#1 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

Why, I will need a volunteer of course! More on that later.

Using the wizardry of Socratic Questioning, I will get someone with knowledge of scientific theories, who doesn't believe in religion or the bible, to admit that the creation part of Genesis is not necessarily contradicted by popular scientific theories. Not that it's true, but that it's not necessarily say proven wrong by Evolution, Abiogenesis, or the Big Bang Theory. Maybe even admit to more.

Of course, no magic trick is fun without that suspense, that danger! I'm willing to stake my life on the power of my magic. Unfortunately, that is impossible. But, I am willing to bet a wish/request. Yes! If I fail in this regard, I will do whatever you ask of me....within reason. Meaning, you can't ask me to say - break the law. You can't request nudes...But, if for some reason you requested that I never post again on the forum, I would do so. If you requested I change my profile pic to My Little Pony, I would do so. Etc. All I require are a limitless amount of questions and total cooperation. If I succeed, what do I get? Nothing!

Now, here's how it will work: I will ask my volunteer yes or no questions. Maybe throw in a couple questions where I tell you to expand on something....All they have to do is sit back and answer my questions. That's all. Yes or no, unless I indicate more.

However, my volunteer must have certain qualifications. They must be decently versed in science(knowledge/theories--specifically Evolution whatnot mentioned earlier). You must be at least half intelligent, average or up. You must be able to think through hypothetical scenarios and understand hypothetical questions. They must have, say, the English/Critical Reading skills of someone above middle school. And last, you must be around to answer my questions. At the very least, pop in once a day.

Anyone willing to match magical wits with me? Anyone up to the challenge? (....I'm specifically hoping Umbrafeline, the user who posts most of the interesting science threads, to happen across my thread and be my volunteer...) Happy July 4th.

#2 Posted by pooty (12929 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm on vacation till monday. i'll play if needed

#3 Posted by Glitch_Spawn (17179 posts) - - Show Bio

I will play your game. Hit me.

#4 Posted by The_Lunact_And_Manic (3296 posts) - - Show Bio

Well..I can do it..

(The last time someone said I'll perform a magic trick I lost 20 bucks.)

#5 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

Bump

Waiting for a larger selection of possible volunteers.

#6 Edited by Glitch_Spawn (17179 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer said:

Bump

Waiting for a larger selection of possible volunteers.

I want to do it! I'm decently versed. Let's make this trick happen.

#7 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

^Your interest is noted.

....Bump

#9 Posted by TifaLockhart (15122 posts) - - Show Bio

I want to make your profile image My Little Pony, but I don't know if I'm versed enough in evolution, sadly.

#10 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

^You don't actually have to be well-versed in evolution, you just really have to have the general idea of it.

But who was deleted message?

Bump

#11 Edited by Dernman (17153 posts) - - Show Bio

I want to see.

#12 Posted by mrdecepticonleader (19257 posts) - - Show Bio

Yeah I am game.

You could always call out @umbrafeline if you want her to take a look at this thread.

#13 Posted by mrdecepticonleader (19257 posts) - - Show Bio
#14 Posted by Lvenger (23135 posts) - - Show Bio

This would be quite the magic trick to pull off. If you manage to overwrite years of scientific theories in this thread, this would be quite the game changer.

#15 Edited by Pyrogram (42534 posts) - - Show Bio
#16 Posted by SpideyIvyDaredevilFan26 (6711 posts) - - Show Bio

Steve Carrell as a magician. Thank you for reminding me of that terrible movie which will not be spoken but was released in 2013 and officially ruined Olivia Wilde's career.

#17 Edited by Nefarious (27276 posts) - - Show Bio

I can see through your tricks.

#18 Edited by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio
@lvenger said:

This would be quite the magic trick to pull off. If you manage to overwrite years of scientific theories in this thread, this would be quite the game changer.

That's not what I said I'd be doing....

Hmmm decisions, decisions. Whoever I pick, though.... you'd have to read my posts closer than this user^

EDIT: About to go out with friends. I'll pick sometime tomorrow. Probably.

#19 Posted by New_World_Order (13893 posts) - - Show Bio

BOOO

#20 Edited by PartialSanity (450 posts) - - Show Bio

I can amuse you if you want.

Edit: Please be sure to read at least the first chapter of Genesis thoroughly, and decide if you really want to do this. While I don't believe in the texts of the bible, I studied at a catholic school - I took theology classes for about 5 years out of my 14 year venture in there.

Edit 2: They also made the grievous mistake of giving rather great science courses, which caused me to lose my blissful faith in the first place - it was such a sad day.

Edit 3: I would also like to point out that "Yes or No" questions are not Socratic.

#21 Posted by Lvenger (23135 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer said:
@lvenger said:

This would be quite the magic trick to pull off. If you manage to overwrite years of scientific theories in this thread, this would be quite the game changer.

That's not what I said I'd be doing....

Hmmm decisions, decisions. Whoever I pick, though.... you'd have to read my posts closer than this user^

EDIT: About to go out with friends. I'll pick sometime tomorrow. Probably.

Now this is a tad pretentious of you. Here's exactly what you say: " I will get someone with knowledge of scientific theories, who doesn't believe in religion or the bible, to admit that the creation part of Genesis is not necessarily contradicted by popular scientific theories" The scientific theories are in stark contrast to the Biblical story of Genesis. Regardless of what you said you'd be doing, the evidence presented by these theories contradict the story presented in the Bible. And I don't appreciate the holier than thou knock. So drop it if you please.

#22 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

Edit 3: I would also like to point out that "Yes or No" questions are not Socratic.

During Socrate's(Plato depicting Socrates) dialogues, discussions generally only proceeded through the acceptance of premises."Sososo and so do you agree?" When a premise was not accepted, he revised it to get to a point in which the person would agree. He constantly asked for affirmation and agreement with what he was saying. More importantly, he essentially guided the discussion through questions.

#23 Edited by PartialSanity (450 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger: I for one am intrigued as to where this is going. I like good magic tricks. I also find the irony in all of this to be quite exquisite.

#24 Edited by Lvenger (23135 posts) - - Show Bio

@partialsanity: I must admit I am intrigued where the OP is going with this. But I doubt the volunteer will be me given my response.

#25 Edited by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@jezer said:
@lvenger said:

This would be quite the magic trick to pull off. If you manage to overwrite years of scientific theories in this thread, this would be quite the game changer.

That's not what I said I'd be doing....

Hmmm decisions, decisions. Whoever I pick, though.... you'd have to read my posts closer than this user^

EDIT: About to go out with friends. I'll pick sometime tomorrow. Probably.

Now this is a tad pretentious of you. Here's exactly what you say: " I will get someone with knowledge of scientific theories, who doesn't believe in religion or the bible, to admit that the creation part of Genesis is not necessarily contradicted by popular scientific theories" The scientific theories are in stark contrast to the Biblical story of Genesis. Regardless of what you said you'd be doing, the evidence presented by these theories contradict the story presented in the Bible. And I don't appreciate the holier than thou knock. So drop it if you please.

So essentially, your response was simply going "well what you're gonna try to do is impossible, so here's what you'd have to do instead" That's kinda ironic giving the idea of this as a magic show. Also, rather arrogant of your own understanding/underestimating my magical prowess.

Don't think I displayed "holier-than-thou" anywhere. *elaborate shrug* Pretentiousness? That's a given during a performance. lol

#26 Posted by Lvenger (23135 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer: You misunderstand. Let me put this bluntly and clearly. Scientific theories such as evolution and the Big Bang Theory require millions or billions of years to be carried out. The story of Genesis happens in 6000 years give or take. So to say that popular scientific theories aren't contradicted by the Bible can only be achieved if you take the whole non literal interpretation of the Bible route.

#27 Posted by PartialSanity (450 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer: Socratic questioning was meant to show how to question things, asking the why's and how's, and the importance of questions. It was meant to stimulate thought, not to hinder it by limiting things to "yes" or "no." It lead people to arrive at conclusions from explanations they themselves gave, not the other way around - it was a principle of understanding.

Anyway, that was more of an aside, I don't really oppose to "yes or no" questions.

#28 Edited by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger said:

@jezer: You misunderstand. Let me put this bluntly and clearly. Scientific theories such as evolution and the Big Bang Theory require millions or billions of years to be carried out. The story of Genesis happens in 6000 years give or take. So to say that popular scientific theories aren't contradicted by the Bible can only be achieved if you take the whole non literal interpretation of the Bible route.

That's an interesting observation.

Why do you say the story of Genesis happens in 6,000 years give or take? < Last question/second to last/possibly last response before I let you sit back and watch like the rest of the audience.

#29 Posted by Lvenger (23135 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer: Because there's debate over whether it was 6000 years ago or whether it may have been longer even amongst creationist scientists.

#30 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer: Socratic questioning was meant to show how to question things, asking the why's and how's, and the importance of questions. It was meant to stimulate thought, not to hinder it by limiting things to "yes" or "no." It lead people to arrive at conclusions from explanations they themselves gave, not the other way around - it was a principle of understanding.

Anyway, that was more of an aside, I don't really oppose to "yes or no" questions.

You're looking at the theory/intent, I'm looking at the actual practice as he used it(well, was depicted using it. In multiple philosophy books). Most of how he used it was simply guiding people toward the point he was trying to make, in a way where they come to the conclusion themselves.

....However, I neither plan on only asking yes or no questions, nor said that I would in my original post.

#31 Posted by Glitch_Spawn (17179 posts) - - Show Bio

I feel ji[epedc

#32 Posted by PartialSanity (450 posts) - - Show Bio

This is gonna be good. Also, if you're simply waiting for someone in specific to volunteer, why not just call them out directly, rather than going this roundabout way?

#33 Edited by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

^I'm drawing out the suspense/not really waiting for a specific person, though I was hoping for one earlier.

@lvenger said:

@jezer: Because there's debate over whether it was 6000 years ago or whether it may have been longer even amongst creationist scientists.

So, you're making assertions about the Bible(like, you just told me it was 6,000 years give or take) based on hearsay and awareness of the fact that its a hot-topic issue? Not on actual research? This actually seems very common with people who disagree with the bible and bring up "6000" year old Earth, and also seems slightly contradictory to the methods and ideals of science.

To give a sneak peak of my spellcasting, let me address this:

Genesis Chapter 1, verse 1-2:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was*(Footnote: Or possibly "became") formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

From the very first two verses, it appears to state that God created the heavens and the Earth. Before the days of creation have started. It seems to state that the Earth existed in some form that was "formless" and "empty", with even the possibility that it existed in some form before that and then "became" formless and empty. It doesn't appear to give any sort of estimate for how long that took. It could have taken a second, it could have taken an eon, a billion years, 1 year, etc.

Going from even the strictest literal interpretation, I just don't see how its possible to claim the Earth is 6,000 years(or any specific number) when there is no indication to how long it took him to create both the heavens and Earth in the very first two verses. This doesn't mean that the Earth is definitively not 6,000 years old according to the bible, only that it isn't proven that it is. There's a missing base to any calculation that anyone attempts to make.

Flipendo!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I insist you wait for the main show.

#34 Edited by ssejllenrad (13028 posts) - - Show Bio

Get on it... I'm running out of popcorn and peanuts!

#35 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (39786 posts) - - Show Bio

SHAZAM!

#36 Posted by SC (14614 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrdecepticonleader: Heh heh thank you for alerting me to this interesting thread.

I probably wouldn't make a good contestant for what I think Jezer is trying to accomplish here, since I don't disbelieve in the religion or bible by way of contradiction with scientific theory or science, but because the more unfalsifiable assertions and claims become, the more the assertions and claims will have to compete with alternative theories that also may be made with similar levels/lack of demonstration, evidence proof and so on. Depending on how you define, consider and interpret all fictional stories ever, they aren't necessarily contradicted by popular scientific theories. All of them are possibly true... because thats the nature and power of concepts like possibly. Except also some of them being true could also mean not all of them could be true. Just because some of them are possible, doesn't mean they are likely either. Which is why I undermine what I may or may not believe, and personally focus on what I know, don't know, can know and also importantly understand. So the magic part for me, would be if someone could demonstrate that the anything written or known in the bible is beyond the ability of any human author. Its not that hard to use vague or ambiguous methods of communication to present ideas and concepts that can modify and adapt with time, thus negating the potential meaning of the idea and concept but also proofing it against criticism, correction and falsification.

Moderator
#37 Edited by Lvenger (23135 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer: Well we've finished the warm up you and I. The main event should be starting next :P

#38 Posted by mrdecepticonleader (19257 posts) - - Show Bio

@sc said:

@mrdecepticonleader: Heh heh thank you for alerting me to this interesting thread.

I probably wouldn't make a good contestant for what I think Jezer is trying to accomplish here, since I don't disbelieve in the religion or bible by way of contradiction with scientific theory or science, but because the more unfalsifiable assertions and claims become, the more the assertions and claims will have to compete with alternative theories that also may be made with similar levels/lack of demonstration, evidence proof and so on. Depending on how you define, consider and interpret all fictional stories ever, they aren't necessarily contradicted by popular scientific theories. All of them are possibly true... because thats the nature and power of concepts like possibly. Except also some of them being true could also mean not all of them could be true. Just because some of them are possible, doesn't mean they are likely either. Which is why I undermine what I may or may not believe, and personally focus on what I know, don't know, can know and also importantly understand. So the magic part for me, would be if someone could demonstrate that the anything written or known in the bible is beyond the ability of any human author. Its not that hard to use vague or ambiguous methods of communication to present ideas and concepts that can modify and adapt with time, thus negating the potential meaning of the idea and concept but also proofing it against criticism, correction and falsification.

No problem :)

Interesting I see what you mean. That is a good point/points.

#39 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

@lvenger: Everyone, a round of applause for our warmup volunteer Lvenger!

Unfortunately, I have some type of picnic to go to in about 3 hours. In the meantime, I must study for a test related to my future!

The intermission will be over sometime later tonight, when I come back from my outing, after which I will pick my volunteer!

SC, you never reveal the secret of a magician's magic. I'll leave it up to you to decide if its more of a retrospective magic, or if there is underlying intuition. Or both. Or neither. Huzzah!

#40 Posted by Lvenger (23135 posts) - - Show Bio

I thought I was the volunteer for a second lol.

#41 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm torn between Glitch-Spawn and Lvenger.

Eh, I'll make up my mind tomorrow. After I recover mentally from the fiasco I just had the displeasure of witnessing.

#42 Posted by pooty (12929 posts) - - Show Bio

@sc said:

@mrdecepticonleader: Heh heh thank you for alerting me to this interesting thread.

I probably wouldn't make a good contestant for what I think Jezer is trying to accomplish here, since I don't disbelieve in the religion or bible by way of contradiction with scientific theory or science, but because the more unfalsifiable assertions and claims become, the more the assertions and claims will have to compete with alternative theories that also may be made with similar levels/lack of demonstration, evidence proof and so on. Depending on how you define, consider and interpret all fictional stories ever, they aren't necessarily contradicted by popular scientific theories. All of them are possibly true... because thats the nature and power of concepts like possibly. Except also some of them being true could also mean not all of them could be true. Just because some of them are possible, doesn't mean they are likely either. Which is why I undermine what I may or may not believe, and personally focus on what I know, don't know, can know and also importantly understand. So the magic part for me, would be if someone could demonstrate that the anything written or known in the bible is beyond the ability of any human author. Its not that hard to use vague or ambiguous methods of communication to present ideas and concepts that can modify and adapt with time, thus negating the potential meaning of the idea and concept but also proofing it against criticism, correction and falsification.

You just ruined the OP aka the magic trick. You exposed his trick. It is nearly impossible to DISPROVE something. You can't disprove that unicorns exist or that fire breathing dragons existed. You can't disprove that I can turn invisible. Prepare to see the words interpretation, concept and opinion used quite a bit during this trick.

So the magic part for me, would be if someone could demonstrate that the anything written or known in the bible is beyond the ability of any human author

Proving that wouldn't be magic. That is Omega Level Reality Manipulation.

#43 Posted by consolemaster001 (6771 posts) - - Show Bio

Huh wah ?

#44 Posted by PartialSanity (450 posts) - - Show Bio

I wonder if he's talking about a certain Brazilian getting knocked out.

#45 Edited by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

^I was talking about a comedian getting knocked out during his stand-up routine.

@pooty said:

@sc said:

@mrdecepticonleader: Heh heh thank you for alerting me to this interesting thread.

I probably wouldn't make a good contestant for what I think Jezer is trying to accomplish here, since I don't disbelieve in the religion or bible by way of contradiction with scientific theory or science, but because the more unfalsifiable assertions and claims become, the more the assertions and claims will have to compete with alternative theories that also may be made with similar levels/lack of demonstration, evidence proof and so on. Depending on how you define, consider and interpret all fictional stories ever, they aren't necessarily contradicted by popular scientific theories. All of them are possibly true... because thats the nature and power of concepts like possibly. Except also some of them being true could also mean not all of them could be true. Just because some of them are possible, doesn't mean they are likely either. Which is why I undermine what I may or may not believe, and personally focus on what I know, don't know, can know and also importantly understand. So the magic part for me, would be if someone could demonstrate that the anything written or known in the bible is beyond the ability of any human author. Its not that hard to use vague or ambiguous methods of communication to present ideas and concepts that can modify and adapt with time, thus negating the potential meaning of the idea and concept but also proofing it against criticism, correction and falsification.

You just ruined the OP aka the magic trick. You exposed his trick. It is nearly impossible to DISPROVE something. You can't disprove that unicorns exist or that fire breathing dragons existed. You can't disprove that I can turn invisible. Prepare to see the words interpretation, concept and opinion used quite a bit during this trick.

Lol.....duh?(this is directed at the italics, rest of your post is irrelevant)

The skill is in how Shakespeare compares her to a summer's day.

Oh, and the idea of "its impossible to disprove something" is beside the point of my sorcery, because I don't generally make statements that don't acknowledge their own limitations or assert statements as definitively true..... You should probably go ahead and learn that type of magic.

#46 Posted by umbrafeline (5919 posts) - - Show Bio

its in his sleeve!

#47 Posted by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

I choose

@glitch_spawn

Though, I reserve the right to switch him out for another volunteer at most once, if I think he's lacking in anything necessary for the the trick.

Do you accept Glitchspawn?

#48 Posted by Glitch_Spawn (17179 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer said:

I choose

@glitch_spawn

Though, I reserve the right to switch him out for another volunteer at most once, if I think he's lacking in anything necessary for the the trick.

Do you accept Glitchspawn?

I accept.

#49 Edited by Jezer (3212 posts) - - Show Bio

Let's start

__________________________________________________________

@glitch_spawn: Good sir, are you familiar with The Big Bang Theory?

EDIT: If so, could you summarize it in 1 or 2 sentences?

#50 Edited by Glitch_Spawn (17179 posts) - - Show Bio

@jezer said:

Let's start

__________________________________________________________

@glitch_spawn: Good sir, are you familiar with The Big Bang Theory?

EDIT: If so, could you summarize it in 1 or 2 sentences?

Yes I'm familiar.

In essence it involves the theory that the entire Universe we exist in and that is all around us came into existence in a cosmically small amount of time and everything we know was once infinitely small and infinitely dense.

Einstein never accepted the theory because he believed the Universe is static. No beginning. No ending.