Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
That's why I included opportunities as part of the list. You have to make due with limitations placed on your talents, and lack of opportunity is the flip side of opportunity. Why do we have proportionately fewer serious music composers today than in the 18th and early 19th century, for example? Fewer talented people? Stacy Smith wrote: What are we to do if our talents are being hindered? Stacy. At 07:58 PM 11/05/2002 -0700, you wrote: This is true. Each has their own challenges, opportunities, talents, gifts and assignments in life. This is what I get from what Paul says in I Corinthians 13. YOUR challenge and MY challenge are to use those to the best of our advantage. I learned a very interesting lesson recently. I've been going through a great deal of physical pain due to some neurological problems (among other things I had a blood clot on the brain, between the surface and the lining of the brain, called a subdural haematoma, which they say is one of the most painful things a person can experience, along with childbirth and kidney stones). A neuropsychologist (who is a diagnostician, not a counsellor) told me that I would probably have this difficulty, due to brain damage in the parietal pre-frontal lobe of my brain, for quite some time, and I had to learn to separate pain itself, which I can't do anything about (beyond analgaesic relief) and suffering which he defined as my reaction to pain. He told me to take more social risks and if I have a seizure in public, well, so what of it? Other people's reaction to it is their problem. Now let's turn that around. If you have a talent, you have a responsibility to magnify it. Other people, who may not have that talent, should not envy you for it, but should be glad for you, and should not react negatively when you succeed in that area. We put a lot of barriers in our own way, and often attempt to put barriers in other people's lives, too. Don't let anyone put barriers in your way. And what I've said goes for Gary, too. I'm sure I'm not telling any of you anything you don't already know, but this is by way of encouragement. Stacy Smith wrote: Not all of us are required to prove theories. Stacy. At 03:55 PM 11/04/2002 -0900, you wrote: After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with: No, it is postulating a theory. Once a theory is set out for all to read, then it is up to the rest of us to disprove the theory by testing it against known evidences. That does not yet make it a fact, as future evidence can always refute a theory. Without theories, we would not advance in science or knowledge. The danger comes when we convince ourselves that a theory is a fact, when in fact, it isn't. So basically what you are saying is that I can forward any way out weird theory, maybe like something that Velikovsky or von Daniken might write, and the burden of proof is on us to use evidence to showing how wrong headed my theory is. I disagree that a person can responsibly postulate a theory and then expect it to be accepted unless someone can disprove it. Even a theory needs to be supported with some kind of evidence. Otherwise it isn't even a theory, just a wild speculation. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === You know what would make a good story? Something about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea. --Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR /// // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// /// // --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002 / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950) Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
I was trying to make points that not everyone appreciates the talents we may already have. Stacy. At 01:04 AM 11/07/2002 -0700, you wrote: That's why I included opportunities as part of the list. You have to make due with limitations placed on your talents, and lack of opportunity is the flip side of opportunity. Why do we have proportionately fewer serious music composers today than in the 18th and early 19th century, for example? Fewer talented people? Stacy Smith wrote: What are we to do if our talents are being hindered? Stacy. At 07:58 PM 11/05/2002 -0700, you wrote: This is true. Each has their own challenges, opportunities, talents, gifts and assignments in life. This is what I get from what Paul says in I Corinthians 13. YOUR challenge and MY challenge are to use those to the best of our advantage. I learned a very interesting lesson recently. I've been going through a great deal of physical pain due to some neurological problems (among other things I had a blood clot on the brain, between the surface and the lining of the brain, called a subdural haematoma, which they say is one of the most painful things a person can experience, along with childbirth and kidney stones). A neuropsychologist (who is a diagnostician, not a counsellor) told me that I would probably have this difficulty, due to brain damage in the parietal pre-frontal lobe of my brain, for quite some time, and I had to learn to separate pain itself, which I can't do anything about (beyond analgaesic relief) and suffering which he defined as my reaction to pain. He told me to take more social risks and if I have a seizure in public, well, so what of it? Other people's reaction to it is their problem. Now let's turn that around. If you have a talent, you have a responsibility to magnify it. Other people, who may not have that talent, should not envy you for it, but should be glad for you, and should not react negatively when you succeed in that area. We put a lot of barriers in our own way, and often attempt to put barriers in other people's lives, too. Don't let anyone put barriers in your way. And what I've said goes for Gary, too. I'm sure I'm not telling any of you anything you don't already know, but this is by way of encouragement. Stacy Smith wrote: Not all of us are required to prove theories. Stacy. At 03:55 PM 11/04/2002 -0900, you wrote: After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with: No, it is postulating a theory. Once a theory is set out for all to read, then it is up to the rest of us to disprove the theory by testing it against known evidences. That does not yet make it a fact, as future evidence can always refute a theory. Without theories, we would not advance in science or knowledge. The danger comes when we convince ourselves that a theory is a fact, when in fact, it isn't. So basically what you are saying is that I can forward any way out weird theory, maybe like something that Velikovsky or von Daniken might write, and the burden of proof is on us to use evidence to showing how wrong headed my theory is. I disagree that a person can responsibly postulate a theory and then expect it to be accepted unless someone can disprove it. Even a theory needs to be supported with some kind of evidence. Otherwise it isn't even a theory, just a wild speculation. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === You know what would make a good story? Something about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea. --Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR /// // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// /// // --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002 / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950) Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely;
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 21:54 11/6/2002 -0600, Gryy wrote: Though your text book told you about biology, you still cut into that frog in class. Why? To prove the statements in the book that a frog does have heart, lungs, etc. Each time you turn on a light switch, you do it with faith, because you have previously tested the theory that it will normally turn on the light. When the light doesn't come on, then new theories appear: the bulb is broken, the power is out, the wiring is messed up, etc. To get this fixed, we must test each possible answer until the evidence points us to the correct one. IN other words, we test theories out each and every day. Most are on things that are not earth shattering. They are for the frog! Till the champion of the under-amphibian / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Come-on line in Biology 20: Hi! My name's Marc. I'll pith your frog for you. Worked with all the girls. Elmer L. Fairbank wrote: At 21:54 11/6/2002 -0600, Gryy wrote: Though your text book told you about biology, you still cut into that frog in class. Why? To prove the statements in the book that a frog does have heart, lungs, etc. Each time you turn on a light switch, you do it with faith, because you have previously tested the theory that it will normally turn on the light. When the light doesn't come on, then new theories appear: the bulb is broken, the power is out, the wiring is messed up, etc. To get this fixed, we must test each possible answer until the evidence points us to the correct one. IN other words, we test theories out each and every day. Most are on things that are not earth shattering. They are for the frog! Till the champion of the under-amphibian / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / -- Marc A. Schindler Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950) Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated. / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^^=== This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^^===
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
What are we to do if our talents are being hindered?
Stacy.
At 07:58 PM 11/05/2002 -0700, you wrote:
This is true. Each has their own challenges, opportunities, talents, gifts and
assignments in life. This is what I get from what Paul says in I
Corinthians 13.
YOUR challenge and MY challenge are to use those to the best of our
advantage. I
learned a very interesting lesson recently. I've been going through a
great deal
of physical pain due to some neurological problems (among other things I had a
blood clot on the brain, between the surface and the lining of the brain,
called a
subdural haematoma, which they say is one of the most painful things a
person can
experience, along with childbirth and kidney stones). A neuropsychologist
(who is
a diagnostician, not a counsellor) told me that I would probably have this
difficulty, due to brain damage in the parietal pre-frontal lobe of my
brain, for
quite some time, and I had to learn to separate pain itself, which I can't do
anything about (beyond analgaesic relief) and suffering which he defined
as my
reaction to pain. He told me to take more social risks and if I have a
seizure
in public, well, so what of it? Other people's reaction to it is their
problem.
Now let's turn that around. If you have a talent, you have a responsibility to
magnify it. Other people, who may not have that talent, should not envy
you for
it, but should be glad for you, and should not react negatively when you
succeed
in that area. We put a lot of barriers in our own way, and often attempt
to put
barriers in other people's lives, too. Don't let anyone put barriers in
your way.
And what I've said goes for Gary, too. I'm sure I'm not telling any of you
anything you don't already know, but this is by way of encouragement.
Stacy Smith wrote:
Not all of us are required to prove theories.
Stacy.
At 03:55 PM 11/04/2002 -0900, you wrote:
After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with:
No, it is postulating a theory. Once a theory is set out for all to read,
then it is up to the rest of us to disprove the theory by testing it
against known evidences. That does not yet make it a fact, as future
evidence can always refute a theory. Without theories, we would not
advance in science or knowledge. The danger comes when we convince
ourselves that a theory is a fact, when in fact, it isn't.
So basically what you are saying is that I can forward any way out weird
theory, maybe like something that Velikovsky or von Daniken might write,
and the burden of proof is on us to use evidence to showing how wrong
headed my theory is.
I disagree that a person can responsibly postulate a theory and then
expect it to be accepted unless someone can disprove it. Even a theory
needs to be supported with some kind of evidence. Otherwise it isn't even
a theory, just a wild speculation.
John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
You know what would make a good story? Something
about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's
real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea. --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR
///
//
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
///
//
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade;
character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we
dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors
employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 19:16 11/4/2002 -0700, M Marc wrote: Anyone here remember that old cartoon about the swing? There are about half a dozen ridiculous drawings of a simple swing in ridiculous configurations, which go from: what the salesman booked, what the marketeer spec'ed, what the engineer built, and so on, until the final one was a simple rope with a tire at the end, labelled what the customer wanted. It was, in fact swinging through my mind when I read it. Till / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
John W. Redelfs wrote:
After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with:
No, it is postulating a theory. Once a theory is set out for all to read,
then it is up to the rest of us to disprove the theory by testing it
against known evidences. That does not yet make it a fact, as future
evidence can always refute a theory. Without theories, we would not
advance in science or knowledge. The danger comes when we convince
ourselves that a theory is a fact, when in fact, it isn't.
So basically what you are saying is that I can forward any way out weird
theory, maybe like something that Velikovsky or von Daniken might write,
and the burden of proof is on us to use evidence to showing how wrong
headed my theory is.
A theory has to be based on observable data, and it has to show its own
falsifiability criteria, which is to say, this is what it would take to prove
the theory wrong:. (Darwin did this in Origin of Species, for instance, when he
said that if intermediate forms were not found in the fossil record this would
present a major stumbling block to his theory. That intermediate forms continue
to be found all the time shows that his theory works, or in scientific parlance,
that it is true. But that doesn't mean true in the ultimate, religious sense,
as tomorrow another theory could come along which explains the data better and is
better at predicting behaviour of the physical model. Velikovsky's problem was
that he didn't indicate how Venus and Mars could have changed their orbits from a
harmonic orbit with Earth (for which there is a precedent; namely Neptune and
Pluto) to their existing near-circular orbits. It also didn't account for the
thermal effects close flybys would create in the Earth, therefore it has been
rejected by scientists.
I disagree that a person can responsibly postulate a theory and then expect
it to be accepted unless someone can disprove it. Even a theory needs to
be supported with some kind of evidence. Otherwise it isn't even a theory,
just a wild speculation.
John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
You know what would make a good story? Something
about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's
real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea. --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
This is true. Each has their own challenges, opportunities, talents, gifts and
assignments in life. This is what I get from what Paul says in I Corinthians 13.
YOUR challenge and MY challenge are to use those to the best of our advantage. I
learned a very interesting lesson recently. I've been going through a great deal
of physical pain due to some neurological problems (among other things I had a
blood clot on the brain, between the surface and the lining of the brain, called a
subdural haematoma, which they say is one of the most painful things a person can
experience, along with childbirth and kidney stones). A neuropsychologist (who is
a diagnostician, not a counsellor) told me that I would probably have this
difficulty, due to brain damage in the parietal pre-frontal lobe of my brain, for
quite some time, and I had to learn to separate pain itself, which I can't do
anything about (beyond analgaesic relief) and suffering which he defined as my
reaction to pain. He told me to take more social risks and if I have a seizure
in public, well, so what of it? Other people's reaction to it is their problem.
Now let's turn that around. If you have a talent, you have a responsibility to
magnify it. Other people, who may not have that talent, should not envy you for
it, but should be glad for you, and should not react negatively when you succeed
in that area. We put a lot of barriers in our own way, and often attempt to put
barriers in other people's lives, too. Don't let anyone put barriers in your way.
And what I've said goes for Gary, too. I'm sure I'm not telling any of you
anything you don't already know, but this is by way of encouragement.
Stacy Smith wrote:
Not all of us are required to prove theories.
Stacy.
At 03:55 PM 11/04/2002 -0900, you wrote:
After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with:
No, it is postulating a theory. Once a theory is set out for all to read,
then it is up to the rest of us to disprove the theory by testing it
against known evidences. That does not yet make it a fact, as future
evidence can always refute a theory. Without theories, we would not
advance in science or knowledge. The danger comes when we convince
ourselves that a theory is a fact, when in fact, it isn't.
So basically what you are saying is that I can forward any way out weird
theory, maybe like something that Velikovsky or von Daniken might write,
and the burden of proof is on us to use evidence to showing how wrong
headed my theory is.
I disagree that a person can responsibly postulate a theory and then
expect it to be accepted unless someone can disprove it. Even a theory
needs to be supported with some kind of evidence. Otherwise it isn't even
a theory, just a wild speculation.
John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
You know what would make a good story? Something
about a clown who make people happy, but inside he's
real sad. Also, he has severe diarrhea. --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.399 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 10/09/2002
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 13:27 11/1/2002 -0900, BLT wrote: It seems to me that an honest scholar would just stick to writing things he can authenticate using the documentary record, or at least the archaeological record. In the absence of such records the author isn't just engaging in unfounded supposition, he is engaged in irresponsible guessing and wild speculation. That is, he is just making up the story. Such a book is fiction, not nonfiction. Ah, yes, but now it becomes part of the scholarly record, to be quoted ad nauseum, with the wild speculation becoming more and more a concrete truth with every scholarly citation. Till / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 15:29 11/1/2002 -0900, BLT wrote: Was Ammon defending a flock of turkeys when he cut all those guys arms off? Till thinks that he was defending the sheep FROM flocks of turkeys! / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 15:53 11/1/2002 -0900, BLT wrote: The oldest secular writings, from ancient Sumer, also speak of a Great Flood. Yes, but they were obviously primitive unenlightened people, whose superstitions count for nothing in the light of scientific truth and so must be brushed away with all the other human debris that came before. They weren't as advanced as we of the enlightenment, the glorious age of knowledge and reason; those whose conceit knows no bounds. Till the cynical / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 22:01 11/1/2002 -0700, M Marc wrote (and wrote): So maybe to me I see a turdus migratoris [guess why I've always remembered *this* one!!] but my 4-year old granddaughter sees a robin and her little 2-year old friend sees a birdie. And is it the European robin or the New World robin? They're not the same. Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate? Till the helpful / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 23:13 11/1/2002 -0900, BLT wrote: Otherwise, it is just a long essay on how I look at things. Till prefers very short essays on how he looks at things. / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 14:03 11/3/2002 -0900, BLT wrote: I'm just a black and white kind of guy. Yes, I noticed that about your hair, last time I saw you, John. 8)) Till / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
?
I don't get it.
Elmer L. Fairbank wrote:
At 22:01 11/1/2002 -0700, M Marc wrote (and wrote):
So maybe to me I see a turdus migratoris
[guess why I've always remembered *this* one!!] but my 4-year old
granddaughter
sees a robin and her little 2-year old friend sees a birdie. And is it the
European robin or the New World robin? They're not the same.
Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate?
Till the helpful
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want a
world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Then Diamond's book is not for you.
Elmer L. Fairbank wrote:
At 23:13 11/1/2002 -0900, BLT wrote:
Otherwise, it is just a long essay on how I look at things.
Till prefers very short essays on how he looks at things.
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
A general book like Diamond's is not part of the scholarly record. It's
intended for the general public. For those who want scholarly treatments, he
provides a long list of recommended reading related to each chapter of the book.
Elmer L. Fairbank wrote:
At 13:27 11/1/2002 -0900, BLT wrote:
It seems to me that an honest scholar would just stick to writing things
he can authenticate using the documentary record, or at least the
archaeological record. In the absence of such records the author isn't
just engaging in unfounded supposition, he is engaged in irresponsible
guessing and wild speculation. That is, he is just making up the
story. Such a book is fiction, not nonfiction.
Ah, yes, but now it becomes part of the scholarly record, to be quoted ad
nauseum, with the wild speculation becoming more and more a concrete truth
with every scholarly citation.
Till
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 11:34 11/4/2002 -0700, M Marc wrote: ? I don't get it. Elmer L. Fairbank wrote: At 22:01 11/1/2002 -0700, M Marc wrote (and wrote): So maybe to me I see a turdus migratoris [guess why I've always remembered *this* one!!] but my 4-year old granddaughter sees a robin and her little 2-year old friend sees a birdie. And is it the European robin or the New World robin? They're not the same. Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate? Till the helpful Hint: Monty Python Till / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
RE: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Dan Allen: Thanks Larry, that's the one I was using. The Scientific is meant to imply that the person making the SWAG is basing it on some valid data that doesn't extend far enough to make the SWAG a serious prediction - it's a confidence level thing. ___ Ah yes, the confidence level thing. Reminds me of the time in the Wizard of Id when Sir Rodney the Knight was interviewing applicants for the position of stable hand. He says to one applicant, It says here that you were a rocket scientist. I find that hard to believe. To which the applicant replies, Do you want someone who can shovel it or not? Larry Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
John W. Redelfs wrote:
At 12:42 PM, Saturday, 11/2/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote:
The 1P don't say. It doesn't appear to be a concern for them. That could
be why all
the sciences are represented in the curriculum at BYU (in fact, BYU's
evolutionary
biologists are leading cladists, a sub-specialty in the field). Also, I
don't
seem to see all that disagreement that you talk about. Science is forever
tentative -- it always changes. This is its nature. It's normal.
Aw, c'mon now. Right here in Diamond's book he contradicts all those
paleontologists who have presented evidence of human habitation in the
Americas before the Clovis culture. Why can't scientists at least agree on
that? He also points out that there is a difference of opinion among
scientist whether or not the early American hunter-gatherers were
responsible for the extinction of the large mammals that one inhabited the
Americas. He says that the early Americans killed them all, and then
admits that many scientist do not believe any such thing.
Exactly what I said. Science is forever tentative -- it always changes.
Scientists *do* now believe that the Monteverdian culture (the one you're
referring to, the one found in Chile) pre-dates the Clovian culture, but
defenders of the Clovian culture as being first didn't give up without a fight.
The orthodox view among the most highly respect paleontologists is that
mankind arrived in the Americas by a series of successive waves of
immigration over the Bering land bridge. He says that other highly
respected scientists allow for the possibility that some of the first
inhabitants of the Americas arrived here by boat as they followed the
shoreline that rings the Pacific. Which is it? I can't believe that you
would say that scientists don't disagree on anything, or that they don't do
it much. They do it all the time, and it is commonplace.
Perhaps, instead of asking me just so you can pick holes in answers which I'm
presenting in an attempt to be helpful, you could check into some of Diamond's
recommended reading books.
Part of the reason I turned away from science to religion is because I
despaired of learning anything with any certainty when the foremost
authorities in almost every field disagree with fellow scientists about
really basic things. I have a real need for at least some questions to
have conclusive answers. Otherwise, life is just a constantly changing
dream bound by no laws and consequently all over the map. I know very
little for sure, but what little I do know I have learned from the
scriptures, the modern prophets, and the testimony of the Holy Ghost.
It's always either/or, isn't it? sigh
John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Yes, even the army's cleaned itself up ;-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Larry Jackson:
Scientific wild- _ _ _ guess.
There are other meanings, as well, but that's the primary
one in most common use.
Paul Osborne:
Ha ha ha ah. I didn't think you had in you Larry.
___
Well, facts is facts, no? Besides, it's SNAFU that everyone
usually gets wrong: Situation normal, all fouled up.
(Just thought I'd clarify that, lest someone get all charterly
on me or something.) [grin]
Larry Jackson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with: Part of the reason I turned away from science to religion is because I despaired of learning anything with any certainty when the foremost authorities in almost every field disagree with fellow scientists about really basic things. I have a real need for at least some questions to have conclusive answers. Otherwise, life is just a constantly changing dream bound by no laws and consequently all over the map. I know very little for sure, but what little I do know I have learned from the scriptures, the modern prophets, and the testimony of the Holy Ghost. It's always either/or, isn't it? sigh Yes I have been accused with binary thinking. I confess that it is so. With me a thing is either true or false, good or bad, right or wrong, from God or from the devil, promoting freedom or promoting slavery. I'm just a black and white kind of guy. There are gray area to be sure, but they are gray only because of my own ignorance. If I were smart enough to figure them out or had enough information to do so, I would undoubtedly assign them their properly black or white status. John W. Redelfs[EMAIL PROTECTED] = To me, clowns aren't funny. In fact, they're kind of scary. I've wondered where this started and I think it goes back to the time I went to the circus, and a clown killed my dad. --Jack Handy = All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
JWR confessed I'm just a black and white kind of guy. Me too. And, I don't take prisoners. ;-) Paul O [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
How about just thinking of things as tools? Science isn't in opposition to
religion except in the hands of ignorant atheists, as far as I'm concerned (and
there are plenty of them, to be sure). It's just a tool, a certain disciplined
way of looking at things, that's all. The confusion arises when one way of
looking at things uses a word which has a different meaning or connotation in a
different realm (like truth -- there's really no such concept in science. While
a scientist will use the term, he really means useful, consistent/predictive,
etc., not true in some ultimate sense as a philosopher or religious person
would use it).
John W. Redelfs wrote:
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
Part of the reason I turned away from science to religion is because I
despaired of learning anything with any certainty when the foremost
authorities in almost every field disagree with fellow scientists about
really basic things. I have a real need for at least some questions to
have conclusive answers. Otherwise, life is just a constantly changing
dream bound by no laws and consequently all over the map. I know very
little for sure, but what little I do know I have learned from the
scriptures, the modern prophets, and the testimony of the Holy Ghost.
It's always either/or, isn't it? sigh
Yes I have been accused with binary thinking. I confess that it is
so. With me a thing is either true or false, good or bad, right or wrong,
from God or from the devil, promoting freedom or promoting slavery. I'm
just a black and white kind of guy. There are gray area to be sure, but
they are gray only because of my own ignorance. If I were smart enough to
figure them out or had enough information to do so, I would undoubtedly
assign them their properly black or white status.
John W. Redelfs[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=
To me, clowns aren't funny. In fact, they're kind of scary.
I've wondered where this started and I think it goes back to
the time I went to the circus, and a clown killed my dad.
--Jack Handy
=
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 08:19 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: And hence the humble SWAG is born... What is a SWAG? I don't recognize the acronymn. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 08:37 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: And there isn't even a proper bibliography, just some suggested additional reading. Define proper bibliography. John, if you don't like the book, don't finish it. But spare us your suffering. A proper bibliography is a list of works cited, usually those documented with footnotes linking the claims made in the text to the authority upon which those claims are made. Even our RS/PH manuals use footnotes and a proper bibliography. A person doesn't have to be a heavy duty scholar to appreciate knowing where an author came up with an assertion. In the absence of such documentation, it seems like the author is just making it up out of his head. And since so much of this particular text is obviously speculation and conjecture, a few footnotes and a real bibliography would have increased the credibility of the work. Otherwise, it is just a long essay on how I look at things. Incidentally, a person doesn't have to be a scholar to appreciate a real bibliography. I'm not a scholar, and I appreciate them. In fact, I think that most bibliographies are more interesting than the works built upon them. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth part of the face. --Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 08:37 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: At 01:56 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: You're asking a question Diamond doesn't attempt to answer, and there's no easy way to answer this. I don't believe I suggested that Diamond was supposed to answer my question. I asked my question of the members of this list. If Diamond is right about the domestication of grain and sheep, and the origins of language, isn't there something wrong with our Book of Genesis? Only if you believe Genesis was intended to be an anthropology text. I don't believe it is an anthropology text. I think it is a history book, a record of God's dealings of man since the first man down to the time of Moses. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography and the dancers hit each other. -- Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 08:37 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: Then perhaps you should follow the counsel of the brethren and learn how: I quote again, Leave geology, biology, archaeology, and anthropology, no one of which has to do with the salvation of the souls of mankind, to scientific research. Nowhere does it say they're wrong, it says to leave them to the experts. And just who are these experts, and why do they so rarely agree with each other? All that disagreement hardly enhances the credibility of their claims. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Okay, I'll take that. Let me rephrase my question: Jim, care to back *any* of
this up with any actual facts?
John W. Redelfs wrote:
At 08:08 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote:
Jim, care to back *any* of this up with any actual facts, rather than just
a rant?
You are misusing the word rant. Jim's post was not bombastic or excited
enough to qualify as rant:
1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner
2 : to scold vehemently
transitive senses : to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion
And when a person is expressing attitudes and values, facts are
irrelevant. For instance, if I were to say that I can't stand people with
an eastern European accent, no one could intelligently demand that I
provide facts. The fact is that I feel that way. And the fact is that Jim
feels that way about scientists who forget where science leaves off and
where religion begins.
John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===
The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth
part of the face. --Jack Handy
===
All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
The first duty of a university is to teach wisdom, not a trade; character, not
technicalities. We want a lot of engineers in the modern world, but we dont want
a world of engineers. Sir Winston Churchill (1950)
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 12:37 PM, Saturday, 11/2/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: I don't believe it is merely a (secular) history book -- I think it's more profound than that. If it's truly a secular history of God's dealings [with] man since the first man down to the time of Moses why a) does it show signs of having been redacted by later editors; and b) why doesn't it tell us anything about, say, the Chinese? Marc, I can't believe that you wrote this. Think it through again. How could a history be secular if it is a record of God's dealings with man? As for the Chinese, I think that much of the Old Testament is devoted to teachings that apply to all mankind. I assume that includes the Chinese too. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === If you were a poor Indian with no weapons, and a bunch of conquistadors came up to you and asked where the gold was, I don't think it would be a good idea to say, I swallowed it. So sue me. --Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 12:40 PM, Saturday, 11/2/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: That would be appropriate for a technical text, but Diamond's book was meant as an introduction for a lay audience. The scope of what he discusses is too broad for this kind of approach -- there would simply be too many footnotes. That's why authors who find themselves in this situation give recommended reading lists so people can zero in on areas of interest and do further research. Our RS/PH manuals use footnotes because they are explicitly teaching from the teachings of an individual. Diamond isn't doing that -- he's painting with a much broader brush. If you are uncomfortable with his conclusions, check out the recommended reading and do further reading to see if he's talking through his hat or not. I am actually enjoying the book quite a lot. Most of it makes assumptions that I think are false, but for some reason that doesn't really detract from my enjoyment. I do think that Diamond is making an awful lot of assumptions, so many that the whole book seems like one big assumption. At least half the book is stuff that Diamond couldn't possibly know. Where is the line between fiction and nonfiction? I think he really comes close to that line. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man. --Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 12:42 PM, Saturday, 11/2/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: The 1P don't say. It doesn't appear to be a concern for them. That could be why all the sciences are represented in the curriculum at BYU (in fact, BYU's evolutionary biologists are leading cladists, a sub-specialty in the field). Also, I don't seem to see all that disagreement that you talk about. Science is forever tentative -- it always changes. This is its nature. It's normal. Aw, c'mon now. Right here in Diamond's book he contradicts all those paleontologists who have presented evidence of human habitation in the Americas before the Clovis culture. Why can't scientists at least agree on that? He also points out that there is a difference of opinion among scientist whether or not the early American hunter-gatherers were responsible for the extinction of the large mammals that one inhabited the Americas. He says that the early Americans killed them all, and then admits that many scientist do not believe any such thing. The orthodox view among the most highly respect paleontologists is that mankind arrived in the Americas by a series of successive waves of immigration over the Bering land bridge. He says that other highly respected scientists allow for the possibility that some of the first inhabitants of the Americas arrived here by boat as they followed the shoreline that rings the Pacific. Which is it? I can't believe that you would say that scientists don't disagree on anything, or that they don't do it much. They do it all the time, and it is commonplace. Part of the reason I turned away from science to religion is because I despaired of learning anything with any certainty when the foremost authorities in almost every field disagree with fellow scientists about really basic things. I have a real need for at least some questions to have conclusive answers. Otherwise, life is just a constantly changing dream bound by no laws and consequently all over the map. I know very little for sure, but what little I do know I have learned from the scriptures, the modern prophets, and the testimony of the Holy Ghost. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography and the dancers hit each other. -- Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
RE: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
What is a SWAG? I don't recognize the acronymn. --JWR Scientific wild- _ _ _ guess. There are other meanings, as well, but that's the primary one in most common use. Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Maybe the scriptures really are just an ancient collection of Hebrew folk talks. Is that possible? Well, I've put all my eggs in one basket in the which the scriptures are true. However, it seems that symbolism plays a major part in the stories told of the Bible which could make what we think is reality as something totally different. I don't know John. I just try to believe. I try to have faith but I don't have any interest in trying to be perfect in this life. I know that Joseph Smith was a prophet and have felt the awesome power of the Holy Ghost tell me it's true. I believe in Joseph Smith just as much as I believe in Christ. To me, Jesus is no more the Savior than Joseph is a prophet and they both are equally true. Take one away and they both collapse together. The scriptures on the other hand are open to continuous interpretation because they have many abstract concepts that need further explaining. I'll be very upset to learn that the earth was not universally flooded as I believed or that the 6,000 year plan was not so. I don't like believing in untruths. I want the truth and nothing but the truth. Paul O [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
John: Has anyone on the list read GUNS, GERMS AND STEEL by Jared Diamond? It won the Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction in 1998. I am about half way through it, and I'm getting bogged down. This guy is a scientist and a historian, but he keeps explaining how domesticated plants were developed by man. He also explains how sheep came to be domesticated. Now he is talking about how the use of writing originated. Dan: I had started to read it several months ago, but didn't get very far. One of the things that bothered me about it was in his discussion of the conquest of South America. He based his estimates of the numbers of natives slain on a series of letters that - to me at least - read as propaganda tracts to the king of Spain. Now the numbers may actually be accurate, but when they are combined with statements like we did this in the glory of your kingship they ring a little inflated. That wasn't the reason that I quit reading it, but is one of the things I remembered from it. John: I thought that Cain raised grain, and Able raised sheep? Am I wrong? And I also thought that the language of Adam was the Adamic language, and that it is the language that was spoken by all peoples before their tongues were confounded at the time of the Tower of Babel. What is wrong with this picture. Are the scriptures wrong? Or is this scientist just making things up? Maybe the scriptures really are just an ancient collection of Hebrew folk talks. Is that possible? Dan: The problem with the study of truly ancient languages and cultures is the lack of real records. A lot of this type of scholarship has to be based on supposition; personal bias will get in the way. I don't think that there is really any way around that. If a scholar starts from the supposition that the Bible is strictly a regional record - and most seem to - then it gets ignored. / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
I have.
John W. Redelfs wrote:
Has anyone on the list read GUNS, GERMS AND STEEL by Jared Diamond? It won
the Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction in 1998. I am about half way
through it, and I'm getting bogged down.
This guy is a scientist and a historian, but he keeps explaining how
domesticated plants were developed by man. He also explains how sheep came
to be domesticated. Now he is talking about how the use of writing originated.
I thought that Cain raised grain, and Able raised sheep? Am I wrong? And
I also thought that the language of Adam was the Adamic language, and that
it is the language that was spoken by all peoples before their tongues were
confounded at the time of the Tower of Babel. What is wrong with this
picture. Are the scriptures wrong? Or is this scientist just making
things up? Maybe the scriptures really are just an ancient collection of
Hebrew folk talks. Is that possible?
You're asking a question Diamond doesn't attempt to answer, and there's no easy way
to answer this. We've been told by prophets from Brigham Young to John Widtsoe to
Spencer W. Kimball that Genesis is symbolic. A scientist isn't after ultimate truth
in the religious sense, he's after the best explanation that can be used in a
predictive model, or which describes physical evidence. You have to read his book
differently than you read Genesis, imo.
You go too far, imo, when you suggest, even rhetorically, that the scriptures are
just an ancient collection of Hebrew folk tales. That may be their format, but it's
a kind of mythology known as mythopoeia, which means that the narrative isn't the
point -- the symbolism is, and also the way something is written conveys the
message. I believe this is how the temple works, and there's a good explanation
(imo) by Northrop Frye about this that's on my website:
http://www.members.shaw.ca/kschindler/frye_1.htm
I actually have two items by Frye on my website, but this is the shorter one and it
addresses what it means to say that something is literal, especially sacred
history (what theologists sometimes call, borrowing from German, Heilsgeschichte).
The book is very well written, and the ancient scenarios he describes are
fascinating. But I don't see how he could possibly know these things
except by conjecture. And if his supposition are correct, then there is
something dreadfully wrong with the Genesis account of the creation.
I'm not sure what you mean by conjecture. Diamond has done active research in
many parts of the world, especially in the Indonesian Archipelago, including New
Guinea. It's not an either/or question. Both are right within their appropriate
realms.
He also points out that there was a dearth of large mammals to be used for
domestication here in the Americas. Sheep were domesticated in
Eurasia. How could the Garden of Eden have been here in the Americas, if
Able raised sheep, and sheep were domesticated in Eurasia and completely
unknown in the Americas until after the first contact with Europe?
What do you think?
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer, nor
those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
John: It seems to me that an honest scholar would just stick to writing things he can authenticate using the documentary record, or at least the archaeological record. In the absence of such records the author isn't just engaging in unfounded supposition, he is engaged in irresponsible guessing and wild speculation. That is, he is just making up the story. Such a book is fiction, not nonfiction. Dan: And hence the humble SWAG is born... If science limits itself to just the existing record, whether documentary or archaeological, and not try to extrapolate beyond that, then it really can't expand understanding. There needs to be _some_ supposition, hopefully founded on existing records, in all archaeological theories (or any theory for that matter), but it should only be there to help in defining further research. The problem, as I see it, is that many scientists invest so much of their egos in defending their more reasonable suppositions that they become 'facts', and 'proofs' and are then used to base more fanciful suppositions on. Eventually you have something that resembles complete fantasy because it's no longer even remotely based on the record. I don't think Mr. Diamond has gone that far yet, even though he is apparently ignoring the biblical record. Something else to consider on the sheep issue John is that we seem to be the only group that understands that Adam lived here - I think that most people assume that Eden was somewhere in what is now the mid-east, if they think about it at all. / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 01:56 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: You're asking a question Diamond doesn't attempt to answer, and there's no easy way to answer this. I don't believe I suggested that Diamond was supposed to answer my question. I asked my question of the members of this list. If Diamond is right about the domestication of grain and sheep, and the origins of language, isn't there something wrong with our Book of Genesis? You are forever trying to reconcile science with religion by suggesting that they don't ever tread on each other's toes. I am not convinced. The scriptures say that Cain raised grain, and Abel raised sheep. And Adam was literate and kept a book of remembrance. Diamond says that forty thousand years ago, primitive hunter-gatherers domesticated grain by cultivating local grasses, and that writing originated by some form of intellectual evolution. In was a remarkable invention. You can philosophize and theorize all you want, that sound like a contradiction to me. We've been told by prophets from Brigham Young to John Widtsoe to Spencer W. Kimball that Genesis is symbolic. Have they ever said which parts of Genesis are symbolic, or that all of it is symbolic? It seems to me that they teach that Adam and Eve were actual people, the parents of our race. Or is that symbolism too? I have always supposed that the story of the serpent, tree of life, tree of knowledge, Adam's rib and the flaming sword that kept the couple from returning to Eden were symbols. But was it mere symbolism when Adam was visited by angels who inquired as to why he was offering burnt sacrifice? Genesis tell us that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire from heaven. Was that merely a figure of speech? We learn that Jacob had twelve sons who fathered twelve tribes. Did that really happen, or is it just symbolism, something like a Hebrew Zodiac? In my view, if a person wants to dismiss Genesis as being mere symbolism, he needs to be a little more specific. He needs to either state that all of it is symbolism, or he needs to tell us which parts are symbolism and which parts are to be taken literally. A scientist isn't after ultimate truth in the religious sense, he's after the best explanation that can be used in a predictive model, or which describes physical evidence. You have to read his book differently than you read Genesis, imo. First of all, I never said anything about ultimate truth. I just said that Diamond's scenario seems to diverge considerably from the ancient record as contained in Genesis and the Book of Moses. And he didn't provide much physical evidence to buttress his claims. He didn't footnote. And there isn't even a proper bibliography, just some suggested additional reading. You go too far, imo, when you suggest, even rhetorically, that the scriptures are just an ancient collection of Hebrew folk tales. That may be their format, but it's a kind of mythology known as mythopoeia, which means that the narrative isn't the point -- the symbolism is, and also the way something is written conveys the message. I believe this is how the temple works, and there's a good explanation (imo) by Northrop Frye about this that's on my website: http://www.members.shaw.ca/kschindler/frye_1.htm Some people miss the marc (pun intended) by oversimplifying things, and others miss the mark by assuming things to be far more complicated than they are. I probably oversimplify things. And in my opinion you have a tendency in the other direction. Fundamental principles are rarely complex. Cause and effect can often be very complex because virtually nothing ever happens that is not influenced by a multitude of factors. BTW, the reason I tend to simplify things is because I'm just not smart enough to understand things that are highly complex. Simple minded as I am, I am constantly trying to find the essence of a thing. And by definition, an essence is simple. I actually have two items by Frye on my website, but this is the shorter one and it addresses what it means to say that something is literal, especially sacred history (what theologists sometimes call, borrowing from German, Heilsgeschichte). The book is very well written, and the ancient scenarios he describes are fascinating. But I don't see how he could possibly know these things except by conjecture. And if his supposition are correct, then there is something dreadfully wrong with the Genesis account of the creation. I'm not sure what you mean by conjecture. Conjecture: 2 a : inference from defective or presumptive evidence b : a conclusion deduced by surmise or guesswork c : a proposition (as in mathematics) before it has been proved or disproved Diamond has done active research in many parts of the world, especially in the Indonesian Archipelago, including New Guinea. It's not an either/or question. Both are right within their appropriate realms. I think it is a neat
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Of course they're true. But what do you mean by true? Scientists use a
different definition, and this is where the apparent contradictions arise.
Science is forever tentative and can only deal with the physical data it has at
hand. It's been very useful and I wouldn't want to do without it, but you can't
get teleological (purpose-related) or transcendent (things having to do with
spiritual matters) from it. I'm one of the strongest defenders of the scientific
method here, probably, so don't get me wrong, but I also know its boundaries.
But I like your answer, Paul. One thing I found that helps is an odd suggestion,
perhaps, but it's to learn a second language. Unilingual people often take for
granted that translation is simply a matter of selecting a word in the original
language, A-ish, and looking for the corresponding word in B-ish, the target
language. But when you actually learn B-ish, you find it's not that simple.
Learning a foreign language is also learning a foreign (literally) way of
thinking. I mean just look at English -- at all the misunderstandings that can
arise between speakers from different countries from Britain to Singapore, US
army brat to US valley girl.
To me science and religion are like different languages. There are limits to that
metaphor, so don't take it too literally, but it's kind of how I view it, or try
to explain it. Perhaps weakly. [Self-promotion alert] I have an essay on my
website with my thoughts on the differences. In fact, Stephen helped me with the
title, because I'm not fluent in Italian, and I wanted a take-off on Galileo's
famous (and probably apocryphal) statement, eppur si muovo (and yet it [the
Earth] moves). I've called my essay eppur si riconciliano:
http://www.members.shaw.ca/mschindler/A/galileo.htm
By the way, there are illustrations in the essay, but I've found that with some
browsers they don't show up. My apologies if they don't, but I don't know enough
about HTML to fix the problem.
Paul Osborne wrote:
Maybe the scriptures really are just an ancient collection of
Hebrew folk talks. Is that possible?
Well, I've put all my eggs in one basket in the which the scriptures are
true. However, it seems that symbolism plays a major part in the stories
told of the Bible which could make what we think is reality as something
totally different. I don't know John. I just try to believe. I try to
have faith but I don't have any interest in trying to be perfect in this
life.
I know that Joseph Smith was a prophet and have felt the awesome power of
the Holy Ghost tell me it's true. I believe in Joseph Smith just as much
as I believe in Christ. To me, Jesus is no more the Savior than Joseph is
a prophet and they both are equally true. Take one away and they both
collapse together.
The scriptures on the other hand are open to continuous interpretation
because they have many abstract concepts that need further explaining.
I'll be very upset to learn that the earth was not universally flooded as
I believed or that the 6,000 year plan was not so. I don't like believing
in untruths. I want the truth and nothing but the truth.
Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Scientists go from the assumption that the Bible isn't secular history, and in
that they are right. Apples and oranges.
Zion wrote:
John:
Has anyone on the list read GUNS, GERMS AND STEEL by Jared Diamond? It won
the Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction in 1998. I am about half way
through it, and I'm getting bogged down.
This guy is a scientist and a historian, but he keeps explaining how
domesticated plants were developed by man. He also explains how sheep came
to be domesticated. Now he is talking about how the use of writing
originated.
Dan:
I had started to read it several months ago, but didn't get very far. One
of the things that bothered me about it was in his discussion of the
conquest of South America. He based his estimates of the numbers of natives
slain on a series of letters that - to me at least - read as propaganda
tracts to the king of Spain. Now the numbers may actually be accurate, but
when they are combined with statements like we did this in the glory of
your kingship they ring a little inflated. That wasn't the reason that I
quit reading it, but is one of the things I remembered from it.
John:
I thought that Cain raised grain, and Able raised sheep? Am I wrong? And
I also thought that the language of Adam was the Adamic language, and that
it is the language that was spoken by all peoples before their tongues were
confounded at the time of the Tower of Babel. What is wrong with this
picture. Are the scriptures wrong? Or is this scientist just making
things up? Maybe the scriptures really are just an ancient collection of
Hebrew folk talks. Is that possible?
Dan:
The problem with the study of truly ancient languages and cultures is the
lack of real records. A lot of this type of scholarship has to be based on
supposition; personal bias will get in the way. I don't think that there is
really any way around that. If a scholar starts from the supposition that
the Bible is strictly a regional record - and most seem to - then it gets
ignored.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 04:13 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Dan R Allen wrote: Something else to consider on the sheep issue John is that we seem to be the only group that understands that Adam lived here - I think that most people assume that Eden was somewhere in what is now the mid-east, if they think about it at all. Yes, the sheep thing really puzzles me. As Latter-day Saints we often think of horses when answering the questions of the anti-Mormons. But what about sheep? Is there any evidence that there were any sheep in the New World before Columbus? And if the Garden of Eden was near Spring Hill, Missouri, and Abel raised sheep, how come there weren't any sheep here? I guess they all drowned in the Great Flood. Oh wait... I forgot, the flood was only over there in Mesopotamia somewhere. Here it shouldn't have had any effect on the sheep population, do you think? I've heard some Latter-day Saints speculate that the flocks mentioned in the Book of Mormon had reference to turkeys rather than sheep. Because there were domesticated turkeys in the New World before Columbus, but not sheep. Is that a good supposition? Can turkeys actually be herded like sheep or cattle? Was Ammon defending a flock of turkeys when he cut all those guys arms off? Always wondering, so many questions, so few answers, John W. Redelfs, [EMAIL PROTECTED] / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
At 04:42 PM, Friday, 11/1/02, Marc A. Schindler wrote: Of course they're true. But what do you mean by true? Scientists use a different definition, and this is where the apparent contradictions arise. Science is forever tentative and can only deal with the physical data it has at hand. It's been very useful and I wouldn't want to do without it, but you can't get teleological (purpose-related) or transcendent (things having to do with spiritual matters) from it. I'm one of the strongest defenders of the scientific method here, probably, so don't get me wrong, but I also know its boundaries. DC 93:24 24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; If scientists are using any other definition for true, then they need to rethink their position. And the last I heard scientist were frequently teaching thing as the are, and as they were, and as they are to come. Well... this last one is scientists like Gregory Benford and Isaac Asimov who were not only scientists but first-rate science fiction authors. If scientist are trying to learn and teach what happened in the past, then they are using the same definition for true that religious folk are. I think the dictionary actually comes quite close to this too. You say that science is forever tentative. Because of the principle of continuing revelation couldn't you say the same thing of the gospel? Once more I find the distinction a distinction without a difference, John Pratt and Marc Schindler notwithstanding. Both science and religion are trying to tell me what happened many thousands of years ago. And religion at least has some very old written records to buttress their claims. The oldest secular writings, from ancient Sumer, also speak of a Great Flood. John W. Redelfs [EMAIL PROTECTED] === To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music, no choreography and the dancers hit each other. -- Jack Handy === All my opinions are tentative pending further data. --JWR / /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / ==^ This email was sent to: archive@jab.org EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Jim, care to back *any* of this up with any actual facts, rather than just a
rant?
Jim Cobabe wrote:
John,
Scientists are free to indulge their fancy. Obviously there's little
historic evidence to substantiate supposedly prehistoric events. For
many science devotees, one basic premise is that nothing supernatural
exists. In science to acknowledge the existence or act of God is an
awful heresy. Of course the bible simply assumes that readers have
implicit faith in the existence of God. Therefore the science nazis
have to invent ways to discount biblical history.
Some of them can do this without being overtly arrogant and patently
offensive, but many cannot. As far as I can tell, the scientists
first tactic in arguing this position is to label anyone who doesn't
agree an ignorant superstitious moron. While this may satisfy their own
requirements for determining the winner of an argument, it seldom
answers the objections of science dissidents or science apostates.
And of course the scientists in their cliques don't feel obligated to
respect or cater to morons. For them, it certainly would be more
gratifying to feed each other's egos, and pretend that all their
theories have been critically reviewed.
When they are learned...
As to some of your other points.
I have long been fascinated by a science discipline referred to as
ethnobotany. This is a narrowly focused study attempting to discern
the natural origins of domestic plant species. In fact, it is a
singularly unproductive study, because it is generally found that the
existence of domestic strains extends back before historic times.
Nobody really knows for sure where the ancestors of most modern
cultivated plants arose. The studies return results that are strikingly
similar to the fruits of anthropologists efforts to find a proto-human
ancestor.
---
Mij Ebaboc
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
Well put, Dan. Science has a methodology which is based upon certain assumptions.
Many scientists make the mistake of assuming that that's all there is. But many
non-scientists likewise make the mistake of pooh-poohing a scientific discovery
out of ignorance of how science works, or because on the surface it *appears* to
contradict something they (the protestors) accept on faith.
Here's an example: no one's ever seen electrons jump from one energy level to
another, but if they didn't, your CD player wouldn't work.
Dan R Allen wrote:
John:
It seems to me that an honest scholar would just stick to writing things he
can authenticate using the documentary record, or at least the
archaeological record. In the absence of such records the author isn't
just engaging in unfounded supposition, he is engaged in irresponsible
guessing and wild speculation. That is, he is just making up the
story. Such a book is fiction, not nonfiction.
Dan:
And hence the humble SWAG is born...
If science limits itself to just the existing record, whether documentary
or archaeological, and not try to extrapolate beyond that, then it really
can't expand understanding.
There needs to be _some_ supposition, hopefully founded on existing
records, in all archaeological theories (or any theory for that matter),
but it should only be there to help in defining further research. The
problem, as I see it, is that many scientists invest so much of their egos
in defending their more reasonable suppositions that they become 'facts',
and 'proofs' and are then used to base more fanciful suppositions on.
Eventually you have something that resembles complete fantasy because it's
no longer even remotely based on the record.
I don't think Mr. Diamond has gone that far yet, even though he is
apparently ignoring the biblical record.
Something else to consider on the sheep issue John is that we seem to be
the only group that understands that Adam lived here - I think that most
people assume that Eden was somewhere in what is now the mid-east, if they
think about it at all.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
--
Marc A. Schindler
Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada -- Gateway to the Boreal Parkland
Guns dont kill people; people with guns kill people
Note: This communication represents the informal personal views of the author
solely; its contents do not necessarily reflect those of the authors employer,
nor those of any organization with which the author may be associated.
/
/// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at ///
/// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html ///
/
${list_promo}
Re: [ZION] Guns, Germs and Steel
This issue comes up in apologetics all the time, especially with respect to the evident lack of horses in the New World between the end of the ice age and the time of Columbus (the Vikings don't count because it's known they didn't bring horses with them). And the answer, or more properly, I suppose, the speculation, is that besides the fact that you can't prove a negative (that is, you can't prove there *weren't* horses or sheep), that the way people use language is different in different circumstances -- this is similar to what I've said already about the difference between sacred history and secular history, and between human languages. I'll give you a specific example so you can see what I'm getting at. When I write deer you think of an animal with antlers, more or less. But imagine the following conversation: John: I saw a deer on the road the other night, Marc: well, what kind of deer? Was it a red-tailed deer or a mule deer? John: How should I know? It was a deer. What's your problem? Marc: If you can't tell a red-tail from a mule, then how do I know you didn't see a caribou or a moose or a wapiti? John: Oh, leave me alone... :-) Okay, that's a bit tongue-in-cheek, but there is a point. It's been proposed by etymologists and linguists that the parent tongue of almost all the European languages, Persian, and the northern Indian languages was a language called Indo-European. This is a bit of a convenience, actually, because nothing in Indo-European (or indo-germanisch in German -- you can already see that there are controversies here!) has ever been found. They were probably pre-literate. However, if a people has lots of words for, say, different types of trees, then you can be safe in assuming that they lived in an area that was heavily forested, so they'd know the difference between, say, a ponderosa pine and a blue spruce, let alone between an oak and a birch. If they lived in an area which didn't have oak trees, they probably wouldn't have a word for it. This is an over-simplification because today you don't need to experience snow to know what it is, but we are in a global village now -- I'm talking about ancient societies. I knew what henna was long before a Moslem woman I worked with got engaged and got hennaed by her girlfriends (now I'll recognize that fragrance whenever I encounter it again). Now it so happens that in German there's a word for reindeer (Renntier) and there's a word for deer in the sense we think of a deer (Hart), but the word tier (also written, archaically, thier) doesn't mean deer, it means animal. Of course the set of animals is a superset of the set of deer, so how did Tier come just to mean deer? One proposal is that the northern Germanic peoples came to use the word to refer to the most common animal they were concerned with -- the deer, or more specifically, actually, the reindeer. It provided them with clothing, food and transport; kind of like an Old World counterpart to the bison (which we confusingly call a buffalo, which actually is supposed to refer to an Old World animal, but I digress). This is a case of the general becoming specific through the evolution of languages (btw, it probably came into English not through German, but through Norse, as the Vikings occupied a good part of England -- the region known as the Danelaw -- until Alfred the Great managed to drive them out). This also works the other way around. When the Spanish encountered the Carib Indians of Hispaniola (the island which today is shared by Haiti and the Dominican Republic), they noticed that they made an alcoholic drink brewed from palm hearts. The Spanish had no word for this, so they just called it viña (I'm going from memory; let's at least pretend that's the Spanish word for wine! Someone please correct me if I'm wrong). But strictly speaking, viña comes from grapes, so shouldn't they have used a new word for this palm wine? Maybe, but they didn't. They just didn't care. We care more today -- our languages are, as a rule, more complex and have larger vocabularies than earlier versions of them did. For instance, why don't we call the wine that's brewed (distilled? see my point?) from agave juice agave wine? But, no, we call it tequila, because we've borrowed the word from the Spanish. This is all by way of leading up to the suggestion that the terms sheep and horse could be relative, and have to be seen through the filter of a translator who may not have been a trained etymologist and scientist, like Joseph Smith. A llama is close enough to a sheep to be called a sheep, and an alpaca could be called a horse. That an alpaca is not of the equus family is beside the point -- our modern system of biological classification wasn't even invented until, iirc, the 18th century, when a Swede named Linnaeus invented the species/genus/ system that scientists use today. So maybe to me I see a turdus migratoris [guess why I've always remembered *this* one!!] but my 4-year old granddaughter
