Religion The Bible: Literal, figurative, bulldust?

[Gethelred]

To clearly delineate conversation between threads, this thread is for specifically bible talk; if you're debating biblical historicity or lack of it, if you're talking interpretation, this is the thread for you.

Standard board rules apply. Go nuts.

 

[evolved2]

Rosscoe 17

Explain this statement through your vast wealth of mathematical knowledge: "If our creation was random then two people would have the same finger print; because that is how randomness works."

 

[Roylion]

I always understood that the Jews didn't care if he was a real person or not, they just didn't accept that he was their messiah. Jesus could have just been some rabblerouser from the Judean Peoples' Front, resenting life as it was under the Roman Empire of the time and making so much local noise that they erased him.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

View attachment 1746213

Nothing definitive, but here's a bit of food for thought. I never knew koalas also had fingerprints!!

Do other animals have fingerprints? And what purpose do they serve?

Do other animals have fingerprints? And what purpose do they serve?

It turns out we aren’t the only creatures with fingerprints – and there are many reasons they could have evolved. And the fingerprints of an unexpected animal might even be confusing the police databases in Australia.

www.newscientist.com

10 March 2021

Unsurprisingly, our closest relatives, the great apes, also have fingerprints.

Perhaps more surprisingly, so does the koala. In an example of convergent evolution, koalas have fingerprints that are virtually indistinguishable from ours, even though our last common ancestor lived more than 100 million years ago. Like human prints, each individual koala’s fingerprint has a unique pattern.

The primary function of fingerprints still isn’t universally agreed on. Suggested benefits include improved grip and the prevention of blisters. Fingerprints are also thought to increase the sensitivity of touch, allowing us to discriminate finer details.

When we run our fingers over an object, this sets off tiny vibrations in the skin, which are detected by nerves. Fingerprints increase, the size of these vibrations about 100-fold.

Koalas are notoriously fussy eaters, preferring to eat only eucalyptus leaves of a particular age. Their sensitive fingers may have evolved to allow them to identify the texture of their ideal meal...

 

[Rosscoe 17]

Rosscoe 17

Explain this statement through your vast wealth of mathematical knowledge: "If our creation was random then two people would have the same finger print; because that is how randomness works."

Here is the Maths part. If no two same fingerprints have ever been sighted; how can anybody come to the conclusion that 1 in 64 Billion fingerprints are identical. It should be 0 out of whatever.

 

[the_interloper]

Here is the Maths part. If no two same fingerprints have ever been sighted; how can anybody come to the conclusion that 1 in 64 Billion fingerprints are identical. It should be 0 out of whatever.

Yeah but odds like that are not definitive though right, it's meant to create a model, it's not like anyone would test it. That's the idea of odds, to give you an idea of the likelihood of outcomes.

That said on this particular case I'd be interested to see the maths on that, I'm assuming there's some sort of rigour done.

 

[Roylion]

Here is the Maths part. If no two same fingerprints have ever been sighted; how can anybody come to the conclusion that 1 in 64 Billion fingerprints are identical. It should be 0 out of whatever.

Really? How do you think that is estimated? Does everything have to be spelt out for you?

Probability is a branch of mathematics that deals with the occurrence of a random event. Probability theory is used in various areas of study such as statistics, mathmatics, science, finance, gambling, artificial intelligence, computer science, amongst others. Forensic scientists and fingerprint experts estimate there is a 1 in 64 billion chance of two persons having exactly the same fingerprints.

Whatever the case, individual fingerprints is not evidence of any form of intelligent design.

 

[Rosscoe 17]

Yeah but odds like that are not definitive though right, it's meant to create a model, it's not like anyone would test it. That's the idea of odds, to give you an idea of the likelihood of outcomes.

That said on this particular case I'd be interested to see the maths on that, I'm assuming there's some sort of rigour done.

Agreed so long as it is not definitive.

 

[Rosscoe 17]

Really? How do you think that is estimated? Does everything have to be spelt out for you?

Probability is a branch of mathematics that deals with the occurrence of a random event. Probability theory is used in various areas of study such as statistics, mathmatics, science, finance, gambling, artificial intelligence, computer science, amongst others. Forensic scientists and fingerprint experts estimate there is a 1 in 64 billion chance of two persons having exactly the same fingerprints.

Whatever the case, individual fingerprints is not evidence of any form of intelligent design.

I don’t need it spelt out; estimates are based on what exactly?

 

[Roylion]

I don’t need it spelt out; estimates are based on what exactly?

I just told you.

Forensic scientists and fingerprint experts estimate there is a 1 in 64 billion chance of two persons having exactly the same fingerprints. Francis Galton was the first to calculate this.

Whatever the case, the fact that each individual has unique fingerprints is not evidence of any form of intelligent design.

 

[Rosscoe 17]

I just told you.

Forensic scientists and fingerprint experts estimate there is a 1 in 64 billion chance of two persons having exactly the same fingerprints. Francis Galton was the first to calculate this.

Whatever the case, the fact that each individual has unique fingerprints is not evidence of any form of intelligent design.

Our bodies have been designed in a way that can identify us.

 

[Roylion]

Our bodies have been designed in a way that can identify us.

There is no evidence that there is an intelligent designer. Fingerprints are certainly not evidence .

 

[Rosscoe 17]

There is no evidence that there is an intelligent designer. Fingerprints are certainly not evidence .

There is design in every aspect of nature. It is obvious.

 

[Roylion]

There is design in every aspect of nature. It is obvious.

No it’s not.

There is absolutely no evidence of “intelligent design” at all.

Each snowflake has a general hexagonal pattern, but each snowflake is unique. That’s not an indication of “intelligent design.” It’s merely a product of the chemistry of water in the frozen state.

There’s no “design” at work at all.

 

[Rosscoe 17]

No it’s not.

There is absolutely no evidence of “intelligent design” at all.

Each snowflake has a general hexagonal pattern, but each snowflake is unique. That’s not an indication of “intelligent design.” It’s merely a product of the chemistry of water in the frozen state.

There’s no “design” at work at all.

Creation is either random or designed. There is nothing random about nature. If you have evidence that there is; please present it because the “yeah nah”, thing has become tiresome.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

There is design in every aspect of nature. It is obvious.

Did the same god that designed all the different fingerprints, also design all the different dog nose prints, and all the different zebra stripes?

 

[Roylion]

Creation is either random or designed. There is nothing random about nature.

The design of organisms as they exist in nature, however, is not "intelligent design", imposed by God as some sort of supreme engineer of life; rather, it is the result of a natural process of selection, promoting the adaptation of organisms to their environments. There is no evidence whatsover for any of that being the design of some sort of higher order intelligent designer.

There is no compelling case for Intelligent Design. The proponent of inteliigent design rests on three three things: unshakeable faith, the argument from incredulity, and the "God of the Gaps" argument.

Looking at the world (such as the fact that there are virtually unique fingerprints for everybody on the planet) through ID-colored glasses and interpreting everything you observe to be the "Designer’s" handiwork does not constitute actual evidence for your claim.

If you have evidence that there is; please present it because the “yeah nah”, thing has become tiresome.

How are unique fingerprints evidence of intelligent design?

 

[Rosscoe 17]

Did the same god that designed all the different fingerprints, also design all the different dog nose prints, and all the different zebra stripes?

You do not have to believe in god to admit there is design in nature. But if you do admit there is design, then you cannot be an athiest because design requires a designer; whatever you believe that to be.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

You do not have to believe in god to admit there is design in nature. But if you do admit there is design, then you cannot be an athiest because design requires a designer; whatever you believe that to be.

Could there be design through sheer evolutionary need? Some animals grew thick hides to deal with weather. Reptilian scales evolved into the virtual plate armour that crocodiles and alligators have. Prey animals developed all manner of camouflage to fool predators.

Necessity is the driver.

 

[Chief]

Did the same god that designed all the different fingerprints, also design all the different dog nose prints, and all the different zebra stripes?

Oh derrr!

How else do zebras get into their iPhones?

 

[evolved2]

Creation is either random or designed. There is nothing random about nature. If you have evidence that there is; please present it because the “yeah nah”, thing has become tiresome.

Evolution relies on random mutation to heritable genetic material as well as non-random natural selection.

So 'creation' is neither random or designed.

 

[evolved2]

Here is the Maths part. If no two same fingerprints have ever been sighted; how can anybody come to the conclusion that 1 in 64 Billion fingerprints are identical. It should be 0 out of whatever.

I presume it's based on probability calculated from the amount of functional DNA in our 23 chromosome pairs. Environment seems to play a part too.

You don't need to see direct evidence to calculate the odds of a pack of cards randomly forming any one sequence. That's not how probability works.

 

[Rosscoe 17]

Evolution relies on random mutation to heritable genetic material as well as non-random natural selection.

So 'creation' is neither random or designed.

Creation has a beginning that was either created or randomly appeared from nothing.

 

[Rosscoe 17]

I presume it's based on probability calculated from the amount of functional DNA in our 23 chromosome pairs. Environment seems to play a part too.

You don't need to see direct evidence to calculate the odds of a pack of cards randomly forming any one sequence. That's not how probability works.

That two fingerprints could be identical is conjecture.

 

[evolved2]

Creation has a beginning that was either created or randomly appeared from nothing.

I'll go with the first law of thermodynamics. Energy can neither be created or destroyed. Therefore, there was always something. One logical conclusion is that the Universe has always existed in some form or another.

Do you believe biblegod was created or did they randomly appear from nothing?

 

[evolved2]

That two fingerprints could be identical is conjecture.

That's conjecture on your part. If you don't know how scientists and mathematicians determine the odds of two fingerprints being identical, you have no basis to challenge it.