Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 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: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   King David's Palace Found
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 31 of 81 (234077)
08-17-2005 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Tal
08-17-2005 8:34 AM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
LOL, I love you guys. An Archeologist finds a huge palace that she says is King David's palace, and you pull a strawman about moses' tablets!
Yet when another Archeologist finds a piece of a skull the evolutionary world has collective orgasms and shouts to the mountain top how this little piece of bone will "change the way we think about evolution."
Tal, you're analogy doesn't work.
An archeologist has found a structure that dates to around the supposed time of David. There is no evidence so far that it is a palace, and even if it is, there is no evidence thus far that it is the palace of the biblical David.
This would be on the same level as an evolutionist finding a femur and concluding, without first investigating the find beyond a simple dating, that it obviously belonged to the common ancestor shared by man and ape, with no actual evidence to support such a claim.
The scientific community would react much the same way people in this thread have - once people realize that there is no evidence beyond the existance of a bone of indeterminate origin (like this structure of indeterminate purpose and origin), and the fact that it dates to an appropriate time period, the find will be dismissed until such time as evidence arises in support of the overblown claims.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Tal, posted 08-17-2005 8:34 AM Tal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 12:08 PM Rahvin has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 81 (234082)
08-17-2005 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Nighttrain
08-17-2005 8:20 AM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
Hey, wasn't there an ossuary found that proves that Jesus existed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Nighttrain, posted 08-17-2005 8:20 AM Nighttrain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Tal, posted 08-17-2005 12:00 PM Chiroptera has replied
 Message 35 by Theodoric, posted 08-17-2005 12:11 PM Chiroptera has not replied
 Message 47 by ramoss, posted 08-17-2005 3:03 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Tal
Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 33 of 81 (234084)
08-17-2005 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Chiroptera
08-17-2005 11:56 AM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
More Strawmen, keep em coming.

'Now isn't it amazing. I tell you that nobody made a simple toy like that (solar system model) and you don't believe me. Yet you gaze out into the solar System - the intricate marvelous machine that is around you - and you dare say to me that no one made that. I don't believe it'. -Sir Isaac Newton

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Chiroptera, posted 08-17-2005 11:56 AM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Chiroptera, posted 08-17-2005 12:15 PM Tal has replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 34 of 81 (234086)
08-17-2005 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Rahvin
08-17-2005 11:53 AM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
There is no evidence so far that it is a palace, and even if it is, there is no evidence thus far that it is the palace of the biblical David.
I'm curious, what evidence would need to be uncovered to convince you that is was King David's palace?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Rahvin, posted 08-17-2005 11:53 AM Rahvin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Rahvin, posted 08-17-2005 12:33 PM Monk has replied
 Message 39 by Theodoric, posted 08-17-2005 12:42 PM Monk has replied

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


Message 35 of 81 (234090)
08-17-2005 12:11 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Chiroptera
08-17-2005 11:56 AM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
The James Ossuary was a forged artifact. A number of people in Israel have been indicted for this

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Chiroptera, posted 08-17-2005 11:56 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 81 (234092)
08-17-2005 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Tal
08-17-2005 12:00 PM


Not a straw man.
For my example to be a straw man, I would have to be making some kind of argument. I was making no argument; if I was saying anything (and there's no guarantee that I was) I was saying that one should be careful of making profound conclusions prematurely.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Tal, posted 08-17-2005 12:00 PM Tal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Tal, posted 08-17-2005 1:10 PM Chiroptera has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 37 of 81 (234095)
08-17-2005 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Monk
08-17-2005 12:08 PM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
I'm curious, what evidence would need to be uncovered to convince you that is was King David's palace?
Well, finding a document or tablet with his name on it inside the structure would go a long way. Something matching any known descriptions of the palace would help.
Basically anything more than "It's a big man-made structure that dates to around the time we think David may have lived, assuming he was real."

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 12:08 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 12:40 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 38 of 81 (234099)
08-17-2005 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Rahvin
08-17-2005 12:33 PM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
Well, finding a document or tablet with his name on it inside the structure would go a long way. Something matching any known descriptions of the palace would help.
Fair enough, that's reasonable.
This message has been edited by Monk, Wed, 08-17-2005 11:41 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Rahvin, posted 08-17-2005 12:33 PM Rahvin has not replied

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


Message 39 of 81 (234100)
08-17-2005 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Monk
08-17-2005 12:08 PM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
Ok how about some proof.
1) That it is a palace
2) David's name?
3) Peer review of the findings
Dr. Mazar seems to be a little controversial in Israeli archaelology. She is funded by groups that have a vested interest in establishing a stronger jewish claim to all of Jerusalem. The Ir David foundation exists to promote the moving of Jews into East jerusalem, which is traditionally arab neighborhoods. East Jerusalem is at the hear of the the Arab-Israeli conflict. SHe is also supported by Roger Hertog a Jewish American banker. I found this on beliefnet about this relationship..
"Her work has been sponsored by the Shalem Center, a neoconservative research organization in Jerusalem, and funded by an American Jewish investment banker who would like to help provide scientific support for the Bible as a reflection of Jewish history."
No other archaeologists support her that this is a palace or in any way linked to King David.
Give us evidence

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 12:08 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 1:03 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 40 of 81 (234110)
08-17-2005 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Theodoric
08-17-2005 12:42 PM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
Dr. Mazar and her financial backers certainly have a vested interest in proving King David's palace. That doesn't imply fraud. If you read the NY Times article, the terms used are, "may be", and Dr. Mazar "believes" it could be. She hasn't come out with anything more than speculation. The OP in this thread is the only place I've seen that isn't speculation.
No other archaeologists would support speculation especially when Dr. Mazar hasn't been definitive herself. We'll just have to wait for her published work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Theodoric, posted 08-17-2005 12:42 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by jar, posted 08-17-2005 1:08 PM Monk has replied
 Message 43 by Theodoric, posted 08-17-2005 1:22 PM Monk has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 41 of 81 (234111)
08-17-2005 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Monk
08-17-2005 1:03 PM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
I don't think anyone has suggested fraud in this case. It has been suggested that there may be bias involved, but it seems the general tone has been it's just too early to make any determinations.
The other concept floating in this thread is that confirmation of most historical evidence in the Bible does nothing to support the theology. Would you consider that a reasonable assumption?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 1:03 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 1:24 PM jar has not replied

  
Tal
Member (Idle past 5677 days)
Posts: 1140
From: Fort Bragg, NC
Joined: 12-29-2004


Message 42 of 81 (234113)
08-17-2005 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Chiroptera
08-17-2005 12:15 PM


Strawman it was...
You are trying to contradict point DP (David's Palace).
You presented point BO (Bogus Oshuary) as an argument that finds are bogus wich implies you think DP is bogus.
Your strawman was implied, just like Moses' Tablets.
But I do agree that no conclusions can be drawn yet. Let's see what comes of it.

'Now isn't it amazing. I tell you that nobody made a simple toy like that (solar system model) and you don't believe me. Yet you gaze out into the solar System - the intricate marvelous machine that is around you - and you dare say to me that no one made that. I don't believe it'. -Sir Isaac Newton

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Chiroptera, posted 08-17-2005 12:15 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Chiroptera, posted 08-17-2005 1:32 PM Tal has not replied

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


Message 43 of 81 (234120)
08-17-2005 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Monk
08-17-2005 1:03 PM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
Did I say anything about fraud?
You asked what could be accepted as proof. I replied and added the part about her backers because I wanted to stress the need for peer review. That is what is different in science. In science people recognize and understand the effect of bias. That is why there is peer review

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 1:03 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Monk, posted 08-17-2005 1:36 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 3924 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 44 of 81 (234121)
08-17-2005 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by jar
08-17-2005 1:08 PM


Re: Flash: Moses` Tablets found
The other concept floating in this thread is that confirmation of most historical evidence in the Bible does nothing to support the theology. Would you consider that a reasonable assumption?
Yes, that's a reasonable assumption. I wouldn't expect physical evidence to support the supernatural. At best, it can only confirm biblical history.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by jar, posted 08-17-2005 1:08 PM jar has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 81 (234126)
08-17-2005 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Tal
08-17-2005 1:10 PM


No it wasn't.
quote:
You presented point BO (Bogus Oshuary) as an argument that finds are bogus wich implies you think DP is bogus.
Uh oh. Are we now going to get into an argument about what I think?
I presented "James' Ossuary" to point out that one needs to be careful before one makes unwarranted conclusions. I have no idea whether or not "David's Palace" is bogus (and even if it turns out not to be David's Palace, "bogus" may still be too strong a word); I'm just pointing out that it's a bit early to come to definite conclusions as to whether the discovered ruins are in fact David's Palace.
By the way, to be a straw man, I would have to be arguing against a point that the other person did not make. Since I don't know what your point was (I haven't reread the previous posts), I certainly wasn't arguing against it, and therefore was committing no fallacy at all. I was merely giving a warning about being to credulous.
Personally, I don't really think a discussion of my intentions or a discussion on the definition of "straw man" would really be all that interesting.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Tal, posted 08-17-2005 1:10 PM Tal has 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