before or after you created this thread?

LOL ... had to think on that a sec.

 

[Kylie]

According to Wikipedia, the Mariana Trench reaches a maximum depth of 6.78 miles.If you accept this as factual, without going there and measuring it yourself --- even if everyone on earth goes there and measures it (except you) and comes back with the same figure --- then I contend that you're taking it on faith that the Mariana Trench has a maximum depth of 6.78 miles.

Faith in the written documentation and/or eyewitness testimony and/or anecdotal testimony --- either way --- it's still faith.

And I don't care if you're a taxi driver, a chef, a ballerina, or an oceanographer looking at computer printouts and sonar graphs; if you haven't gone there yourself, then you're [correctly] accepting the written documentation.

This is as it should be --- and it's called 'walking by faith'.

Of course, we can ask WHY the documentation says that, and it would lead us to the different surveys which have been done over the years, and we can examine the findings they got, the actual data, not just their conclusions.

So not quite the same as relying on a book full of old stories, is it?

 

[Kylie]

I might have a PhD in astronomy and have seen SN1987A with my own eyes, but when I believe the documentation and test results of botanists who claim plants are green because of chlorophyll, I'm exercising faith in what they are showing me is correct.

But being able to see their evidence for chlorophyll is a very different thing to saying, "The Bible says it, so it must be true."

Sure ... I can test their findings myself.

I can go get me some chlorophyll, learn how it works, then test it myself; but if I don't, then it is because I either don't care, or I'll take the word of those who claim to be an expert.

In fact, I can even take the word of someone who isn't an expert.

The point is: I'm taking their word for it and adjusting my mindset to theirs.

But if lots of people test it, and they all get "chlorophyll" as the result, then it's safe to say that chlorophyll is the correct answer.

But when people test religion and get more than 4000 different religions, and 30,000 or 40,000 different flavours of Christianity, then there's a good chanced you messed it up somewhere...

 

[AV1611VET]

Of course, we can ask WHY the documentation says that, and it would lead us to the different surveys which have been done over the years, and we can examine the findings they got, the actual data, not just their conclusions.

All on paper, isn't it?

And yes, you can ask anything you want.

You can even go down into the trench and measure it yourself.

Or you can have faith in the written testimony of those who have.

I heard and I forgot; I saw and I remembered; I did and I understood.

 

[AV1611VET]

But if lots of people test it, and they all get "chlorophyll" as the result, then it's safe to say that chlorophyll is the correct answer.

Let's say there are 7,000,000,000 people on earth: all adults.

Let's say 6,999,999,999 actually go down into the trench and measure it for themselves.

For that 1 person who didn't, he's exercising faith in the others who did go down there.

But when people test religion and get more than 4000 different religions, and 30,000 or 40,000 different flavours of Christianity, then there's a good chanced you messed it up somewhere...

And what of the 100% of Christians who ever lived, alive today, and will be alive tomorrow who believe IN THE BEGINNING GOD?

How did they score on that test?

Compare that to the test scores of scientists who ever lived, alive today, and will be alive tomorrow when asked how we got our moon.

 

[Kylie]

All on paper, isn't it?

And yes, you can ask anything you want.

You can even go down into the trench and measure it yourself.

Or you can have faith in the written testimony of those who have.

I heard and I forgot; I saw and I remembered; I did and I understood.

Tell me, do you see the difference between a source that has the data to back it up and a source that has no data but is believed just because people have been believing it for a long time?

 

[Kylie]

Let's say there are 7,000,000,000 people on earth: all adults.

Let's say 6,999,999,999 actually go down into the trench and measure it for themselves.

For that 1 person who didn't, he's exercising faith in the others who did go down there.

Tell me, if those 6,999,999,999 people ALL got it wrong, do you think they'd all get the same result?

And what of the 100% of Christians who ever lived, alive today, and will be alive tomorrow who believe IN THE BEGINNING GOD?

How did they score on that test?

Compare that to the test scores of scientists who ever lived, alive today, and will be alive tomorrow when asked how we got our moon.

When out of the 7 billion people on the planet, only 2.1 billion of them think Christianity is true, that means 4.9 billion people think that Christians are wrong. An argument from popularity is not your friend here, AV.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

When out of the 7 billion people on the planet, only 2.1 billion of them think Christianity is true, that means 4.9 billion people think that Christians are wrong. An argument from popularity is not your friend here, AV.

Sooo, 4.9 billion people think that murder, theft, lying, and adultery is ok, and that treating your fellow man well is nonsense? No wonder this world is messed up.

 

[AV1611VET]

Tell me, do you see the difference between a source that has the data to back it up and a source that has no data but is believed just because people have been believing it for a long time?

Yes.

 

[AV1611VET]

Tell me, if those 6,999,999,999 people ALL got it wrong, do you think they'd all get the same result?

No.

When out of the 7 billion people on the planet, only 2.1 billion of them think Christianity is true, that means 4.9 billion people think that Christians are wrong.

And of those 7 billion, how many think evolution is true (or even heard of it)?

An argument from popularity is not your friend here, AV.

And the truth isn't yours, is it?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

But when people test religion and get more than 4000 different religions, and 30,000 or 40,000 different flavours of Christianity,............

With fewer than a dozen or so major differences between them.

 

[durangodawood]

According to Wikipedia, the Mariana Trench reaches a maximum depth of 6.78 miles.If you accept this as factual, without going there and measuring it yourself --- even if everyone on earth goes there and measures it (except you) and comes back with the same figure --- then I contend that you're taking it on faith that the Mariana Trench has a maximum depth of 6.78 miles.

Faith in the written documentation and/or eyewitness testimony and/or anecdotal testimony --- either way --- it's still faith.

And I don't care if you're a taxi driver, a chef, a ballerina, or an oceanographer looking at computer printouts and sonar graphs; if you haven't gone there yourself, then you're [correctly] accepting the written documentation.

This is as it should be --- and it's called 'walking by faith'.

Then "faith" is weak and, to my mind, much shallower than the way religious faith has typically been presented.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then "faith" is weak and, to my mind, much shallower than the way religious faith has typically been presented.

Tell that to the New Yorkers on 9/11 when [religious] academians invaded our office space with our 747s.

 

[durangodawood]

Tell that to the New Yorkers on 9/11 when [religious] academians invaded our office space with our 747s.

Not comparable to an educated understanding of how science and scientific institutions work. Putting that in the same category as suicide-terrorist "faith" is just silly.

You are basically equivocating among 2 totally different understandings of the word "faith" in order to diminish the status of scientific endeavor. Its transparent, what youre doing, and not particularly well thought out..

 

[Belk]

According to Wikipedia, the Mariana Trench reaches a maximum depth of 6.78 miles.If you accept this as factual, without going there and measuring it yourself --- even if everyone on earth goes there and measures it (except you) and comes back with the same figure --- then I contend that you're taking it on faith that the Mariana Trench has a maximum depth of 6.78 miles.

Faith in the written documentation and/or eyewitness testimony and/or anecdotal testimony --- either way --- it's still faith.

And I don't care if you're a taxi driver, a chef, a ballerina, or an oceanographer looking at computer printouts and sonar graphs; if you haven't gone there yourself, then you're [correctly] accepting the written documentation.

This is as it should be --- and it's called 'walking by faith'.

Equivocation : Department of Philosophy : Texas State University

 

[AV1611VET]

Not comparable to an educated understanding of how science and scientific institutions work.

I don't think New Yorkers would would agree with you calling it two different understandings of faith.

They had a terrible tragedy occur, with a great loss of life and limb, and the last thing they need is some academian analyzing what understanding of faith was employed to get the job done.

 

[AV1611VET]

Equivocation : Department of Philosophy : Texas State University

What about it?

I'm sure Texas State University is second to none in taking your money if you want to start walking by sight in some scientific discipline.

But even then they'll LITERALLY test your faith.

For instance, if you take Ocenagraphy 101, you'd better put the right number down when asked how deep the Mariana Trench is.

And I assume you'll have that number in your head by rote memory.

Because as I said before:

I heard and I forgot, I saw and I remembered, I did and I understood.

 

[Belk]

What about it?

I'm sure Texas State University is second to none in taking your money if you want to start walking by sight in some scientific discipline.

But even then they'll LITERALLY test your faith.

For instance, if you take Ocenagraphy 101, you'd better put the right number down when asked how deep the Mariana Trench is.

And I assume you'll have that number in your head by rote memory.

Because as I said before:

I heard and I forgot, I saw and I remembered, I did and I understood.

It is the logical fallacy your argument is presenting. If you wish us to take your conclusion seriously you should deal with that logical fallacy. I think you should do so because I believe the idea that is underpinning your argument is correct. However you can't show it to be so when using a fallacious argument.

 

[AV1611VET]

It is the logical fallacy your argument is presenting.

So if you and I were debating each other on the John Ankerberg show, and you said the Mariana Trench was 6.78 miles deep, and I asked you where you heard that; what would you say?