Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Divine signature in the Torah
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 46 of 139 (721421)
03-07-2014 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Eliyahu
03-06-2014 11:10 PM


Normally in science, a chance of 1 in 20 is taken as not te be coincidence anymore, for instance in testing medication.
The odds of winning the Powerball lottery is 1 in 150 million, yet people win it all of the time.
So after six years of brooding on the codes, and after calling in the worlds foremost expert on statistics who delved into it, and who couldn't find a flaw, it was published.
The flaw is that it commits the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy. These combinations of letters were not predicted before hand.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Eliyahu, posted 03-06-2014 11:10 PM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:07 AM Taq has not replied
 Message 48 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:07 AM Taq has not replied
 Message 50 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:20 AM Taq has replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 47 of 139 (721438)
03-07-2014 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Taq
03-07-2014 2:33 AM


Normally in science, a chance of 1 in 20 is taken as not te be coincidence anymore, for instance in testing medication.
The odds of winning the Powerball lottery is 1 in 150 million, yet people win it all of the time.
Bs'd
Your point being?
So after six years of brooding on the codes, and after calling in the worlds foremost expert on statistics who delved into it, and who couldn't find a flaw, it was published.
The flaw is that it commits the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy. These combinations of letters were not predicted before hand.
Isn't that weird, that something with a so obvious fallacy, passes through six years of peer review, by the worlds best statisticians?
Those combinations were of course predicted in advance.


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Taq, posted 03-07-2014 2:33 AM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-07-2014 10:03 AM Eliyahu has replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 48 of 139 (721439)
03-07-2014 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Taq
03-07-2014 2:33 AM


.
Edited by Eliyahu, : Dubbel


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Taq, posted 03-07-2014 2:33 AM Taq has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 49 of 139 (721440)
03-07-2014 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Eliyahu
03-07-2014 1:22 AM


Re: This is not real
However, like I said, for the Great Rabbi's Experiment, a maximum chance of 1 in 1000 was demanded for publication, and a chance of less than 1 in 50,000 was delivered.
.
.
.
This in contradistinction to the Torah codes, which are statistically highly significant.
quote:
There are those who assert that it has been statistically proven that there are codes in the Torah so it can be used as a first step to get some non-religious Jews to start thinking seriously about yiddishkeit. But the virtually unanimous opinion of those professional mathematicians and statisticians who have carefully examined the evidence is that there has been no scientific proof of the codes.
There are three major problems with you great rabbis code fiasco.
- Any text of similar size yields similar word clusters as the torah.
- The probabilities you quote are based on methods not accepted by the mathematical community and are bogus.
- The very nature of Hebrew left lots of wiggle room in designing the word searches. If you don't find enough clusters of one spelling then add in the clusters for another, and yet a third.
That's just in data and methods. Now, let's talk real science. In trying to repeat this great rabbis fabrication using actual accepted mathematical standards the p values (significance) fall well below 1 in 5 let alone 1 in 1000 or your bogus 1 in 50,000.
quote:
Because minor variations in data definitions and the procedures used by Witztum et al. produce much less striking results, there is good reason to think that the particular forms of words those authors chose effectively "tuned" their method to their data, thus invalidating their statistical test.
And here is something else for you to consider. For these codes to be the true ciphers of your god they would only work if the masoretic text of today were infallible, letter by letter, to the original. You do realize that all scholars recognize that today's torah is not letter-for-letter perfect from the original despite your clumsy attempt to show otherwise. A quick look at the Qumran texts (the dead sea scrolls dated out to 400 BCE) shows this quite clearly. Based on this alone your "divine signature" is shown to be a forgery.
Your bible codes are bunk, always have been bunk, always will be bunk. There is nothing you can do to change this.
source
source
source
And just for jollies, a religious argument against your asinine codes.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
Edited by AZPaul3, : corrected error

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 1:22 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:42 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 50 of 139 (721441)
03-07-2014 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Taq
03-07-2014 2:33 AM


Normally in science, a chance of 1 in 20 is taken as not te be coincidence anymore, for instance in testing medication.
The odds of winning the Powerball lottery is 1 in 150 million, yet people win it all of the time.
Bs'd
Your point being?
So after six years of brooding on the codes, and after calling in the worlds foremost expert on statistics who delved into it, and who couldn't find a flaw, it was published.
The flaw is that it commits the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy. These combinations of letters were not predicted before hand.
Isn't that weird, that something with a so obvious fallacy, passes through six years of peer review, by the worlds best statisticians?
Those combinations were of course predicted in advance.


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Taq, posted 03-07-2014 2:33 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Taq, posted 03-07-2014 11:39 AM Eliyahu has not replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 51 of 139 (721442)
03-07-2014 9:25 AM


Bs'd
Dr Rips, professor at the Hebrew University Jerusalem, one of the best mathematicians in the world: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfvkIm9oa8I


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by AZPaul3, posted 03-07-2014 9:47 AM Eliyahu has replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 52 of 139 (721443)
03-07-2014 9:30 AM


Bs'd
Harold Gans, senior code breaker at the NSA for 28 years:
Harold Gans - MountZion


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 53 of 139 (721444)
03-07-2014 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by AZPaul3
03-07-2014 9:16 AM


Re: This is real
There are three major problems with you great rabbis code fiasco.
- Any text of similar size yields similar word clusters as the torah.
Bs'd
But not with any statistical significance.
- The probabilities you quote are based on methods not accepted by the mathematical community and are bogus.
Then explain why something with a so obvious fallacy passes through six years of peer review by the worlds best statisticians and was then published in Statistical Science.
- The very nature of Hebrew left lots of wiggle room in designing the word searches. If you don't find enough clusters of one spelling then add in the clusters for another, and yet a third.
The data was fixed in advance by a third party expert before the experiment began.
That's just in data and methods. Now, let's talk real science. In trying to repeat this great rabbis fabrication using actual accepted mathematical standards the p values (significance) fall well below 1 in 5 let alone 1 in 1000 or your bogus 1 in 50,000.
Now THAT is bogus.
quote:Because minor variations in data definitions and the procedures used by Witztum et al. produce much less striking results, there is good reason to think that the particular forms of words those authors chose effectively "tuned" their method to their data, thus invalidating their statistical test.
This is refuted in a peer reviewed publication presented at the 18th International Congres for Pattern Recognition in 2006
And here is something else for you to consider. For these codes to be the true ciphers of your god they would only work if the masoretic text of today were infallible, letter by letter, to the original.
A very big mistake. If the text is corrupted, letter by letter, then some codes will disappear, others will not.
Just look at the codes spelling "Torah", or the Esther codes which are in Genesis, corruption of all four books following Genesis will not affect those codes.
When the text degenerates, slowly slowly the codes will start to disappear, but not all at once when a single letter is left out of the Torah.
Edited by Eliyahu, : No reason given.
Edited by Eliyahu, : 2005 was 2006


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by AZPaul3, posted 03-07-2014 9:16 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by AZPaul3, posted 03-07-2014 10:39 AM Eliyahu has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(3)
Message 54 of 139 (721445)
03-07-2014 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Eliyahu
03-07-2014 9:25 AM


Dr Rips, professor at the Hebrew University Jerusalem, one of the best mathematicians in the world
Dr. Fred Hoyle, one of the most outstanding, brilliant, prolific scientists in his time, went off the deep end late in his life, too.
Being best does not make all your pronouncements truth, especially when the rest of your colleagues have shown you where you erred.
A few years ago an entire team of equally brilliant egg-heads as your Dr. Rips announced they may have found superluminal neutrinos.
Being brilliant does not mean you are not wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:25 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Eliyahu, posted 03-09-2014 8:37 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 55 of 139 (721447)
03-07-2014 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Eliyahu
03-07-2014 9:07 AM


Isn't that weird, that something with a so obvious fallacy, passes through six years of peer review, by the worlds best statisticians?
How did you rank the world's statisticians, what with you knowing bugger-all about statistics?
Those combinations were of course predicted in advance.
That would either be a huge retarded lie, or something for which you have evidence.
And so far I've not seen any evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:07 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 10:11 AM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 57 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 10:25 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 56 of 139 (721449)
03-07-2014 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Dr Adequate
03-07-2014 10:03 AM


Those combinations were of course predicted in advance.
That would either be a huge retarded lie, or something for which you have evidence.
And so far I've not seen any evidence.
Bs'd
Look into the Great Rabbis Experiment and you'll see.


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-07-2014 10:03 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Theodoric, posted 03-07-2014 1:11 PM Eliyahu has not replied
 Message 61 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-07-2014 2:14 PM Eliyahu has replied
 Message 66 by NoNukes, posted 03-08-2014 8:44 PM Eliyahu has replied

  
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 2260 days)
Posts: 288
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 57 of 139 (721453)
03-07-2014 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Dr Adequate
03-07-2014 10:03 AM


.
Edited by Eliyahu, : Double


"The only reality is mind and observations."

Richard Conn Henry, professor Johns Hopkin department of physics

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-07-2014 10:03 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 58 of 139 (721455)
03-07-2014 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Eliyahu
03-07-2014 9:42 AM


Re: This is real
This is refuted in a peer reviewed publication presented at the 18th International Congres for Pattern Recognition in 2006
Show me.
Then explain why something with a so obvious fallacy passes through six years of peer review by the worlds best statisticians and was then published in Statistical Science.
Here's a hint.
quote:
Mr. Witztum concedes my point that because referees don’t always give papers extremely careful consideration, the acceptance in a scientific journal is only a weak indication of the paper’s correctness. But he says that his paper was different. First he claims that it passed scrutiny by Persi Diaconis, who all agree is one of the world’s leading statisticians. In fact, while Diaconis did think the paper worthy of publication as a discussion piece accompanied by a rebuttal, he was doubtful enough about the result that he offered to write that rebuttal himself. Moreover, at the time he was under the incorrect impression that the experimenters had used a statistical test he had proposed, when in fact they had used a completely different test which improved their result (see footnote 39). Recently, Diaconis has become convinced that the paper is totally invalid.
source
Edited by AZPaul3, : Added second topic
Edited by AZPaul3, : added bold. I'll stop now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:42 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Eliyahu, posted 03-09-2014 8:54 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 59 of 139 (721459)
03-07-2014 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Eliyahu
03-07-2014 9:20 AM


Your point being?
Occurences with improbable odds occur every second of our day, and they are the product of very mundane processes, not divine ones.
Isn't that weird, that something with a so obvious fallacy, passes through six years of peer review, by the worlds best statisticians?
Isn't it weird that the world's best statisticians say that their probabilities are invalid?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 9:20 AM Eliyahu has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(7)
Message 60 of 139 (721465)
03-07-2014 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Eliyahu
03-07-2014 10:11 AM


Ignorant or not telling truth?
Your great Rabbi's experiment has been debunked. In the same journal it was originally in.
quote:
Statistical Science publishes Bible Codes Refutation
The only paper published in a refereed scientific journal that claims to find evidence for the reality of the Bible Codes is the paper Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis, by Doron Witztum, Eliyahu Rips, and Yoav Rosenberg (WRR), Statistical Science, Vol. 9 (1994) 429-438.
We are now happy to announce that, after review by four senior statisticians chosen by the journal, Statistical Science has published a thorough rebuttal: Vol. 14 (1999) 150-173.
The new paper is Solving the Bible Code Puzzle, by Brendan McKay, Dror Bar-Natan, Maya Bar-Hillel, and Gil Kalai. Here is the abstract:
quote:
A paper of Witztum, Rips and Rosenberg in this journal in 1994 made the extraordinary claim that the Hebrew text of the Book of Genesis encodes events which did not occur until millennia after the text was written. In reply, we argue that Witztum, Rips and Rosenberg's case is fatally defective, indeed that their result merely reflects on the choices made in designing their experiment and collecting the data for it. We present extensive evidence in support of that conclusion. We also report on many new experiments of our own, all of which failed to detect the alleged phenomenon.

Source
The source also has links to the paper and all supporting data.
Alas, I am sure you will just ignore anything that does not agree with you. Oh yeah, this was debunked 15 years ago. So what is it ignorance or deceit?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Eliyahu, posted 03-07-2014 10:11 AM Eliyahu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by arachnophilia, posted 03-07-2014 7:03 PM Theodoric has not replied
 Message 64 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-08-2014 1:06 AM Theodoric has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024