On Pevensie Education Politics

Tolkien Lore made a video answering a point by GRRM which I had already answered in another way.

No, GRRM, We Don't Care About Aragorn's Tax Policy
12th Oct. 2020 | Tolkien Lore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXM9NWd1Q7Y

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Actually, I did care enough to come up with a tentative answer.

Just as I care very much for the part of the Pevensie education politics that disenforced school.

But, here is my answer about Aragorn and taxes:

Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Answering GRRM on JRRT's character Aragorn
https://filolohika.blogspot.com/2014/06/answering-grrm-on-jrrts-character.html

Writing this before watching your video.

Eru Ilúvatar

Pevensie education politics?

Sounds interesting enough.

Chrysalis Maria Adolphus von Schwarzenfels

What does "Pevensie education politics that disenforced school" mean? Google didn't provide the answers...

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Chrysalis Maria Adolphus von Schwarzenfels Look up last chapter of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, or if it was last paragraphs of previous chapter. School compulsion had existed under the White Witch and was abolished by Pevensie kings.

In other words, school (attendance) had been enforced under the White Witch and was disenforced under the Pevensies.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I wonder what effects that had on litteracy and soforth.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar I don't think literacy is more important than wellbeing of children.

I also don't think literacy is inaccessible by other means than school compulsion, for instance parental or sometimes lordly lessons. Remember what the Gaffer said about Bilbo? He had taught Sam letters, not meaning any harm ... that's lordly lessons, but obviously many parents a bit more literate than Gaffer Gamgee would be able to give their children literacy, if desired or needed.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl School is enforced in many ways in the modern world as well, and it (generally) doesn't effect the wellbeing of children (this changes in later years as the amount of work etc increases, but that's besides the point). Now, I'm going to assume those the white witch had were much worse than those..but wouldn't it be a better move to just make the schools themselves *better*, rather than leaving the possibility of a large part of the population not getting an actual education?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar "and it (generally) doesn't effect the wellbeing of children"

It does that of those forced to attend despite harassment from either teachers or comrades.

"Now, I'm going to assume those the white witch had were much worse than those.."

Why?

"but wouldn't it be a better move to just make the schools themselves *better*,"

One way of making them better is making children's attendance voluntary to parents so that school teachers have to be attractive and keep an attractive social atmosphere.

" rather than leaving the possibility of a large part of the population not getting an actual education?"

There is a huge difference between an actual education per se and an actual school education.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
1st point: If we simply look at our own systems, where attending school is often mandatory (and enforced), which seems to go quite well in a lot of countries, why would it not work there.
Also 1st point: Teachers/Students harassing Students...there would be things in place to prevent this in a good system, that don't involve making schools/education no longer mandatory.
2nd point: Because if they're not worse then why remove the mandatory aspect
3rd point: the better was mostly reffering to if they are infact worse than our own.
@Hans-Georg Lundahl
4th point: there is not as much of a difference as you might think. Being homeschooled isn't the best option in a lot of cases

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar "1st point: If we simply look at our own systems, where attending school is often mandatory (and enforced), which seems to go quite well in a lot of countries, why would it not work there."

Would Sweden and England be among these countries? Sweden is where ma was harrassed by a teacher. England is where C. S. Lewis was harrassed by comrades at a boarding school. In Austria I was harrassed by teachers, but ma took me out to homeschool me. On returning to Sweden I was harrassed by pupils in one school, then homeschooled, social welfare stopped that and I was put on a boarding school, with the result I was harrassed by pupils there too.

"Also 1st point: Teachers/Students harassing Students...there would be things in place to prevent this in a good system, that don't involve making schools/education no longer mandatory."

Not mandatory is the simplest way of preventing this.

"2nd point: Because if they're not worse then why remove the mandatory aspect"

Because mandatory schools here are bad enough.

"3rd point: the better was mostly reffering to if they are infact worse than our own."

OK?

"4th point: there is not as much of a difference as you might think. Being homeschooled isn't the best option in a lot of cases"

It certainly beats being harrassed in school.

It also beats getting indoctrinated by a school with a state sponsored agenda. You know evolution belief, Draper White thesis, Whig bias in history ...

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Evolution belief? Are you one of those fools who doesn't believe in evolution? If so, this is exactly what I mean

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Harassment isn't always as severe as you have apparantly experienced. Trust me -_-

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Draper white Thesis...the conflixt thesis, about science and religion..I do not recall this being forced as truth, nor do I see why this would be beneficial for indoctrination

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Whig bias is also not everywhere....

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar "Are you one of those fools who doesn't believe in evolution? If so, this is exactly what I mean"

Well, this attitude is exactly what I mean about harrassment.

"Harassment isn't always as severe as you have apparantly experienced"

Isn't always doesn't equal the harrassed should have no way out.

"I do not recall this being forced as truth, nor do I see why this would be beneficial for indoctrination"

I suppose you are from US?

That would explain your not recalling so, and that would explain why you haven't seen as severe harrassment. I am from Sweden, and in the 80's, our schools were infiltrated by the Stasi, according, not to a conspiracy theory, but an ordinary news outlet in Sweden.

"Whig bias is also not everywhere..."

Could it be that the option of homeschooling in US actually promotes some kind of quality control?

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I'm not from the US, I'm from the Netherlands.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl That attitude isn't harassment. It's stating that I think people who don't believe in evolution are fools

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar OK, your being of the Netherlands is compatible with ultimately Calvinist adoration of literacy and a modern equally fanatic adoration of state control of schools.

Your telling me in one conversation what you think of creationists is indeed not harrassment, but your attitude was the basis of very much of the harrassment I did suffer. Comrades starting debates to shift to collective threat and jeering before I could make a point and so on.

You are fairly much part of the problem C. S. Lewis was addressing.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl ....

While you did appear quite reasonable to start with you have felt the need to use one's country of origin and beliefs to justify whether they are right or wrong, which is not something to encourage in a debate. The original debate was if school attendence should be enforced or not, and what would/should happen with changes to that. so I shall give a full argument on that. And that alone.

If you do make it so going to a school (not 1 specifically..just to a school out of however many there are) is no longer enforced, it should atleast be ensured that children are educated in other ways to a certain degree (via private tutors, etc). If homeschooled, preferably with a proper curriculum. It is however, from my point of view, a better choice to at the very least make children go to school for a basic education, if not more than that. This would give them a basis to learn from, makes sure they have basic skills that could be necessary, etc. My own preference would be to enforce schools up to high school* (so untill 18), with any further education being choice, and the place where you go to school also being one's own choice** (well, that of the parents, but you get the point).

*This is ofcourse for a situation in our own world, not in Narnia, where I doubt they would have more than basic education anyway.

**Along with switching schools if necessary, if one is harassed and in a situation where the school cannot (or will not) do something about it, and to make sure that a school one goes to is good for them.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar " The original debate was if school attendence should be enforced or not, and what would/should happen with changes to that."

Well, you did mention something about countries where it was supposed to work better than in Narnia's Long Winter. I challenged you on whether that included the countries where C. S. Lewis and my ma and myself had personal experience of school attendance.

"you have felt the need to use one's country of origin and beliefs to justify whether they are right or wrong"

No, the country is relevant to topic as per where you might pretend things work better than under the White Witch, not in general, but as to school attendance and its being enforced.

I did not rely on my beliefs as to enforce school attendance was wrong, you relied on yours to enforce home schooling being wrong. I mentioned mine as per arguing how I had been bullied.

"My own preference would be to enforce schools up to high school* (so untill 18),"

This in turn involves refusing pregnant teens to marry the dads. Refusing marriage before 18 is a very Dutch as well as a very Sovietic preference. It may originally hinch on a very Protestant superstition of education (Lenin had Lutheran grandparents or at least one, from 19th C when Lutheranism was very influenced by Kant and therefore Calvinist if not specific beliefs at least culture).

"and the place where you go to school also being one's own choice** (well, that of the parents, but you get the point)."

"**Along with switching schools if necessary, if one is harassed and in a situation where the school cannot (or will not) do something about it, and to make sure that a school one goes to is good for them."

But when you say "if necessary" you mean it is first of all necessary to prove one is harrassed. There are ways around detecting harrassment. Like in one school, pretending the harrassed person is abnormal and therefore a harrassment magnet, and in another, the boarding school, making sure the bullies are never really punished there either.

Two years of hell - because it was unacceptable that sons of better paid parents than my ma should be pointed at as my bullies. And because it was unacceptable to extend full innocent victim status to a non-feminist or anti-feminist who was also creationist. That latter part being where I suspect the Stasi infiltration of Swedish schools would have been relevant.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It would not need to be proven to anyone but the child's parents if they simply wished to switch.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl 'this in turn involves refusing pregnant teens to marry the dads. Refusing marraige before 18 is a very Dutch as well as a very sovietic preference'

Again with using the country of origin/ideology thing. Also implying marrying as a teen is some kind of right and must be exercised, and that marriage has anything to do with actually staying in school untill 18. You are seeming more and more backwards, and discriminatory towards certain groups and beliefs

@Hans-Georg Lundahl You are using your own/other's beliefs to justify things. You litterally do so in your next paragraph.

Tolkien Lore

I don’t see how it’s discriminatory to recognize that different people have different cultures that lead to different behaviors. Take a minute to think about what he’s saying and don’t jump to conclusions.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Tolkien Lore "It would not need to be proven to anyone but the child's parents if they simply wished to switch."

This is easiest to realise if the parents don't have any school obligation in the first place.

"Again with using the country of origin/ideology thing."

Well, Spain 100 years ago or little before that allowed marriage from 14 for boys and 12 for girls. As did the Papal states up to the horrible year 1870. As did canon law up to at least 1917 (it was switched up two years per sex, that year or later, not sure). This is very opposed to Kingdom of Sardinia / Italy, first country I suppose to introduce 18/18, Soviet Union, second country, and while nearly all states in Europe now have that limit, Spain is more ready than Netherlands to allow for younger marriages.

"Also implying marrying as a teen is some kind of right"

Yes, I very much do think that. Especially, but not exclusively, if the female partner is pregnant. Like, you know, it is a preferrable option for children to grow up with two parents being married to each other.

"and must be exercised,"

I don't think rights must be exercised, neither for marriage nor for education. But both as for right and as for certain circumstances of "must" I think marriage ranks higher than getting a school education, from when it is normally physically possible.

"and that marriage has anything to do with actually staying in school untill 18."

Having to attend school is usually obstructive to making a living as a couple or one in a couple. It is also psychologically a strain on the marital relation if the wife has to have a good relation to a teacher. Before Bill Clinton, it was legal in the US (at least South Carolina) to quit school if you married. One girl of 12 did, and Clinton promised to make this impossible.

"You are seeming more and more backwards,"

I thank you very sincerely for the exquisite compliment!

"and discriminatory towards certain groups and beliefs"

I didn't know Soviet tyranny (including in the more capitalistic and limited to some situations like school version in the Netherlands) constitute a group. I do discriminate against beliefs like Calvinism and Communism. I think one should.

// I did not rely on my beliefs as to enforce school attendance was wrong //
"You are using your own/other's beliefs to justify things. You litterally do so in your next paragraph."
// This in turn involves refusing pregnant teens to marry the dads. //

Oh, you pretend, if I think a pregnant teen should marry the dad of the child, I am using "my beliefs", but if you think a pregnant teen girl should stay in school, even if it involves abortion, you are using ... what do you call your beliefs instead of calling them your beliefs? Comedy gold!

Tolkien Lore

He never said they were inherently bad that I saw. And frankly I bet he would admit his only culture has its own problems.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Tolkien Lore You cannot know that he would, however. And let me explain what I have gathered from my conversation; Since he knew my country of origin he has constantly been using one of it's various faiths as a basis for why the things he does not like about it's values or education policy are bad. He has also drawn associations between that and the soviets. Those people who would go on to kill millions. I have a right to find those things somewhat discriminatory, and to be offended by it.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I am however not using the belief to justify things. I am using other things to justify my belief.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Again, if switching is allowed to be done by law, it is just as if not more easy than not having school obligation- that should be quite clear by now

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Tolkien Lore and the other guy, here is to both:

"And frankly I bet he would admit his only culture has its own problems."

Yes, like being mostly mis-pastored by intruders like Frankenpope who is not really of it.

All things have problems in a fallen world, but the Church law of centuries and the Roman custom of having education of the young a private matter for the parents are good solutions agreeable to the natural law (good and ill are not one among elves and another among men, etc).

I do call the total overall arrangement for the young these days inherently bad. Each separate item (except raising marital age to 18/18 minimum without exceptions and keeping young schooled where either miserable or needed in a married home and obviously abortion) could be defended. The overall combination cannot so.

"Those people who would go on to kill millions."

Have a look at 80 Years War, at support for Cromwell and William (III in England) of Orange, at what either meant to Ireland ...

Have also a look at where your ideologies (about marriage possibly, you didn't say downright you were against lowering of marital age, school compulsion certainly) come from historically over the XXth C. In 1914, Russia had no school obligation (and unlike other places in Christendom with this asset, also little access to school if wanted, which is not an asset). 1924, Soviet Union had school obligation, introduced by Lenin. Can you say this happened earlier in Netherlands?

Oh, unfortunately you can:

"De eerste leerplichtwet in Nederland werd aangenomen in 1900 en trad in werking op 1 januari 1901. Deze wet verplichtte kinderen van 5 tot 12 jaar tot het volgen van onderwijs. De leerplicht startte dus bij de aanvang van het schooljaar nadat de kinderen ten volle 5 jaar geworden zijn. Voor sommige kinderen werden uitzonderingen gemaakt, zoals voor boerenkinderen tijdens de oogsttijd. Dochters mochten ook thuisblijven om het gezin te verzorgen."
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leerplicht#Geschiedenis_2

However, this was not to 18, it was to 12. It did not concern teens. Its prolongations came in 1928, 1942 and 1975.

Gezin = household?

Confer Belgium:
"De Belgische grondwet schrijft dat iedereen recht heeft op onderwijs, met eerbied voor de fundamentele rechten en vrijheden. Om dit leerrecht te garanderen, is er een leerplicht. Het maakt niet uit hoe het kind onderwijs krijgt. De vrijheid van onderwijs is in België van toepassing op de ouders. Overtredingen van de leerplichtwet kunnen nooit door de leerlingen, maar enkel door de ouders begaan worden."

In other words, homeschooling is allowed, as long as a basic vague curriculum is followed. Why? Perhaps because Belgium is former Spanish Netherlands. Catholicism = freedom for parents.

"I have a right to find those things somewhat discriminatory, and to be offended by it."

You do, but why don't you get offended of having things in common with Soviets as opposed to with Belgium?

"I am using other things to justify my belief."

Which you didn't exactly mention, plus how they justify one belief depends on another belief on what is good.

"Again, if switching is allowed to be done by law, it is just as if not more easy than not having school obligation- that should be quite clear by now"

It is clear you assert it, but it is not clear how it would in practise be so. "My son needs to switch to a school on the other side of the Graacht" - "OK, wait two weeks so we can make the paperwork" (two weeks later:) "Sorry, the school at the other side of the Graacht can't take your son, do you still want to switch?" - "Yes." - "Which school?" - "The one three Graachten away." - "OK, wait two weeks ..." (two weeks later:) "I am sorry to hear your son committed suicide, I think he should have switched schools a bit earlier"

Sociodemographic Differences in Time Trends of Suicidal Thoughts and Suicide Attempts Among Adolescents Living in Amsterdam, The Netherlands
https://econtent.hogrefe.com/doi/full/10.1027/0227-5910/a000735

Figure 4: Estimated percentage of 13–14-year-olds reporting suicide attempts during the past 12 months, stratified by educational level, for school years 2010–2011 to 2014–2015.

An overall downward trend from 2010 to 2014, but only school form responsible for it is practical pre-vocational. It dropped from c. 5-6 % suicide attempts to under 3 %. Theoretical pre-vocational was steady just below 3 %, slightly rising. Senior general secondary about 2 %, slightly rising. Pre-university, steadily 1%.

For some reason, I get overall stats for Belgium (which are higher) but not stats for Belgian teens under 15, which is the comparable group.

Margatatials

@Eru Ilúvatar someone doesnt know of anyone abused in the English school system of the past

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl That last example is very exaggerated. Paperwork generally doesn't take that long or lead to refusal

@Hans-Georg Lundahl You wish to know why leerplicht was implemented and prolonged here? To prevent child labour and to make it so all children had an education regardless of wealth or how much their parents knew

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Gezin is family

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Generally not, meaning sometimes so.

"To prevent child labour and to make it so all children had an education regardless of wealth or how much their parents knew"

I believe you.

This doesn't make it good.

"Gezin is family"

Veel bedankt. Something more respected in 1900 than in 1975, then.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Catholiscism is not the only thing that dictates that.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl I got offended to the soviet thing...and several other comments.

Not the belgians

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl why is it "unfortunate" that there was a leerplicht in the netherlands earlier
..?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Well, it makes Netherlands a bad model in Russia second time ... first under Peter the Great, then under Lenin.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It isn't good that it stopped child labour?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Depends on what child labour.

If you mean in mines, that should be stopped, but if you mean Heintje singing and acting ...? Or if you mean daughters knitting sweaters then sold ...?

And above 12, I'd not agree it is a question of children with girls, as with boys above 14.

@Eru Ilúvatar Other example of acceptable child labour. St. Helen was c. 22 / 24 when marrying Constantius or at first perhaps becoming his concubine, but before that she had had a carreer as stablegirl.

What modern girl would not envy her that teen labour?

Eru Ilúvatar

[to what kind of work] @Hans-Georg Lundahl working Factories, building, long workdays, that sorta thing- btw, I also found a suicides per 100,000 for age 15-19 for this year, on which belgium has 6/6,5 and the netherlands has 4,5/5

[to stable girl St. Helen] @Hans-Georg Lundahl quite a few actually..especially those who tried it themselves..and those are often in their late teens

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar OK. Now, work in factories, building, long work days ... in Sweden one could work some things from 13 when I was young (I didn't) and these were not among them.

Serving in shops or bars was more like it.

Nevertheless, some teens who worked in stables and didn't like that may have liked school even less.

Higher suicide rates per 15-19 in Belgium, noted, but that includes 19 year olds who don't have to go to school (so school environment is not he question) and I would argue it involves none of those who were in homeschooling.

Overall, I think Belgium has highest suicide rate in European Union, and that for ages over 15. Belgium has a problem, or more than one, but not having leerplicht in public schools is not one of them.

Also, the work Netherlands did to avoid suicide thoughts in practical pre-vocational schools among 13 to 14 year olds back in 2015 may have paid off in less suicides in 2020. Whatever it was, it is laudable, and if you were one of them who helped that, hat off. Netherlands clearly are doing something very right.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It's true that it isn't necessarily the cause, but it presents the case that not having leerplicht does not mean there will be less suicides.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar This does not hold ceteris paribus. Belgium has for instance probably most immigration in Europe.

I will give a parallel between two countries that are perhaps more comparable, Germany and Austria.

Anzahl der Suizide 2019 = Deutschland
10 bis 15 22 insgesamt 11 Männer 11 Frauen
15 bis 20 163 insgesamt 121 Männer 42 Frauen
163+22 = 185

Bev. 6-13 irrelevant? 5,92 Millionen
Bev. 14-17 3,03 Millionen
Bev. 18-20 2,53 Millionen

5.92+3.03+2.53 = 11.48 Millionen
3.03+2.53 = 5.56 Millionen

185/55.6 = 3.3273381295
185/114.8 = 1.61149825784
___________
Abbildung 2: Standardisierte Suizidraten (pro 100.000 EW; 5-Jahres-Durchschnitt 2014–2018) nach Altersgruppen - Österreich
10 - 14 c. 1. oder weniger
15 - 19 10 Männer, 3 (4?) Frauen, 7 insgesamt
1+7 / 2 = 3.5
_____________________
Actually, suicide rates in the age groups are lower in Germany. I don't think this is directly because of Schulpflicht, but I think some suicide prevention has compensated. In 1975, it may have been the other way round, but I don't know that.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Actually, that is untrue. The Country with the most Immigration in Europe is Germany

@Hans-Georg Lundahl infact, The Netherlands, for example, also has more immigration

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar than Belgium?

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl more than belgium, yes..forgot to add that

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar OK, I seem to have been wrong on some, then.

Eru Ilúvatar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl It happens

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Eru Ilúvatar Yes, I was wrong to think homeschooling, just because it is legal, is so widespread it makes a big difference in Belgium. 2000 - 2014 Flemish homeschoolers grew from 100 to 1000 in total. In Austria, they are over 2000. But that would mean, less than 3000, in total.

Both countries have restrictions making it less pervasive than it should be.

Other differences between Netherlands and Belgium, Germany and Austria carry more weight.

And those other differences are then not the numbers of immigrants, at least not in the way that conflicts would have led to more suicides, if anything, immigrants rather helped.

Historicity of Moses, continued

Answering Useful Charts on Moses and Criteria of Historicity · Historicity of Moses, continued

Principles given up to time signature 7:40 in previous, video as given there, are applied in later parts of the video with which I deal here.

I

9:54 - 10:05 nothing in the archaeological record for that time period or any other time period for that matter to suggest a sudden population drop of 2 million people within Egypt nor 2 million people travelling through the sinai

Most historic events do not leave traces in archaeology.

Especially not traces that would identify the events in detail to exclusion of other scenarios.

And if we stick to carbon dated 1447 to some later date, with my calibrations for C-14, these carbon dates ...

1408 B. Chr.
0.991755 pmC/100, so dated as 1478 B. Chr.
1386 B. Chr.
0.992589 pmC/100, so dated as 1446 B. Chr.

Creation vs. Evolution : New Tables
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

... actually correspond to Judges period.

You are looking at wrong period of Egypt. I am looking at just before the Hyksos invasion, with Amalecites as Hyksos. If you look at wrong period, you may instead of getting absence of evidence get evidence of absence.

Invasion of Canaan argument : the archaeological evidence you look for presumes you could identify the newcomers, but what if they had Canaanean habits before leaving Egypt or changed habits from Egyptian to Canaanean, in the ways that cultures are identified?

II

10:39 The physical evidence for 2 million people travelling would obviously not just have to have existed but also have to have survived after 3500 years, for your argument to hold.

lightgivener

I mean that is a lot of evidence to be lost. Also he mentioned in the video that proof of much smaller communities and groups exist from that time in that area. AND they had Egypt, Sinai and Canaan as areas where there was no evidence found although the exodus happened reportedly in all three areas.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@lightgivener Lot's more have been lost than that.

What remains and is found remained by chance and often enough was found at least half by chance.

So, it's not as if it were drastic.

lightgivener

@Hans-Georg Lundahl well but to be fair they did look. I found the conclusion that there might have been an exodus but of a smaller number quite good. And yes there still could be evidence someday but it is somewhat telling that there hasn't been any.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@lightgivener looking is not enough, being first to find things so it isn't picked away and not walking exactly 50 cm too far to the right or the left of it to notice it are important, but so is sth actually getting dropped and that something getting preserved from physical destruction.

After 3500 years, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

lightgivener

@Hans-Georg Lundahl i agree to some extend. But you can't just flip it entirely on its head and say it did happen and if you can't prove it didn't then it still did. Not having found any proof when proof of other communities WAS found lessens the likelyhood.

I wouldn't rule it out completely but insisting something did happen just on the basis of text is a mostly a belief system not proof as the video explains well and in detail. Doesn't mean it is wrong to see value in the story. It just doesn't mean it happened like this.

I don't see what the value in thinking it has to have happened is. Or why the historical method is not considered as the good method it is.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@lightgivener "Not having found any proof when proof of other communities WAS found lessens the likelyhood."

Not significantly.

Do you know the difference between median and mean?

Take a stat with 15 lifespans. Let one lifespan be 5 and one 7 years too long. For mean, the value is heightened by 12/15th of a year. For median, it can depend very much on where the real lifespans were and where the false ones land, most cases the median will be the same as with real values. Why? Because the errors fall through the grid.

Well, with most known communities the truth falls through the grid. In Egypt carbon dated 1650 BC, we fail to see most of the c. 42 nomes. Nearly all, I'd say. For any given carbon dated century, if we accepted only finds, we would probably land with something like 2, 3 to 5, perhaps 8 nomes, each century. Which is ridiculous.

Plus, you are pretending only archaeology is proof, when texts are.
In fact, the historic method as presented by UsefulCHarts is not how history is made for most periods of history.

lightgivener

@Hans-Georg Lundahl well texts are A source but no not really a trustworthy one. We know of many reasons people would lie and also as he showed in the video accuracy lessens if there is a bias or the events are far removed in time or location.

A text is A important indicator but it is not proof and we must always apply critical thinking.

But as I said I agree that information still could be found. There just is not reason to favor that it will to that it will not. Not knowing is totally fine. But if you believe something happened without actual good indicators or if discrediting evidence does exist than that is a belief system. Which is fine. It just makes the implications different.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@lightgivener On the contrary, texts, oral or written, are always the primary proof.

Finding Richard III's body would have proven nothing, unless you had a tradition in texts on who that was. But we knew very well before 2015 or whenever it was he was king.

Artefacts of Alexander (statues and coins) would have proven a certain face were popular, but nothing about in what context. The contemporary proof that is most interesting is the, precisely, text in cuneiform.

Which means, the primary proof in any case is texts. True, not all texts are trustworthy, but this is no reason to distrust any given text without more specific reasons.

"We know of many reasons people would lie"

Including to themselves about what they remember having heard of? I don't think so.

"and also as he showed in the video"

No, he didn't.

"accuracy lessens if there is a bias"

It can lessen, doesn't do so automatically.

"or the events are far removed in time or location."

Indeed, but my point is, Moses wrote the events down fairly soon after each happened, except last chapter where Joshua took the pen. This is the traditional author assignment, and traditional author assignments are the primary proof we have of authorship. Not something to be discarded in any given case without a specific good reason. He totally left unsubstantiated that earliest development of Torah was 750 years after purported events, and he bluffed shamelessly about Red Sea Divided being an already known literary trope. Plus, presence of such does not prove or even argue very strongly fictitious character of a text.

lightgivener

@Hans-Georg Lundahl there's a great essay called 'stones, bones and Buddhist monks' that explains well why texts should not be considered to have any precedence to archaeological findings. Texts tell us what people wanted to tell, not necessarily truths. Also there is a lot of bias in historical texts! Look at Ceasars bello gallico: for him all other tribes are barbaric - of course because that way he can argue why the Romans are 'right' to conquer them.

The critical method and the historical method are great basic principles. We know that religious texts for example are often evoced to mistreat others. A text tells you very many things: about the authors intentions for example - but it is not a true account we should blindly trust.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@lightgivener "there's a great essay called 'stones, bones and Buddhist monks' that explains well why texts should not be considered to have any precedence to archaeological findings."

In advance of actually reading it : I don't think it is great.

But we are not here distinguishing texts from findings, we are distinguishing texts from non-findings or not identified findings.

"Texts tell us what people wanted to tell, not necessarily truths."

And archaeological finds are interpreted as archaeologists want to interpret, in this case interpreting a non-finding or not identified finding after 3500 years as a find to the contrary, and that is also not necessarily the truth.

The thing is, history has no algorithm. If you want to add 123+456+789 in mathematics, there is more than one algorithm on the paper that will give the correct result, if correctly followed. In history any clue may be misleading. The point is, we don't treat a clue as actually misleading unless we have a specific reason for it.

As I just explained - did you actually read it? - after 3500 years chances are slim for finding any trace of any particular event or population. Just because some have shown traces, that doesn't mean most do. 1510 AD, most do leave traces to us (first French in Florida before Spanish arrival may be an exception), but 1510 BC, most do not.

This means, we do not have any archaeological specific reason to mistrust the text.

"Also there is a lot of bias in historical texts!"

Well, yes, that doesn't necessarily make them unreliable as to the facts. Certain people are sufficiently biassed and prejudiced to not have to distort facts in order to get a biassed overview. In fact, I think most people do.

"Look at Ceasars bello gallico: for him all other tribes are barbaric - of course because that way he can argue why the Romans are 'right' to conquer them."

In so far as I read book I, which I did, he argued the right on other grounds. Like, after fighting back Orgetorix and Ariovistus with the help of Aedui, these and others wanted a Roman protectorate, a coalition with Rome. He then had to protect his allies against his foes. True, I haven't actually read books II to VIII, but I read the start of the story.

But even you won't pretend that he didn't order the building of a bridge over Lake Geneva. That is not touched by the bias.

Now, my point is, this wooden bridge over Lake Geneva is as far as I know not attested by archaeology. This doesn't mean we don't know he built that bridge. We know it from Bellum Gallicum.

"The critical method and the historical method are great basic principles."

No, they are not. Texts can be misleading and should be treated as such, when there is a specific reason for it, but not on other occasions.

"We know that religious texts for example are often evoced to mistreat others."

Like Torah was so much used to mistreat Egyptians? When?

"A text tells you very many things: about the authors intentions for example - but it is not a true account we should blindly trust."

I say that a text which has by its earliest known audience been taken as historic (as opposed to earliest known audience of The Hobbit) should be taken as a true account of facts unless we have a specific reason to take it as a false account of facts. Not as something to be taken as false until proven true.

III

14:01 I think it is time to go to layers of Avaris:

Stratiagraphic layers M-N
Amenemhet I (12th) planned a settlement, called Hutwaret located in the 19th Nome, circa 1930 BC. It was a small Egyptian town until about 1830 BC when it began to grow by immigration of Caananites (Levant Middle Bronze Age IIA) By 1800 BC it was a much larger trade colony under Egyptian control. Over the next 100 years immigration increased the size of the city.[13] Scarabs with the name "Retjenu" have been found in Avaris, also dating to the 12th Dynasty (1991-1802 BCE).[14]

Stratiagraphic layers G
At about 1780 a temple to Set was built. The Canaanites living at Avaris considered the Egyptian god Set to be the Canaanite god Hadad. Both had dominion over the weather.[15]

Stratiagraphic layers F
Around 1700 BC a temple district to Canaanite Asherah and Egyptian Hathor was built in the eastern part of the city. From 1700 onward social stratification begins and an elite arise.[16]

Stratiagraphic layers E
In 1650 the Hyksos arrive and the city grows to 250 ha. It is believed that Avaris was the largest city in the world from 1670 to 1557 BC. A large citadel was built around 1550.

I presume all of these are carbon dates and I also suppose that the carbon dates are inflated by still ongoing rise in C-14 and I finally suppose that Avaris was not Goshen.

Now, where do I put the Exodus in real time and what is that in carbon years?

1) Exodus is 1510 BC
2) 80 years before, we have death of Sesostris III, dated to 1840 BC
3) 40 years later, we have fall of Jericho, dated to 1560 BC.

Yes, 120 years carbon dated as 280 years.

Around when would Exodus have been in carbon year terms?

1521 B. Chr.
0.98184 pmC/100, so dated as 1671 B. Chr.
1498 B. Chr.
0.98555 pmC/100, so dated as 1618 B. Chr.

Creation vs. Evolution : New Tables
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

Between 1670 and 1620, so, 1645, it would matter little if it were 1650 or just before, this means, the Hyksos came to Avaris just after the Exodus.

The actual fact is, we do see an arrival which means (according to sources) an Egyptian defeat.

Layers of Avaris as per:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avaris#Urban_chronology

IV

14:37 If we consider that Manetho wrote c. 1250 years after Moses wrote Exodus, we have a case for basically ignoring Manetho on Moses.

Except for the point that his version is one way to cover up the defeat.

And while Akhenaten is historically verified, we do not have any more reason to pretend he's either Moses or "Osarseph" than to pretend Sargon is Moses bc found in a basket after being set out.

V

15:00 None of the non-Biblical versions line up nicely with the Biblical one, but neither do all of them line up nicely in one version against it.

Tacitus or that Hellenist claiming Moses invented the alphabet were arguably depending (with liberties and misunderstandings) on the Hebrew version.

Note very well, I endorse the criterium, ten sources claim Greek victory only one claims a Persian one = probably Greeks won.

But this is not comparable to one source being the only one for a series of events that is not on any single point contradicted by all other (much later) ones.

22:42 Not only is Manetho as biassed, but Manetho is as religious, just that Manetho was Khemetist, not Hebrew in religion.

Non-religious sources are futile to put as a desideratum for most of the time concerned.

VI

17:07 "and the earliest stage of the Torah's development is around 750 years"

So, Moses writing down the text is supposed to not have been the earliest stage for books II-V? (There were obviously earlier ones for book I).

This is against Tradition - the great guide to history.

Tradition has it, he wrote it. I am not saying he wrote it in square letters and same type of vowel signs as in the Leningrad codex, I am not even saying his consonants were necessarily the same as the ones in Qumran manuscripts, there are such things as linguistically updating later copies.

Since Swedish underwent three reforms in the writing, 1870's, 1906 and 1950, after Tegnér wrote Fridthiofs saga and after Geier wrote Swea Rikes häfder, same year, 1825, we have spelling updates for Tegnér's verse according to 1870's and 1906 for later editions, and if there were one for Geier, as it is prose, it would also involve the conjugation reform of 1950, since changing "voro" to "var" changes no meaning, but does change verse rhythm.

Ergo, while we may not have the original linguistic form of the Torah, while the forms we have point to later editions, this by no means implies that Moses didn't write the Torah. Or that Adam didn't dictate the parts of Genesis 2 and 3, concerning turning points in his life even earlier on.

VII

17:16 - 17:39 Charts' summing up:
1. The archaeological evidence contradicts the Biblical account.
2. There are numerous conflicting accounts in other texts.
3. All of the textual sources are likely biassed.
4. All of the textual sources were written many centuries later.
Conclusion: Moses is more of a legendary figure than a historical one.

My answer:

1. No actual contradiction, unless you look at wrong layer of archaeology.
2. No unified one version in other texts with one conflict against the Biblical one.
3. All textual sources have some bias, but that alone cannot rule out any one of them. The Torah shows at places a lack of bias for Moses, like when he was so "humble" - the word would have meant socially handicapped - he didn't dare to speak up before the Pharao.
4. All except the Torah were written many centuries later.
5. Torah by unanimous Hebrew tradition attributed to Moses.
Conclusion: Moses is a historical figure and an author. "Legendary" does not deny and in many cases affirms historicity.

VIII

18:05 "unless we rely solely on religious faith"

Not so. For historicity, we rely on tradition. It may be difficult to conjugate parting of the Red Sea with a non-Hebrew religion, specifically with most versions of Atheism and obviously with Khemetism, but for the physical fact we do not just have Hebrew (in my case Christian) religious faith, we have the tradition of the Hebrew nation.

To give an example, in the case of the Trojan War and of Ulysses killing a lot of suitors when arriving to his waiting wife, I rely on the Greek tradition. I do not have any kind of faith in the Homeric gods. They are in some cases Homer's way of explaining Providence, and in some cases may have been Ulysses' own way of categorising some type of experience where a lightbringing being gave him practical tips and encouragement, and some of it may have been a deliberate avoidance of naming real actors, like if Athena is a standin for people helping him out with Bian Lian* so he could in a firelit room be taken at first for an old man ... but they are nowhere as essential for the story as God for Exodus. Or in the case they are, we can take them as standin for guardian angels.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bian_lian

IX

18:21 600 BC - 500 AD = when people started to write history like we do today.

No, they didn't. Eliminating the story of a succession of events is a much more recent trick. And the pre-600 BC history being a story is not really born out as different, and certainly can't be taken as proof details were unimportant and (up to a certain level) fictional.

It is common sense that conversations you weren't in may be reported in non-verbatim ways. It is equally common sense that conversations you were in yourself you report as you remember them.

It is not common sense to pretend miracles could be arbitrarily added for effect prior to Herodotus. It is, however, seemingly a meme these days.

X

18:30 Ancient people mixed facts with embellishments ...

The one point where that would be correct is in detailed conversations for facts happening miles away from where the author were. Allowing Brennus to say "vae victis" in Livy is perhaps an embellishment, though it is hardly beyond credible Romans recalled some version of "too bad, pal". But this does not add up to Romulus being an embellishment.

... in order to craft an overall story that made an important point,...

Well, actually telling a story at all usually implies it is making an important point.

... not one that simply recorded exactly what happened and when.

Thank you for qualifiers "simply" and "exactly". This allows for the story to include comment (like Homer's view of divine councils) and some vagueness.

But there is no reasonable way in which comment or vagueness can produce "additions" like infant in a basket in a river or parting of the Red Sea.

The one actual departure from this would have been c. 1800 AD when boring details about geometric ceramics came to rival Homer's life as Greek history of 800 BC.

That is the starting point for what you conceive as modern historiography.

As I mentioned Geier's Svea Rikes häfder, its approach to the "legendary" is fairly unlike yours. All legendary kings are given as facts. Which I think is correct and as to Odin (first king in Yngling dynasty), I think that is a much better candidate than Our Lord for one category of Talmud statements about Yeshu : temporarily he could for instance match a disciple of Joshua ben Pekharia. As his son Thor is known as "son of earth" this could be a mistranslation of "ben ha-eretz".

However, when we have even purported author several centuries after when the legend is from, I think one can accept there were some mistakes and some especially naughty retellers in between who did take non-pertinent material as embellishments.

Like Homer is c. 400 years after the events. The visit to Sicily with Polypheme could be an addition, and in Iliad, he could have been landed with only boring side by sides of short songs of exploits and have invented the fates of Hector and Achilles to give overall interest. Doesn't mean Achilles didn't live and doesn't mean Ulysses didn't get back to Ithaca.

XI

18:43 "literary tropes"

Read Jo Wajsblat and Maurice Cling. How much of their stories of surving Auschwitz are variations on the literary tropes of Oliver Twist, especially the harsh orphanage?

Read a history of Sionism. How much of the 1948 with prequels saga are variations on the literary trope of Moses with Joshua? Like Herzl starring as Moses and Ben Gurion as Joshua?

Read a history of US war of independence, how much is variations on literary tropes of Cyrus having Persians successfully rebel against Medes?

Literary tropes do not prove fictionality of content. Fictionality does not always manifest as already existing literary tropes, since tropes are being invented. If you go to TVTropes, you will often find an indication of how old a trope is, meaning, new ones are added. You will also find ...

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TruthInTelevision

XII

19:19 Sargon of Akkad ... probably was set out in a basket too.

2350 BC, if carbon dated, would be between Joseph and Moses:

1655 B. Chr.
0.914498 pmC/100, so dated as 2395 B. Chr.
1633 B. Chr.
0.933283 pmC/100, so dated as 2203 B. Chr.

Creation vs. Evolution : New Tables
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-tables.html

For Joseph, I give Hunger stele as parallel reference, meaning Djoser was Joseph's Pharao.

While Sargon is well attested, it is not so well that the chronology can't be wrong.

XIII

20:13 Parting of the Red Sea a trope of older heros?

I note that you did not mention even one, so I presume you are bluffing.

Now, if there had been one in literature prior to Moses, it would probably have been in TVtropes.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PartingTheSea

I click open "literature" and find:

1) An Egyptian papyrus features a story where a princess loses a pendant while on a boat and cannot get over the loss. The court magician then folds one half of a lake onto the other so as to look for the pendant and quickly finds it.
2) Pyramids: This happens briefly during the climax with the river Djel that runs through the kingdom. The inhabitants take advantage to wreak vengeance on the momentarily helpless crocodiles.

Example two is as old as Terry Pratchett. At least tradition has it this discworld novel is by one Terry Pratchett who according to accepted legends died close on six years ago.

Example one is more interesting, it is from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westcar_Papyrus#The_tales_of_Papyrus_Westcar

There is no indication of a carbon date, and while one character in it is Sneferu, a Old Kingdom pharao, according to Turin canon (thought to date from Ramesses II and also not carbon dated), this sounds a bit like Sobekneferu - whom Creationists have proposed as Moses' foster mother.

CMI : Searching for Moses
by David Down | This article is from
Journal of Creation 15(1):53–57, April 2001
https://creation.com/searching-for-moses

B U T - no, Sneferu has a statue and therefore is probably not a misspelling of Sobekneferu.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneferu

Other point to ponder from article : "Sneferu's military efforts in ancient Libya led to the capture of 11,000 prisoners and 13,100 head of cattle."
Reference : Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, Pg. 107

No indication this major capture has been archaeologically proven ... to return to TVtropes, would they really have any older epic than Exodus, if there were one with a parting of the sea?

They have :
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/TheEpicOfGilgamesh
where we don't find it.

This at least references the normal wikipedia (often called "the other wiki") for :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_of_Shuruppak
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kesh_temple_hymn

I think we can safely conclude you bluffed.

XIV

20:33 "The biblical story of Moses is a beautifully crafted work of literature, that took common themes and images used at the time and wove them together to create a new story - one that explained Israel's origins and defended their most deeply held beliefs."

Why was it accepted as historical by people who had grown up without that sequence of events as part of their known past?

20:51 "Even if the ancestors of most Ancient Israelites weren't involved in a major exodus from Rgypt or even if the Exodus never happened at all, the point is that the story (and what it symbolised to them) became an important part of their national identity."

Your parallel with Polish immigrants' grandsons celebrating Thanksgiving and 4th of July to fit in is a clear possibility with a smaller Exodus.

It is not one with a non-extant one.

And for a smaller Exodus, we have no need.

For a non-extant one, you'd have parting of the Red Sea in Hume's world, but who says Hume is right? For a non-extant, there is no parallel with US legend, since we have no reason to think even the cherry tree cut down by a certain man was fiction.

XV

22:02 Racism can be directed against very longstanding neighbouring races (like Lapps were victims of such in Sweden between 1930 and 1970's).

Xenophobia is not always wronging the stranger. Getting the right clue to find a criminal or expelling one after his prison sentence is over is not exactly wronging someone just because he is a stranger.

Also, not being xenophobic is no guarantee against the sin. I am in France since 2005. I have partly Jewish origins. I think Jews in France have substantially contributed to oppressing me through things like psychiatric observation or cabales to prevent my acts as being taken for those of an adult, which would have involved my being republished in paper form, and it is by now a question of a study debt of 380 000 SEK, not to mention my expectations on a marriage, which might dwindle considerably if I don't get an income from that and an appartment.

Answering Useful Charts on Moses and Criteria of Historicity

Answering Useful Charts on Moses and Criteria of Historicity · Historicity of Moses, continued

Did Moses Exist? | Applying the Historical Method
19th Feb 2021 | UsefulCharts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptYz-Vu0dxY

I

0:42 What evidence is available for each religious figure outside religious tradition?

What's historic about that question?

Religious traditions make contradictory statements and therefore in a majority of cases false statements about the invisible. But we do not see how they make all that many contradictory statements or all that many obviously false statements on historic events.

Therefore looking outside religious tradition is fairly pointless, as a test. And especially if you mean outside all religious traditions, since all traditions from back then are religious. Or if you mean looking outside all traditions merely at artefacts and texts cut off from such, since it is tradition that immediately differentiates Lord of the Rings as a novel of fiction from Declaration of Independence as not an essay of mere opinion, but an act historically initiating a system of law and a legal body.

For both, you have the original manuscript (even if you don't do that for Red Book of Westmarch). For both, you have internal evidence for taking it seriously, and also some internal evidence for taking it for flights of fancy (orcs in the one, idealism in the other). But you have external evidence from precisely tradition that Tolkien meant his work for entertainment, and Washington, Jefferson et al. meant theirs as a basis for a historical decision encompassing 13 states of actually living persons, either integrating them into US, or exiling them to Canada, or killing them.

II

2:00 None of the tests that the scientists made would have been anywhere near conclusive unless one had had a tradition of Richard III dying and getting buried in that location and that year, and of his being related to such and such other people.

Option A < = Tradition.

III

3:17 Babylonic cuneiform = tradition (since narrative).

The other evidences depend on tradition.

Portraits? We have tradition saying those ones were Alexander son of Philip of Macedon as opposed to a fictionalised very late rendering of Homeric Alexander son of Priam of Troy (supposing we have any portrait that says in so many letters "Alexander") and we have traditions about the actual people doing the portraits.

Similar observations may be made about coins. What says those coins do not represent a purely non-physical deity? Tradition.

Option B < = Tradition.

IV

6:14 Yes, this is why I prefer Gospels over Surah 5 when it comes to Jesus.

Now, here is a little further problem : how do you determine when a text was written?

Again, main answer is Tradition.

V

7:06 Literary tropes are of two types.

Verbal ones and content ones. Neither conclusively argues fictionality.

Historical reality certainly can coincide with literary tropes, and with historical realities that would involve God's revelation, it would even be surprising if they didn't.

Presence of literary tropes does not trump tradition of historicity.

Any pre-modern texts of history were more of stories than analyses of static conditions or complex non-obvious causalities for changes. These genre tropes do not have monopoly of factual history.

VI

7:40 My dear, you have revealed sufficiently to show you do not believe Moses as portrayed in the Torah is a historic figure accurately portrayed.

I come to remember John 5:46.

Jews not believing Jesus is Messiah and Lord God? Well, no surprise they ditch Moses as well!

Neanderthals Spoke

Creation vs. Evolution: The other day I saw an article on "pre-human" language capacity · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Neanderthals Spoke · Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Homo erectus already had language - says you, Daniel Everett!

When We First Talked
11th Feb. 2021 | PBS Eons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCW0zyDGuXc

The video actually is not trying to tell how language arose from non-speech, but when (in Evolutionist / Uniformitarian chronologies) the anatomical equipment was in place.

I

"whales, elephants, crows"
How many combine:

• double articulation
• lexical concepts of curiosity rather than practical immediate use
• designation of non-presents (negatives, elsewheres, pasts, futures, conditionals)
• unlimited recursivity?

II

4:31 Noted : Australopithecus hyoids look more like chimp ones, Heidelbergian hyoids look more like that of today living human ones ...

Wonder how the Creationist community will take that information, since we usually do consider Australopithecus as non-human apes, and Heidelbergians as descending from Adam, as truly human ...

Thank you, much obliged!

8:31 - 8:53 Paranthropus robustus and Australopithecus africanus have shorter and wider external auditory canal than chimps, humanlike malleus, but more chimp like incus and stapes.

9:18 Homo erectus from Ngandong and even more so Heidelbergian from Sima de los Huesos, Neanderthals, have human like hearing abilities.

III

6:17 Ah, upper vocal tract proportions like those of ten year olds ... interesting.

If it had been a question of proportions from small child, not able to pronounce [a, i, u], it would arguably have meant that the Heidelbergians and Neanderthals spoke a language with not much importance attached to vowels.

7:09 Ah, Neanderthals as per La Ferrassie, did have similar proportions as the Heidelbergian ... and a hyoid bone indistinguishable from ours except incomplete, found in El Sidrón.

So, no need to actually think the Neanderthals needed a "vowel-less" dialect ...

7:19 Kebara 2, was not aware ... let's hear. "a lot like our hyoid bones"

7:49 As did the inside ... je suis comblé.

IV

At the end, does the story need to be evolutionary?

Suppose the dates for Sima de los Huesos and Ngandong - neither is carbo dated, I think both could be K-Ar dated - are from the Flood, while Neanderthals mentioned are carbon dated to pre-Flood carbon dates - this would be indication, before the Flood, someone was trying to mix man and ape, and he got some a bit deaf ... this could be part of why God sent the Flood.

Some considerations not given in the video, and I am not citing CMI, though I could, bc some would refuse to click those links.

... and FOXP2 has a role in fetal brain development, as well as in communication in other animals. In 2002, a study by Enard et al. found that this gene is highly conserved in primates, but two non-synonymous mutations seemed to be fixed in the small sample of humans tested. A likelihood-based analysis detected positive selection at this locus on the human lineage, and population genetic approaches (Tajima’s D) implied a recent selective sweep. This finding led to suggestions that the locus has a causal role in the evolution of human speech, although this hypothesis was questioned when the same mutations were found in Neanderthal and Denisovan genomes.

Furlong, R. FOXP2 tells a cautionary tale.
Nat Rev Genet 19, 592–593 (2018).
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-018-0046-6

So, on top of anatomical equipment for speech and hearing speech, Neanderthals and Denisovans had human FOXP2 genes.

A contentious issue has been the identification of Broca's language region in early hominin endocasts. Australopithecines lack a human-like Broca's cap region, but specimen KNM-ER 1470 (H. Rudolfiensis) displays a more advanced morphology in this area (Holloway, 2017). Compared to other human fossils, Neanderthals and modern humans display an increased depth of the anterior fossa that corresponds to part of Broca's region and relatively wider frontal lobes (Bruner and Holloway, 2010).

A Brain for Speech. Evolutionary Continuity in Primate and Human Auditory-Vocal Processing
Francisco Aboitiz, Centro Interdisciplinario de Neurociencias, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2018.00174/full

While Denisovan skeleta and crania have not been found, Neanderthals and Rudolfensians had Broca's area, and Australopithecus didn't.

May I be so bold as to add, mankind today shows a mainly Cro-Magnon genome, but some populations show admixture of Neanderthals and Denisovans, but as far as I have heard, none of Australopithecus?

Declining an "Offer" from Recovering from Religion

How to Stop Being a Christian in 2021!! (4 Simple Steps)
5th Feb. 2021 | Paulogia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79a3jSJ2qg4

Steps 1 and 2 (intellectual), refuted in detail. Steps 3 and 4 (not intellectual), dismissed as irrelevant to "my case" as they would say, both of these under XIV.

I

in dialogue

Hans-Georg Lundahl

1:24 " Accordingly, when a star rose in heaven at the time of His birth, as is recorded in the memoirs of His apostles, the Magi from Arabia, recognising the sign by this, came and worshipped Him."

If St. John was a Cohen and one of the 70 [72], rather than one of the twelve, St. Matthew's Gospel is the only one which could have as alternative title "memoirs of His apostles" (supposing St. Justin restricted the usage to the twelve).

It is also possible that St. Justin lived in a Church which at the time had only one Gospel or only three, excluding St. John.

This is therefore inconclusive as against authorship of St. Matthew.

1:37 You speak of "they" but you are not really showing examples beyond St. Justin.

Alan Thompson

Hans-Georg Kundahl Sorry, I tried. I cannot make any sense of this in the context of this video. A source for the opening quote would, of course, help.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Are you sure it's at 1:37?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson No, it's arguably at 1:27

I see subtitles saying "these gospels they don't use any names at all sure looks like someone"

My bad. Anyway, who except St. Justin is "they"?

II

dialogue

Hans-Georg Lundahl

1:53 You give actual arguments why some of these are pseudepigrapha!

Like, could it be, I and II Timothy and Titus use St. Paul's name - according to your source - because the "real Paul" (same qualification) wouldn't have has as hierarchic a Church yet? That's one Liberal Protestant and Anti-Catholic move ... (just as Marcan priority).

Now, would you have anything like an actual non-ideological argument?

Alan Thompson

Hans-Georg Kundahl Oh dear! The Pastorals are clearly NOT Pauline. "Mark" clearly predates "Matthew" and "Luke". The first book in the bible is called Genesis.

All of these are not arguments. They are accepted facts based upon sound evidence. The ideology is yours alone and I guess it is of the literalistic persuasion.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson No, they are not facts, however much they be accepted.

Marcan priority has first been argued in favour of Matthew because he reflected a later more hierarchic church. Calling pastorals non-Pauline has exactly same motive. In other words, guess work about how the earliest Church actually functioned. Which is properly speaking an ideology.

"The first book in the bible is called Genesis."

What is this supposed to answer?

III

in dialogue

Hans-Georg Lundahl

2:11 Elohist, Yahwist, Deuteronomist and good luck to name all of them ...

For Genesis, I'd give Adam, Noah, Peleg or Heber, Abraham, and a few more documenting their lives (from Abraham on with writing, chapters get longer) until Moses collected all in one book adding his vision of the creation days.

But for the other four, excluding death chapters of Deuteronomy, we deal with Moses and Moses alone.

Alan Thompson

Hans-Georg Lundahl I'd add the Priestly source P to your E, J and D. However, Wellhausen's documentary hypothesis has been challenged recently as too simplistic. Multi-sources and multi-redactions now seem to fit the available (and still growing) evidence.

However, you seem to think Wellhausen was TOO complex. In your reconstruction, all the patriarchs simply kept diaries (a tough job for Noah in particular, and I'm thinking of what happened AFTER the flood!) Then Moses (the murderer) apparently acted as collector and editor, using conveniently granted visionary skills to scribe the two conflicting versions of creation found in Genesis 1 and 2.

Two versions? Well, a cynic might suggest he hadn't learnt Noah's lesson about booze, but I couldn't possibly comment.

Even then, special pleading has to be invoked to bypass Deuteronomy 34. However, if you allow just this ONE redaction by a later scribe, you must also allow the possibility of others, exactly as Wellhausen and all subsequent critical scholarship have done.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson The versions in Genesis 1 and 2 are not conflicting.

I am not speaking of diaries, I am speaking of dictating short oral texts, for Genesis 2 to 11 (while Genesis 1 is a vision by Moses). From Abraham to Joseph, diaries and the beduin tribe collecting them is clearly possible.

"special pleading has to be invoked to bypass Deuteronomy 34. However, if you allow just this ONE redaction by a later scribe"

I'd not qualify Joshua as a "later scribe".

There are probably real redactions by later scribes, as linguistic updates or even changes of place names or added comments relating to later events.

But as these were made by priests, they were authorised by Moses and did not jeopardise the integrity of his authorship.

IV

in dialogue

Hans-Georg Lundahl

2:33 No, the pre-Jesus books were definitely written before.

Otherwise, how do you explain that Jews consider them as holy writing rather than as Christian pseudepigrapha?

(Jews on the other hand do pretend the fulfilments given in NT are spurious ones).

Alan Thompson

Hans-Georg Lundahl I think you missed the point here. Paulogia is referring to the early CHRISTIAN writings which were all (naturally!) post Jesus.

None of the OT authors mention a "Joshua, who is to come". "The biblical Old Testament never speaks of an eschatological messiah, and even the “messianic” passages that contain prophecies of a future golden age under an ideal king never use the term messiah" (Britannica.com) Nor do they add a name!

"Matthew" in particular gleefully quote mined the Tanakh for anything to bolster JC's Messianic credentials. (For instance, count how many times, and where, the name Immanuel appears in the Bible).

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson Look here, he actually did mention precisely the prophecies of the OT. If not, go back to the time signature where he says early Christian authors.

Now, I see the video without headphones and with subtitles, but I do rely on subtitles being reasonably correct and not leaving out words.

So, step back on your claim on what he said, or show the time signature of where he said it!

That Messiah - as an epithet common to king, priest and prophet - is a fitting and before Christianity traditional designation of a character the prophecies refer to but do not literally name so is not too surprising.

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel."
[Isaias (Isaiah) 7:14]

"And shall pass through Juda, overflowing, and going over shall reach even to the neck. And the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Emmanuel."
[Isaias (Isaiah) 8:8]

"Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."
[Matthew 1:23]

Alan Thompson

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Well done for locating the three (count them!) uses of Immanuel. This is the classic example of proto-Christian quote mining in support of the "JC is the Messiah!" message.

The context in Isaiah 7 is absolutely clear and very parochial. King Ahaz rejects Isaiah's offer of a prophecy but gets one anyway. In the Hebrew it is (a) in the present tense and (b) refers to a young woman, thus: "a young woman (known to Ahaz) is pregnant". By the time her son is old enough to tell right from wrong, Ahaz's troubles will have vanished. God has spoken, so there! (Modern summary by yours truly, but go look).

This probably historical event was already 700 years in the past when "Matthew" used it. Educated and writing in koine Greek, he no doubt knew that gods were often "born of a virgin", so the mistranslation of Hebrew Almah (young woman) into Greek Parthenos (virgin) in his source document would naturally have caught his attention.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson Two things.

• 1) St. Matthew was using this as an example of how Christ, after the Resurrection, went over all in the law and prophets that concerned him (which according to another answer of His is all there is in them or the main gist)
• 2) the existence of that parochial affair 700 years earlier is not the least an objection to Messianity of prophecy
• 3) Virgin is not a mistranslation.
• 4) "Educated and writing in koine Greek, he no doubt knew that gods were often 'born of a virgin' " Reference in real Greek myth, not from Zeitgeist, please!

V

in clarifying response

Hans-Georg Lundahl

2:50 sth "these problems, that anyone can observe"

On the contrary, most of what you said is:

• highly academically abstruse, inaccessible to common man in direct ways
• who is taking the word of experts on trust
• when in fact other experts of other schools disagree.

Alan Thompson

Hans-Georg Lundahl Pardon?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson You are not in a position, if you are a bus driver, or a fisherman, to know beyond trust in experts that the problems with authorship really are there.

And Paulogia refuses to disclose there is counterexpertise on that one.

VI

in dialogue

Hans-Georg Lundahl

3:28 Yes, not going into detail when it comes to supposed Bible contradictions is actually your B E S T strategy.

Until someone notices it ...

Alan Thompson

Hans-Georg Lundahl Are you trying to deny that "the bewildering lists" don't exist? Or does the word "contradiction" have a special meaning in this one context?

Like, and just as a single instance, how many women went to find the empty tomb? Was it one, two, three or some? All four gospels clearly CONTRADICT each other on this (hardly insignificant!) point.

This fact is easily explained by the multiple authorship hypothesis, which is happily accepted by the vast majority of believers. It's only the loony literalists who, imagining some kind of inerrant celestial dictation/inspiration, are thereby forced into trying to justify the unjustifiable.

Paulogia has an excellent strategical reason to skip the details (video length!) but what's yours? I've "noticed" that you fail to justify your snide comment in any way.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson "Was it one, two, three or some?"

Those who mention one are not denying three. Therefore, no contradiction.

Yeah, I was aware of that, as also of how many angels ...

@Alan Thompson "Paulogia has an excellent strategical reason to skip the details (video length!) but what's yours?"

I'm counting on either him or someone like you - in this case you - to give specifics, so I can concentrated on one or two or three supposed contradictions.

Going into all I know, I have a combox length limit (4000 characters?). Plus rely on my adversaries for memory!

Alan Thompson

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Pure equivocation! One =/= two =/= three =/= some. This, and the angels, did not seem to concern the 4th C Council which fixed the NT canon. No one there could have been a literalist like you. I wonder where your particular heresy crept in. Quite recently I would guess.

@Hans-Georg Lundahl You could of course click Paulogia's icon and go look at some of his longer videos yourself. BTW I'm still waiting for an answer, not an excuse.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Alan Thompson "One =/= two =/= three =/= some."

Fine, if any Gospel had said there was only one or exactly two, that would contradict three.

But simply mentioning just one or two of the three is not denying they were three.

"This, and the angels, did not seem to concern the 4th C Council which fixed the NT canon."

There was in parallel a 4th C research called De Harmonia Evangeliarum by St. Augustine of Hippo.

For women and angels: The Harmony of the Gospels, Book III, chapter 24
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1602324.htm

In general: The Harmony of the Gospels (Augustine)
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1602.htm

"No one there could have been a literalist like you."

On the contrary, the people at the Councils of Carthage and Rome were confident people like St. Augustine were going to fix the objections.

And as the former of these local councils was in Carthage, not far from Hippo Regia*, and St. Augustine was bishop of Hippo Regia, we can see a connexion of the projects. Satisfactory to literalists like me.

"I wonder where your particular heresy crept in. Quite recently I would guess."

Along with a lot of atheist looking to "Catholics" like Karl Keating or Robert Barron on this question ... and your guess would be wrong.

"You could of course click Paulogia's icon and go look at some of his longer videos yourself."

I did for some. This index for label "Paulogia" on my assorted retorts blog is definitely not limited to only short ones (but some of the longer are still only halfway commented on):

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : Showing posts with label Paulogia.
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/search/label/Paulogia

"BTW I'm still waiting for an answer, not an excuse."

I think I gave the same answer as St. Augustine, shame on you if you consider that just an "excuse".

*footnote

my bad, it's 4 hours by car from Carthage to Hippo Regius - funny I recalled it as Hippo Regia ...

VII

3:53 "we don't know yet"
In some cases, this is the "future science of the gaps".

Like materialistic explanation for consciousness or evolutionary explanation for human language.

Followed

by dialogue

Locnar

""we don't know yet"
In some cases, this is the "future science of the gaps"."

No it's a sign of HUMILITY... something beLIEvers are UNABLE to do !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar It's actually that humility which we do show in front of God being able to do something.

"We don't know yet" is reasonable when you start looking. But when you've turned every stone several times over, it's time to acknowledge you are looking in the wrong place.

Locnar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
"It's actually that humility which we do show in front of God being able to do something." Of course... beLIEVing you are one of the happy fews (he chose the ones he reveals himself) chosen by an allknowing god between the happy fews (made at his image) is the CORE DEFINITION of "humility" ! LOL !
Every sane person call it : OVERSIZED EGO

"But when you've turned every stone several times over, it's time to acknowledge you are looking in the wrong place."
Exactly what happen to sane person : after searching IN VAIN evidecne of the existence of god(s) they turn atheists or deists !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar "Of course... beLIEVing you are one of the happy fews (he chose the ones he reveals himself) chosen by an allknowing god between the happy fews (made at his image) is the CORE DEFINITION of "humility" ! LOL !"

If God makes a choice, it is not pride but humility to accept it. Btw, within mankind Christians and even Catholics are not all that few. And men are not the only ones made in God's image, angels are even more numerous. And those not fallen are better (except for Christ and Mary).

"Every sane person call it : OVERSIZED EGO"

For believing without any kind of clear warrant one is "one of the happy few", well, how about your own idea you atheists (far fewer than even just Catholics, more like size of Anglicans) are one of the happy few who have defeated centuries long illusions by faked traditions and unsound research?

"Exactly what happen to sane person : after searching IN VAIN evidecne of the existence of god(s) they turn atheists or deists !"

You have neither shown where you have turned stone after stone in search for God (Gagarin's method is wrong!) nor dealt with the one I proposed. That makes your approach an ad hominem. At least so far.

Locnar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
"If God makes a choice, it is not pride but humility to accept it"
PROVE he did or STFU
"And men are not the only ones made in God's image, angels are even more numerous"
LOL ! PROVE angels exist or STFU

"You have neither shown where you have turned stone after stone in search for God (Gagarin's method is wrong!) nor dealt with the one I proposed."
Yopur provided NO EVIDENCE,... just the usual rhetoric of your cult : unfounded CLAIMS you through as "absolute truth"
"That makes your approach an ad hominem"
ABSOLUTLY NOT
Nobody have ever provided FACTUAL evidence for your god (or for other ones).
All you have to do to disprove it is to provide one... just one !

"how about your own idea you atheists (far fewer than even just Catholics, more like size of Anglicans)"
Appeal to popularity FALLACY !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar "PROVE he did or STFU"

With that attitude you are not in a position to judge someone else's bloated ego.

"LOL ! PROVE angels exist or STFU"

We were talking about "lucky few" and the point was, no, men aren't quite that.

Proof? Well, both from Christian revelation and from astronomy, unless you want to accept the ghastly Heliocentric heresy and the even ghastlier reinterpretation of past history ad nauseam.

"Yopur provided NO EVIDENCE,..."

Yes. I did.

"just the usual rhetoric of your cult : unfounded CLAIMS you through as "absolute truth" "

No, the claims are not unfounded, we actually do have a consciousness, I actually did look at the latest attempt of your "science" cult, reviewed by Sabine Hossenfelder. We actually do have a language that is radically different from the communication systems of animals, and the atheist and evolutionist linguist Chomsky said so and gave an overview of the differences. He who knows the differences doesn't try to flesh out an evolutionary story and Pascal Picq who kind of tries doesn't master human linguistics.

"ABSOLUTLY NOT Nobody have ever provided FACTUAL evidence for your god (or for other ones). All you have to do to disprove it is to provide one... just one !"

1) we have minds with consciousness, reason, morality, language these minds are not eternal, but these mind contents need to be, since cannot be derived from matter;
2) unless we put the cart before the horse and assume no God and no angels exist, we observe a geocentric universe, but it only works with a God turning it around us;
3) Moses parted the Red Sea;
4) Jesus rose from the dead.

1 and 2 are quests for philosophy, and 3 and 4 for history. Both are better off if you accept it.

"Appeal to popularity FALLACY !"

Actually you were the one who brought up the megalomania of the "lucky few" ... I was answering that, not per se trying in that sentence to prove Catholicism, just showing how your cult is more open to the charge. BOTH in relation to present numbers AND in relation to history. To me, history is 7220 years old and Catholics have been around since 1988 years. 1988 / 7220 = 27.53 %. To you, human history is, just for Sapiens sapiens, 150 000 years old and modern atheism was hardly started with Shaftesbury, he died 1683, 338 years, 338 / 150 000 = 0.225 %. That's a very far fewer "lucky few".

Locnar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
Me :"LOL ! PROVE angels exist or STFU"
You : "Proof? Well, both from Christian revelation and from astronomy, "
Please provide astronomical observation of angles !

"unless you want to accept the ghastly Heliocentric heresy"
ALL astronomical observation and LAWS of mechanic support the heliocentric model !
Only DEEP RELIGION INDOCTRINATION in bullshitology supports other -drivel- models ( geocentric or flat earth cult)

"we have minds with consciousness, reason, morality, language these minds are not eternal, but these mind contents need to be, since cannot be derived from matter;"
FALSE
NO matter (brain) = no consciousness... then conciousness DERIVES from matter
"but these mind contents need to be"
YOUR CROWD OPINION and nothing more. This oipinion have the same value than a used sheet of toilet paper... minus the fertilizer value !

"unless we put the cart before the horse and assume no God and no angels exist, we observe a geocentric universe, but it only works with a God turning it around us;"
We NEVER observe a geocentric universe . ONe time, we BELIEVE the universe in geocentric but it's against ALL observation and mechanic laws .
A geocentric universe need tremendous accelerations to expalin the epicycle needed... what would blow out all the celestrial bodies !

"Moses parted the Red Sea;"
"Jesus rose from the dead." EVIDENCES NEEDED !
BTW quotes from a book which pretends "pi = 3" and "bats are birds" IS NOT EVIDENCE
Where are the historical evidence for these ALLEGED events ? NOwhere except in your fairy tale book !
With this point of view, the broken nose of the sphynx is a proof Asterix and Obelix were real !

"To me, history is 7220 years old and Catholics have been around since 1988 years"
Oh a young earth creationist ! LOL !
Sorry to have to leave this conversation : I m not trained to deal with the mentally disabled !
In creationism, the "a" and "o" are not needed !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar "Please provide astronomical observation of angles !"

Tychonian orbits, including retrogrades, and the complex movements of fix stars (not really fixed, but unlike planets relatively so in relation to zodiac) described in terms of "aberration" "annual parallax" and "proper movement".

"ALL astronomical observation and LAWS of mechanic support the heliocentric model !"

Laws of mechanics only do so if only mechanics of inertia and gravitation are allowed. If free willed movements - like angels acting on celestial bodies - is allowed, your argument falls. And Geocentrism as supported by direct observation is thus preferrable. Meaning angels exist. Astronomy is mainly observed from earth and is therefore geocentric.

"Only DEEP RELIGION INDOCTRINATION in bullshitology supports other drivel models ( geocentric or flat earth cult)"

Ad hominem plus providing fake history of my ways in philosophy.

"FALSE"

I am glad we have the discussion on internet, you seem to be in a mood for shouting loud ...

"NO matter (brain) = no consciousness... then conciousness DERIVES from matter"

Among material objects, only living ones with living brains show consciousness. This does not equal the universal you try to give and your syllogism for proving "it is so and has to be so" doesn't explain in the least how it could even remotely be so.

" YOUR CROWD OPINION and nothing more. This oipinion have the same value than a used sheet of toilet paper... minus the fertilizer value !"

Ah, thank you for noting opinions lack material attributes (like fertilizer value!). One of the reasons mind cannot simply derive from a material brain.

"We NEVER observe a geocentric universe . ONe time, we BELIEVE the universe in geocentric but it's against ALL observation and mechanic laws ."

It's actually according to all observation made in unarmed eyes by c. 7 billion pairs of eyes, and equally 7 billion pairs of inner ears - over earth not seeming to turn - every day. Mechanics part already answered.

"A geocentric universe need tremendous accelerations to expalin the epicycle needed... what would blow out all the celestrial bodies !"

I am not sure exactly what epicycle you are referring to, the ones I think of are provided by angels.

"EVIDENCES NEEDED !"

Historical records like Exodus and Matthew.

"BTW quotes from a book which pretends "pi = 3" and "bats are birds" IS NOT EVIDENCE"

Even if that were so, it would detract nothing of the historical value of Exodus and Matthew. In fact it is not so. One single circle certainly has pi as relation between circumference and diameter. But two concentric circles of a certain object, each chosen for best measure possibilities with string either of circumference or for diameter may very well have three outer diameters for one inner cirucmference. The difference of diameters actually lines up neatly with the decorated rim protruding one hand's breadth outside.

But you need not be a science expert to accurately record the events you see before your eyes and before the eyes of large crowds.

"Where are the historical evidence for these ALLEGED events ? NOwhere except in your fairy tale book !"

Yeah, like what are your criteria for when a book is history?

"With this point of view, the broken nose of the sphynx is a proof Asterix and Obelix were real !"

Do you judge them unreal just for the magic potion? I judge them unreal for known satiric intent of author René Goscinny and painter Albert Uderzo. As well as entertaining one. It has always been taken as fiction by earliest known fanbase. Very unlike Exodus and

"Oh a young earth creationist ! LOL !"

Yes.

"Sorry to have to leave this conversation : I m not trained to deal with the mentally disabled !"

And I am very used but yet not ever get used to deal with rude people, so you are welcome to do so. Before you go, remember to check out the link I left on your channel discussion.

"In creationism, the "a" and "o" are not needed !"

In evolution, you can switch o for i.

Locnar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
Sorry I tape "angles" instead of "angels"
then
Please provide astronomical observation of angels

"Tychonian orbits, including retrogrades, and the complex movements of fix stars"
Complex movements REQUIRE varying accelerations... then varying FORCES so intense they would collapse the stars and planets !
TYcho build his model based ON RELIGION VIWE because his religious indoctrination doesn't allow him to considere the posibility the earth is not the center.
That's why his model is not used ( and NEVER was ) !
His disciples dare to do it and we got the WORKING model we use today !

" If free willed movements - like angels acting on celestial bodies - is allowed, your argument falls"
Then you explanation is... : MAGIC !
You just have to PROVE the existence of angels !

"And Geocentrism as supported by direct observation is thus preferrable. Meaning angels exist."
"Proving" an hypothesis by another hypothesis even more ridiculous... YOUR conception of logic !

"Ad hominem plus providing fake history of my ways in philosophy"
False again !
The pro geocentrism or flat earthism are ALL religious .
Then thses (unworking) models are directly the result of religious indoctrination !

"Ah, thank you for noting opinions lack material attributes (like fertilizer value!). One of the reasons mind cannot simply derive from a material brain."
Thank for proving you poor reading skills and your stupidity.
The fertilizer analogy is linked to "value" not to the nature of opinion !

"I am not sure exactly what epicycle you are referring to,"
Epicycle are the retrograde motion

" the ones I think of are provided by angels.""
In this topic you DON'T THINK, you BELIEVE !
Then your expalnation is : MAGIC !

"Historical records like Exodus and Matthew."
None of them are "historical"
Even Hebrew historians claim exodus NEVER occured !
NOt a single historical track OUTSIDE YOUR FAIRY TALE BOOK !
No track of sudden lost of THE HALF of the working population in Egyptian records
No track of sudden arrival of 1 milion people ( the biblical count take only care of males)
Nothing "historical"... but rather "hysterical"

"In evolution, you can switch o for i."
What work ONLY in english... another PROOF "creatarzionism" is mostly an MuriKKKan (notice the " 3K" like in the klan) stuff.
The word country the most rotten by religious indoctrination !

"Very unlike Exodus"
Exodus is not satiric, it's just FICTIOUS !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar "Please provide astronomical observation of angels"
"Complex movements REQUIRE varying accelerations... then varying FORCES so intense they would collapse the stars and planets !"

Where exactly so?
Can you provide an actual example, or are you just parrotting?

"TYcho build his model based ON RELIGION VIWE because his religious indoctrination doesn't allow him to considere the posibility the earth is not the center."

Actually, he was Geocentric because he saw earth being still and saw heavenly bodies move. We still do, but some have such a heliocentric indoctrination, they can't consider the possibility earth is the centre.

"That's why his model is not used ( and NEVER was ) !"

Oh, it was. The famous astronomer Riccioli has a moon crater named for him, and he was Tychonian. He rejected Kepler's heliocentricity and only accepted his elliptic orbit.

"His disciples dare to do it and we got the WORKING model we use today !"

You fail history of ideas, if I examine you.

"Then you explanation is... : MAGIC !
You just have to PROVE the existence of angels !"

You just have to disprove it in order to rule out Geocentrism. Otherwise, Tychonian orbits and the other movements (actually proper movements, but divided wrongly into proper, aberrational and parallactic) prove voluntary movers, i e angels.

""Proving" an hypothesis by another hypothesis even more ridiculous... YOUR conception of logic !"

Geocentrism is not a hypothesis, it is prima facie fact. You have to disprove it.

"False again !"

Actually not. I'll analyse your next two sentences.

"The pro geocentrism or flat earthism are ALL religious ."

Except Epicure and Democritus, the old age atheists ... but OK, a Geocentric nowadays is usually aware the orbits don't match what Democritus' and Epicure's explanation would predict, so would normally be Theist.

Your bringing in Flat Earth is a curious example of Heliocentric indoctrination, where Geocentrism is considered ridiculous by association with Flat Earth - Tycho and Riccioli were not Flat Earthers.

"Then thses (unworking) models are directly the result of religious indoctrination !"

No, in my case they are very definitely the result of mature reflection in adult years. Your guess is totally wrong.

"Thank for proving you poor reading skills and your stupidity."

Thank you for proving your animosity. AND your bloated ego imagining YOU are the only one leading a discussion, and I JUST have to get what YOU are saying.

"The fertilizer analogy is linked to "value" not to the nature of opinion !"

But the lack of fertilier value is in fact, even if you didn't get it, directly linked to opinions lacking chemical components. Not the only material attributes they lack.

"Epicycle are the retrograde motion"

OK ... what exact retrograde motion would require the forces that would tear the planet apart? Give mathematical detail of your reasoning!

"In this topic you DON'T THINK, you BELIEVE !"

Believing is thinking, whatever your "freethinking" indoctrination may otherwise have led you to believe.

"Then your expalnation is : MAGIC !"

It is supernatural, magic is usually limited to a specific and other kind of supernatural, the one that magicians pretend to practise or master.

"None of them are "historical" "

Both are among the histiorical books of the Bible.

"Even Hebrew historians claim exodus NEVER occured !"

You mean unbelieving Jews - the guys who don't believe in Jesus - don't believe in Moses? What's the difference? Why do you speak of "even"?

"NOt a single historical track OUTSIDE YOUR FAIRY TALE BOOK !"

There are plenty of historical facts that have only one source, when we go back this far.

"No track of sudden lost of THE HALF of the working population in Egyptian records"

Look, Egyptian records from back then still accessible today are fairly scarce. It's not like two sides of a 19th C. War, where we expect not just US but also Spain to have records of the war about Cuba, and the records to be still there on both sides. 1510 BC is not like 1898 AD, OK ...

"No track of sudden arrival of 1 milion people ( the biblical count take only care of males)"

Canaanite records from 1470 BC are even more scarce than Egyptian ones from 1510 BC.

"Nothing "historical"... but rather "hysterical""

About your rejection ...

"What work ONLY in english... another PROOF "creatarzionism" is mostly an MuriKKKan (notice the " 3K" like in the klan) stuff."

Klan is not Young Earth Creationist, they deny Adam was the first man, and that Black people descend from him.

"The word country the most rotten by religious indoctrination !"

What exact country are you from with your rotten antireligious one? I tried to see if Locnar was a Slavic or Hungarian word, but Loc-Nar is actually a fiction character ... btw, I am not American, I am Swedish, the least religious country in the world, even if we don't have the same intensity of state sponsored anti-religious hatred as East Bloc ...

"Exodus is not satiric, it's just FICTIOUS !"

Except it was only so very recently that anyone thought of it as such. Real history, fake history, fable - in that order. Most who did not agree with it didn't know of it, until somewhat less recently ... so real history is the longest and by far oldest known reception of it. With Asterix, fiction is the immediate reception.

Locnar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
""Complex movements REQUIRE varying accelerations... then varying FORCES so intense they would collapse the stars and planets !"
Where exactly so?
Can you provide an actual example, or are you just parrotting?"

LAWS of mechanic as USED DAILY in REAL LIFE by engineers, designers,... PROVE that EVERY variation of movement requres an acceleration ! As Force = acceleration x mass the forces applied on these body would collapse them !

"Actually, he was Geocentric because he saw earth being still and saw heavenly bodies move. We still do, but some have such a heliocentric indoctrination, they can't consider the possibility earth is the centre."
FALSE
His model was geocentric because HIS RELIGIOUS INDOCTRINATION prevents him to accept the earth not being in the center.

"He saw the earth being still"
EXPLAIN how he "knew" the earth is still and other bodies move and not the other way...
RELATIVE MOVEMENTS between these bodies PROVE they are turning around the sun (as Tycho model claims !) and earth TOO
MEchanic LAWS debunks the geocentric religious dogma !

"t is supernatural, magic is usually limited to a specific and other kind of supernatural, the one that magicians pretend to practise or master."
Only in YOUR FANTASY WORLD !
Throuwing "it's supernatural" as expalnation is highly ludiciousand have NO EXPLANATION VALUE .

"There are plenty of historical facts that have only one source, when we go back this far."
PROVE IT..
Even if that's true (it's not) these source are RELIABLE;.. unlike the baybull !

"Both are among the histiorical books of the Bible."
What don't you understand in the sentence " THE BIBLE IS NOT HISTORICALLY RELIABLE"
NO tracks foe most of the event in it
Contradictions (2 different rulers during the supposed census following the verses))
No tracks of the census. NO need to" go to your birth place" for a census

"Klan is not Young Earth Creationist, they deny Adam was the first man, and that Black people descend from him."
Klan members ( most of them) call themself christians and use the scripture to deny black as humans
Some klan members are YEC !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar "LAWS of mechanic as USED DAILY in REAL LIFE by engineers, designers,... PROVE that EVERY variation of movement requres an acceleration !"

So far correct. This is also true of the movements of planets according to Heliocentrism, they also require acceleration, none of them is rectilinear movement in same speed, and actually, they are not even in same speed.

"As Force = acceleration x mass the forces applied on these body would collapse them !"

That's the exact part where I wanted an example and you did not give one.

"EXPLAIN how he "knew" the earth is still and other bodies move and not the other way..."

For one thing, prima facie primes the alternative, unless you can disprove prima facie appearance.

"RELATIVE MOVEMENTS between these bodies PROVE they are turning around the sun (as Tycho model claims !) and earth TOO"

A relative movement does not show which of the bodies is moving.

"MEchanic LAWS debunks the geocentric religious dogma !"

ONLY if you can exclude freewilled movers.

"Only in YOUR FANTASY WORLD !"

It's fairly standard in Catholic theology which has been the mainstay of our Western civilisation ...

"Throuwing "it's supernatural" as expalnation is highly ludiciousand have NO EXPLANATION VALUE ."

Perhaps not in your Soviet style university, but more generally among human people discussing it, it has.

"PROVE IT.."

Caesar defeated the Helvetic invader Orgetorix. With a battle at Lake Geneva. ONLY source = Caesar's Bellum Gallicum. I am not sure if it is repeated by Sueton or Dio Cassius, but if so, that source is dependent on Bellum Gallicum.

"Even if that's true (it's not) these source are RELIABLE;.. unlike the baybull !"

Because you decided so in advance ... or because the supernatural displayed in events, so called miracles ...?

"What don't you understand in the sentence " THE BIBLE IS NOT HISTORICALLY RELIABLE""

I understand it, I just don't agree with it.

"NO tracks foe most of the event in it"

Repeat that in other words, English, German ...

"Contradictions (2 different rulers during the supposed census following the verses))"

You show?

"No tracks of the census. NO need to" go to your birth place" for a census"

There actually are some different clues to the census, but that's not my specialty.

As to getting to one's own habitual place of residence it would make sense in view of Roman local democracy, and it would also make sense it is formulated as going to one's city and on top of that it would also make sense if St. Joseph interpreted it as going to the city his family is from ... a little pun on the ways the Romans formulated it.

Besides, Vulgate has "civitatem" and Greek has "polin" ... it means the lower than whole Empire city state you belonged to, in some cases countries like Galilee or Juda (back in that year a protectorate and not a province yet).

"Klan members ( most of them) call themself christians and use the scripture to deny black as humans"

Mis-use.

"Some klan members are YEC !"

Examples?

Locnar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
"This is also true of the movements of planets according to Heliocentrism, they also require acceleration, none of them is rectilinear movement in same speed, and actually, they are not even in same speed."
Dynamic equilibrum between initial speed and gravitation induces a rotation movement.
Gravitation compensated exactly the centrifugal acceleration...
YOU LOSE AGAIN !

""As Force = acceleration x mass the forces applied on these body would collapse them !"
That's the exact part where I wanted an example and you did not give one."
Take one case of "retrograde motion". Calculate the acceleration needed to change the direction and multiply it by the masse of the body... then calculate the force geenrated and compare it to the resistance of the material...
YOU GET A COLLAPSE !
I not here to make your homework !

"ONLY if you can exclude freewilled movers."
Until you PROVE their existence , your "explanation" is just BECAUSE MAGIC !
Give a way to PREDICT the action of your "freewilled movers" ... you can't? Therefore your drivel have NO EXPLANATORY VALUE !

"Because you decided so in advance ... or because the supernatural displayed in events, so called miracles ...?"é
No becasue the countless contradcitions, errors in this book.
Because of the TOTAL absence of histrical evidence for the events of the book

"Caesar defeated the Helvetic invader Orgetorix. With a battle at Lake Geneva. ONLY source = Caesar's Bellum Gallicum. I am not sure if it is repeated by Sueton or Dio Cassius, but if so, that source is dependent on Bellum Gallicum."
Geopolitic consequencies tend to valid the event...
Not the same with biblical TALES !

"Mis-use."
YOUR oipinion, not their... with the same value (see in one of my previous posts)

""NO tracks foe most of the event in it"
Repeat that in other words, English, German ..."
Don't try to look even dumber than you really are : far from needed !
NO tracks for most of the events related in the book...

Your "explanation" about the census's contradictions is just word salad and ad hoc hypothesis : the bread and butter of christian apologetics !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar "Dynamic equilibrum between initial speed and gravitation induces a rotation movement."

Which by definition is one involving acceleration, since any sideway turn is as much acceleration as a speeding up or slowing down of the movement.

"Gravitation compensated exactly the centrifugal acceleration..."

I was not talking of the centrifugal one, I think.

I think your physics is as bad as your English, I don't think you went to any university ... in fact, in the Heliocentric world, aphelium and perihelium are explained as sometimes gravitation weakening and its effect accumulating to a turning point, just in the nick of time, sometimes the gravitation getting stronger and making the turning point. Either way, an acceleration does take place.

"YOU LOSE AGAIN !"

You pretend you are the neutral umpire keeping track between us?

"Take one case of "retrograde motion". Calculate the acceleration needed to change the direction and multiply it by the masse of the body... then calculate the force geenrated and compare it to the resistance of the material..."

Yes, I was asking YOU to provide such a case.

"YOU GET A COLLAPSE !"

On what exact case?

"I not here to make your homework !"

Come on, you are not a school teacher to me, if you make an argument, you back it up ...

"Until you PROVE their existence , your "explanation" is just BECAUSE MAGIC !"

The fact they explain this is one of the proofs.

"Give a way to PREDICT the action of your "freewilled movers" ... you can't? Therefore your drivel have NO EXPLANATORY VALUE !"

Prediction : God has willed them and they have willed to obey, that they will use regular orbits, therefore the observation of the orbits will provide a way to predict their future movements.

E x a m p l e : God has willed the angel of the Sun to move from West to East through the Zodiac at c. 365.2425 times slower than his compound movement from East to West (between own movement as described through the ether and getting along with ether moved by God), therefore the year is c. 365.2425 times as long as one day.

"No becasue the countless contradcitions, errors in this book."

Countless is a claim, you are not showing even one to back that claim up.

"Because of the TOTAL absence of histrical evidence for the events of the book"

The prima facie conclusion of a) a source making a claim and b) the earliest known audience of the source considering it historical is c) that claim is historical. In each case where this is not so, this has to be separately proven.

"Geopolitic consequencies tend to valid the event..."

What is the exact geopolitical consequence of the battle at lake Geneva.

"Not the same with biblical TALES !"

Geopolitical consequence of Exodus event and Joshua events : Egyptian protectorate or semi-province Canaan got a new population, which we see there later on. Plus obviously later history of Israel. Geopolitical consequence of Christ's resurrection : we see the Church.

What? Are these geoploitical consequences of something else entirely, you mean? Well, that might work for rewriting Gallic wars and dismissing Bellum Gallicum too!

"YOUR oipinion, not their... with the same value (see in one of my previous posts)"

No, you have so far not shown why their opinion would have the same value as that of the Catholic Church which excommunicates them.

"Don't try to look even dumber than you really are : far from needed !"

Thanks for the compliment ...

"NO tracks for most of the events related in the book..."

You had misspelled "for" as "foe" ... sorry. As to my answer : Like with most claims of most books this far back, unless we get to broad geopolitical traces, where existence of Judaism and CHristianity both are such of Exodus.

"Your "explanation" about the census's contradictions is just word salad and ad hoc hypothesis : the bread and butter of christian apologetics !"

In fact, as a Latinist, I happen to know "civitas" and "polis" refers to more than place.

A Roman temporarily residing in Athens would be distinct from a CITIZEN of Athens. A Roman temporarily residing in Pompeii would be distinct from a CITIZEN of Pompeii. Yes, being a citizen of the Empire was not just being a citizen of Rome, it was also being a citizen of some other political entity, under Rome. And being a provincial was being ONLY a citizen of another political entity under Rome, which did not enjoy status or Roman citizens. This was the case with Egypt and Galilee, but at this time not with Judaea, since Judaea was outside the Empire proper and under its own, vassal, king. Arguably, this means, by deliberately being precise in an unexpected way about the terms in the edict, he was eluding the census.

Locnar

@Hans-Georg Lundahl
"in fact, in the Heliocentric world, aphelium and perihelium are explained as sometimes gravitation weakening and its effect accumulating to a turning point, just in the nick of time, sometimes the gravitation getting stronger and making the turning point."
Only in flattardia !

"The fact they explain this is one of the proofs."
FALSE
They explain NOTHING ! YOU have to PROVE their existence BEFORE you start to CLAIM they have an action... or at least modelize their supposed action to see if it match with reality...
You just CLAIM they exist... now PROVE it without your usual circular reasoning
PROVE they are the cause of the events you attribute to them !

"God has willed them and they have willed to obey,"
PROVE IT !
Quoting the biblicalFAIRY TALE is not PROOf

"God has willed the angel of the Sun to move from West to East through the Zodiac at c. 365.2425 times slower than his compound movement from East to "
PROVE your god did it, stop CLAIMING he did !

"Geopolitical consequence of Christ's resurrection : we see the Church."
Here again :NOT A SINGLE HISTORICAL TRACK ! Only the biblical FAIRYTALE

"geopolitical traces, where existence of Judaism and CHristianity both are such of Exodus."
FALSE
Judaism PREDATES the exodus supposed occurence and ChristianISM is nothing more than a jewish SECT (aka a derivated belief)

Another bullshit EXCUSEfor the -lack of- absence of evidence for the biblical tales about the census.
Acensus BY DEFINITION is used to know the amount of people in a place, therefore going back to his birthplace is a COMPLETE NONSENSE !

"I think your physics is as bad as your English, I don't think you went to any university "
English is only my third language..
And about physics, I m a former Mechanic teacher (now an engineeer)... therfore my physic is farabove the one of an homeshooled anator theologist like you !

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Locnar " Only in flattardia !"

No, actually by my physics teacher who was a Heliocentric. I begin to think you never went to university at all ... even apart from your bad manners. This is the explanation why planetary orbits are elliptic, not perfectly circular.

"FALSE
They explain NOTHING ! YOU have to PROVE their existence BEFORE you start to CLAIM they have an action... or at least modelize their supposed action to see if it match with reality..."

Model for angelic action : they act one matter, one object at a time (for instance one star or one planet for any given angel, or one car for that guardian angel who saved a boy from being crushed by that car), by will. No vectors needed in them, but vectors may well be produced or cancelled in the object.

"You just CLAIM they exist... now PROVE it without your usual circular reasoning
PROVE they are the cause of the events you attribute to them !"

There is prima facie proof in the fact that contrary to your models, they explain directly what we see, not just indirectly through it being an optical illusion (like moving trees as seen from cars or trains).

"PROVE IT ! Quoting the biblicalFAIRY TALE is not PROOf"

With your hysteria, it is impossible to even discuss the model I propose.

"PROVE your god did it, stop CLAIMING he did !"

It directly matches observations from earth. Directly, not inversely. Hence it is more economical.

"Here again :NOT A SINGLE HISTORICAL TRACK ! Only the biblical FAIRYTALE"

You can't have studied history much either. In fact, you dropped your claim known historical facts need many sources, you are out of your depth.

"FALSE
Judaism PREDATES the exodus supposed occurence and ChristianISM is nothing more than a jewish SECT (aka a derivated belief)"

The religion of Adam or Abraham is not termed "Jewish", but "Patriarchal" in Catholic language. And we claim to be the true Jews (Judaism is the derivative belief, with modifications to match their rejection of Jesus and loss of the temple).

"Another bullshit EXCUSEfor the lack of absence of evidence for the biblical tales about the census.
Acensus BY DEFINITION is used to know the amount of people in a place, therefore going back to his birthplace is a COMPLETE NONSENSE !"

You think of modern censuses. You forget the highly federal nature of Roman Empire. If a citizen of Galilee came to Athens, he couldn't vote in Athenian votes (elections or other). If a citizen of Athens came to Galilee, likewise, he had no part in Galilaean affairs, unless he came in the quality of Roman citizen and official, that is occupant.

"English is only my third language.."

Mine too.

"And about physics, I m a former Mechanic teacher (now an engineeer)... therfore my physic is farabove the one of an homeshooled anator theologist like you !"

You refuse to show it in the debate at hand.

VIII

3:59 "which is a false start right there"

Matter and energy always existed? Oh, but, H + H -> D, D + D -> He. Happens all the time in the Sun and a lot of stars.

The reverse process is unknown. Since H₂ is still way more numerous than He, and H₂O also, this means the universe has to have some youth ... it has not yet run out of hydrogen!

4:11 "but matter and energy were around before that, in whatever sense before" 4:13 "...that is a relevant concept."

The iffy application of before is straight off plagiarism from Theistic views on God before Creation, since God isn't in time. You could add an equally iffy application of matter in your case, since H cannot have existed in steady state, since it is while still plentyfull, in the long run running out.

Plus an equally iffy application of "energy" even now, since "potential energy" is just theorised to be same quantity and cannot be measured in any one object without relating it to others.

"if anything has to be ..." 4:18 "timeless, it might as well be the energy we all agree" 4:19 "exists."

Do we all agree to that?

resistance is futile

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Only an eternal force is needed to explain what exists as it does. No god required.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@resistance is futile How would an eternal force explain the existence of Hydrogen?

Why has not all Hydrogen become Deuterium, and all Deuterium Helium, already?

IX

4:27 "but starting in the Miller experiments ..."

we have seen very well that abiogenesis of first cell is impossible.

Stating otherwise is like pretending, the natural formation of a brick, if it were possible, would prove Notre Dame could have been built without actual intelligent builders.

4:34 "to prebiotic peptide research of 2020"

CHAPTER 207 - Prebiotic Peptides
BERND M.RODE & KRISTOF PLANKENSTEINER
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123694423502105

ABSTRACT
Based on modern geochemistry's view of the atmospheric and geological conditions on the primordial Earth ∼3.8–4 billion years ago, the most realistic scenario for the formation of amino acids and peptides in chemical evolution is discussed, including possible reasons for sequence preferences in early proteins and for biohomochirality. Arguments for a peptide/protein world as primary origin of life, preceding RNA/DNA-based evolution, are presented.

In other words, a new theory is being presented, and it is not refuted yet as much as the other one. Above is from 2006, but below seems to be fresher:

Prebiotic Peptides: Molecular Hubs in the Origin of Life
Moran Frenkel-Pinter, Mousumi Samanta, Gonen Ashkenasy*, and Luke J. Leman*
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00664

Can I actually read it? Only abstract ...

Abstract
The fundamental roles that peptides and proteins play in today’s biology makes it almost indisputable that peptides were key players in the origin of life. Insofar as it is appropriate to extrapolate back from extant biology to the prebiotic world, one must acknowledge the critical importance that interconnected molecular networks, likely with peptides as key components, would have played in life’s origin. In this review, we summarize chemical processes involving peptides that could have contributed to early chemical evolution, with an emphasis on molecular interactions between peptides and other classes of organic molecules. We first summarize mechanisms by which amino acids and similar building blocks could have been produced and elaborated into proto-peptides. Next, non-covalent interactions of peptides with other peptides as well as with nucleic acids, lipids, carbohydrates, metal ions, and aromatic molecules are discussed in relation to the possible roles of such interactions in chemical evolution of structure and function. Finally, we describe research involving structural alternatives to peptides and covalent adducts between amino acids/peptides and other classes of molecules. We propose that ample future breakthroughs in origin-of-life chemistry will stem from investigations of interconnected chemical systems in which synergistic interactions between different classes of molecules emerge.

I propose that the future result will be this will be as much discredited as order of DNA information coming from nothing into the amino acids ...

4:50 "but it's not complete, and may not be complete in my lifetime"

Future science of the gaps, then!

Followed

by dialogue

Heartland Fun Gear

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Is a peptide life?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Heartland Fun Gear A single peptide? No. But the point is, the research is just beginning and has no definite results yet.

Heartland Fun Gear

@Hans-Georg Lundahl - so there is no evidence to support the authors claim nature caused life to begin?

resistance is futile

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Special pleading. You are merely kicking the improbability can down the road to an exponentially greater improbably since an eternal thinking agent is logically and statistically impossible.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@resistance is futile Neither logically, nor statistically.

It is the one explanation which makes sense of consciousness and of human language.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Heartland Fun Gear Exactly.

And the fact that they start looking at that clue means they have exhausted a previous one.

If God gave the world a few centuries more, Atheism would be soon exhausted.

X

5:08 "but we now understand that appearance is"
"deceiving"
"us, it is the earth that moves, not the sun" 5:11

Good luck proving what you claim "we now understand"!

Naive puddle ... if puddles were conscious, which they are not, this would be an argument for God actually designing a world where puddles can exist.

As it is, there is nothing wrong with claiming God did that. I may for instance have more ease getting hands washed after a toilet visit without tap water to get fingers clean in a puddle than if water were running back and forth ...

I wonder how much of atheistic and generally modern thought depends on ascribing consciousness to things that don't have any:

• computers (when arguing AI actually understands things)
• puddles
• extraterrestrial inhabitants of other planets (which arguably don't exist), and the latter from Galileo to Euler.

XI

5:38 No, our understanding of how consciousness emerges from brains is not incomplete, it is non-extant.

If you really read up on the subject and its recent advances you would know it.

• quantum states in the brain (quantum states are too short compared to what they should explain)
• correlation of different parts of brain at maximum (refuted by epilepsy), sorry optimum (whatever determines that)
• brain searching a way to read data reducing "noise" (presumes there already is an understanding of what is noise and what is meaningful information).

Sabine Hossenfelder ditches all of them as inadequate:

The Mathematics of Consciousness
9th Jan. 2021 | Sabine Hossenfelder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efVBUDnD_no

5:44 No, the repeated results of neuroscience repeatedly demonstrate there are correlations between mental states and physical states.

They do not demonstrate the mental states are all on the receiving end of the correlation.

6:10 and obviously, the idea that it is so leads to the denial of freewill.

resistance is futile

@Hans-Georg Lundahl If the blind cannot see without eyes, the deaf cannot hear without eyes, how does one think without a brain? If consciousness doesn't require a brain, why doesn't our skulls just contain motor function hardware surrounding an immaterial soul module? In fact, if thinking does not require matter, why would an immaterial being even bother with matter? Seems like a big waste of energy.

Consciousness is just the result of the continuous feedback loop of our model-based navigation hardware. Don't overthink it.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@resistance is futile Our soul is meant for interaction with the body.

This means, unlike angels, we need eyes to see and brains to think, not because consciousness requires it, but because human consciousness is made for interaction with the body.

Angels are immaterial beings only.

XII

6:25 Neither empathy, nor working in groups equals morality.

Empathy also does not automatically mean one loves one's neighbour as oneself.

If your empathy is erroneous, your attempt to love your neighbour as yourself will fail, and if your empathy is correct, you may abuse it in very unloving ways.

The morality of collaboration may turn into the socialist morality which is very immoral.

XIII

6:44 "god did it is a thought-free answer to any question"
Less than energy and matter are thought-free answers to any questions in your world view.

With morality, consciousness, language, God did it can get support from presumed attributes of God, while evolution did it can get no support from presumed attributes of energy and matter.

XIV

8:07 I have seen number 3 to the end, now number 4.

Fear of Hell is not my motive for remaining Christian, I don't feel any intellectual attraction to theories like atheism which would land me there, it's like telling a cyclist he only keeps the balance because he fears falling down ... in fact cyclists who do fear that may risk quitting bikes more (as I have quit them).

And for the present and for the past at least ten years, I have not had very good friends in Church and some of my best friends are atheists. Most are in parishes far away from here.

XV

9:21 No thanks, I don't intend to stop being a Christian.

I am too devoted to learning and good philosophy! (Yes, I hope God's grace is keeping me too, but that's a big part of how). (Besides, that's perhaps not an explanation you would accept any more).