Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 35 of 35
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    278
    Another point about honesty ... As you know, atheists are THE most distrusted members of society. If you don't trust someone, you're essentially saying they are dishonest (or not worthy of your trust). So it's rather ironic that you're constantly talking about the dishonesty of religious people when polls show it is YOU who is seen as distrustful by the general public

    One final point on the issue over 864,000 ... If you look at blog debates, atheists used to argue the diameter of the sun was 870,000 miles whenever the biblical links with 864,000 was brought up! They would say we were off by 6,000 miles! Now they are saying we are only off by 1,000 miles ... Eventually you'll come around and chop off 1,000 off that value. You're getting closer and closer to the truth.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,145
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    And like I stated, IF there are STILL authoritative sources that STILL use the value 864,000 (which there are), then THAT in itself warrants using that value. My three main points justifying my use of 864,000 are ...

    1) The value is STILL used by authoritative sources.
    2) The diameter of the moon (2160) has to match PRECISELY with the distance of the sun (which is 400 times farther than the moon) in order to have a total solar eclipse (2160 x 400 = 864,000).
    3) The correspondence between the biblical links (and links from nature itself) to a solar diameter of 864,000.

    ...

    The HIGHEST level of statistical studies are studies involving META-ANALYSIS (where instead of looking at individual studies, we look at ALL the extant studies and make a conclusion by taking ALL the studies into account). Well, let's do that ...
    Your cognitive dissonance is truly stunning Gambini! You TOTALLY IGNORE the vast majority of studies that show the sun is not anywhere near 864,000 miles, and choose to believe that it has that value merely because that's what you want to believe, and then you start lecturing me about how "we" are supposed to "look at ALL the extant studies and make a conclusion by taking ALL the studies into account". It's rare to see such blatant absurdity stated so bluntly. You totally contradict your own word!

    Wow.



    PS: Here again is the review of 32 years of measurements of the solar diameter, using all the different methodologies. The numbers you want to be true are not supported by the vast majority of the studies. How. Freaking. Pathetic.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	sun_radius.PNG 
Views:	49 
Size:	164.7 KB 
ID:	997
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,145
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    "So what? Those are approximations"

    So we can only give "approximations" for the diameter of the CLOSEST body in the solar system and the distance to the sun BUT we can physically measure the diameter of the sun to within an error of 40 miles (give or take)??? If we can physically measure the diameter of the sun with that much accuracy, then surely we can measure the diameter of the moon and the distance of the sun with as much accuracy (if not MORE so) ...

    And like I stated, IF there are STILL authoritative sources that STILL use the value 864,000 (which there are), then THAT in itself warrants using that value. My three main points justifying my use of 864,000 are ...

    1) The value is STILL used by authoritative sources.
    2) The diameter of the moon (2160) has to match PRECISELY with the distance of the sun (which is 400 times farther than the moon) in order to have a total solar eclipse (2160 x 400 = 864,000).
    3) The correspondence between the biblical links (and links from nature itself) to a solar diameter of 864,000.
    Your logic is flawed. Here again is the review of all the studies of the diameter of the sun from the last 32 years. The data marked by the plus signs are from studies of solar eclipses. Not one of them supports your assertion that the solar diameter is 864,000 miles. Not one! There are ten such measurements, and seven of them give a radius above 865,000 miles, and all of them round to that number. Not one of them is below 864,500 miles which would be need to legitimately round them down to the number you so desperately desire. Therefore, your assertion that the "diameter of the moon (2160) has to match PRECISELY with the distance of the sun" is irrelevant. The scientists have measured the diameter of the sun using the solar eclipse and do not agree with your assertion that it implies the solar diameter is 864,000 miles. Science has refuted your claims.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	sun_radius.PNG 
Views:	50 
Size:	164.7 KB 
ID:	998

    Now think what this means. You are totally convinced by the biblical numerology that the solar diameter MUST be 864,000 miles. But it is not. This shows how Biblical numerology cannot be trusted. It also shows how easy it is to be deceived by apparently convincing patterns. It brings into question all the other patterns you believe in. If you could be so easily deceived on something like this that can actually be tested with real science, what about all those other conclusions that can't be tested in any way at all? How can you tell the difference between chance and design? How could you tell if you were deluded? Apparently, you have no method to discern between truth and delusion. And when I give you a method, you fight with all your strength to remain deluded. This is the final nail in the coffin of your many claims.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    And you said nothing about the biblical links with the diameter of the moon or the diameter of the earth ...
    What's there to say, but that I have proven those claims are meaningless because they are based on a falsehood. The solar diameter is not 864,000 miles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    God had the Israelites march around the city of Jericho once for each of six days ... 360 degrees x 6 = 2160 (diameter of the moon) and Jericho itself means "City of the MOON"! ...
    So what? Just another meaningless coincidence. And besides, they actually walked around once for six days and then seven times on the seventh day for a total of 13 times, which gives 360 x 13 = 4680. That's not the diameter of the moon! You are cherry picking again.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    The book of Revelation describes New Jerusalem coming down to the EARTH. The dimensions given for the New Jerusalem in the book of Revelation translates to a diameter of 7920 (diameter of the EARTH in miles) x 1000 feet! And this goes back to my point about the mile, foot and inch not being arbitrary units of measure. Every single ancient system of measurement is related to our modern system.
    Show me your math and we'll talk.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    Btw, I really wish you would stop repeating this ridiculous line of yours about religion having a negative effect on morals. That's the DUMBEST shit I've ever heard. Your own personal experiences of religious people don't mean anything. If your assertion that religion has negative effects on people is true, then the data should back that up ...
    You are a prime example of why I say that religion tends to corrupt the minds and morals of believers. You have chosen to believe a lie and reject the vast majority of scientific studies spanning the last 32 years concerning the diameter of the sun. Your bias is the most blatant anyone could ever imagine. You have not given any SCIENTIFIC REASON to reject all those studies. You and I both know that the only reason you are rejecting those scientific studies is because they contradict what you want to believe. You explicitly claim that you are justified by an APPEAL TO AUTHORITY - saying if you can find any "authorities" that use the wrong value, that justifies your use of the wrong value. That's not just a logical fallacy - it's pure insanity. It makes it look like you DESPISE the truth! This reveals a corruption of your mind. And truth is a moral issue, so your morals have been corrupted too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    The HIGHEST level of statistical studies are studies involving META-ANALYSIS (where instead of looking at individual studies, we look at ALL the extant studies and make a conclusion by taking ALL the studies into account). Well, let's do that ...
    Then why do you reject the meta-analysis of the last 32 years of stuides of the solar radius, which is why the AUTHORITIES now use the value of 696,000 km = 864,948 miles, which is only 52 miles less than 865,000 miles. That's the dotted line in the middle of the graph I keep showing you. There's no way you could legitimately round that down to 864,000 miles. It is the accepted value now in the ephemerides. But you don't care about little things like truth, do you?

    As for the studies you cited, I think I'll start a new thread since that topic deserves a thread of its own.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,145
    Bump.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,145
    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini
    1) The value is STILL used by authoritative sources.
    2) The diameter of the moon (2160) has to match PRECISELY with the distance of the sun (which is 400 times farther than the moon) in order to have a total solar eclipse (2160 x 400 = 864,000).
    3) The correspondence between the biblical links (and links from nature itself) to a solar diameter of 864,000.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gambini View Post
    So given that and the correlating evidence from the bible (and nature itself), we can safely say that the value 864,00 is closer to the truth. Observe another biblical link ...

    The value of "SUN AND MOON" (from Psalm 148:3) = 864!
    Gambini,

    After reviewing all your claims concerning the relation between the number 864 and the diameter of the sun in miles, I cannot find any meaningful motivation to make any connection whatsoever. The value of the word "sun" in Hebrew is 640, which doesn't fit. And the value of "moon" in Hebrew is 218 which "should" have been 216 to make a "connection" with the rounded value of 2160 miles (which just goes to show how important a role meaningless coincidence and cherry picking plays in your numerology).

    The fact that "sun and moon" sums to 864 doesn't mean anything since the diameter of the "sun and moon" is not 864. It's just another meaningless coincidence that you cherry picked to fit a pattern you created out of your own imagination.

    And your assertion that the diameter had to "match PRECISELY with the distance of the sun ... in order to have a total solar eclipse" is ludicrous because both the distance between the earth and the moon and the earth and the sun change all the time (the orbits are elliptical) and besides that, the degree of "precision" obviously doesn't have to be such as to necessitate an exact value of 864,000.

    So I don't see anything in the Bible or nature that would cause anyone to think the number 864 should "match" the diameter of the sun.

    And of course, you entire system is flawed, in that it is based on mere "matching numbers." By that standard, we would conclude that the number codons were designed using the 64 hexagrams of the I Ching.

    Your numerology is anything but a "sure foundation" for your claims that God designed the Bible.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •