RE: Theta vs. Phi

Pim van Meurs (entheta@eskimo.com)
Tue, 25 Aug 1998 08:14:30 -0700

>SJ>My Bible footnotes say that either the dimensions given were an
>>approximation, or that the measurements were not taken taken from the
>>same positions on the rim:

PM>The foresight of those who wrote the bible originally to add footnotes
>is incredible.

Stephen: <<Argument from personal incredility Pim?>>

Not at all. I am merely pointing out how fortuitous it was that the writers of the bible added the footnotes to explain the story.

PM>It is good to see how one has to speculate a lot about this unfortunate
pi=3 measurement.

Stephen: <<There was *no* speculation about it AFAIK by Bible believers, until
sceptics raised it as an alleged problem.>>

<g> Ain't life a ...

Stephen: <<And there is *no* "pi=3 measurement".>>

Unless you take the bible literal.

PM>Perhaps we are wrong about other 'measurements' as well ? Perhaps a
>'day is not 24 hrs' for instance?

Stephen: Nowhere does the Bible even say that the days of Genesis 1 are "24 hrs".
This is just a human interpretation.>>

Indeed.

PM>Heck all it takes are some 'footnotes' which I believe were not in the
original documents ?

Stephen: <<Of course the "footnotes" "were not in the original documents"! Surely Pim
you can't be be serious in thinking they were?>>>

Nope, they are as you said "possible fallacious interpretations/speculations of events in the bible"