#43923: — 10/14  at  12:39 PM
Sounds like the "Isaac Newton of Information Theory" is unfamiliar with the problem of overfitting. I.e., given the combinatorial space of potential mathematical relationships between Bible passages, it's not too hard to concoct one that fits the verses in a surprising looking way. Or maybe Dembski is not that dumb, and is being intentionally misleading (all in the name of Christian apologetics no doubt).

Personally, I find it more significant that the number 31 in base 8 (octal) was equal to 25 in base 10 (decimal). I.e.:

OCT 31 = DEC 25

Non-crack-smokers will be sure to dismiss this, but I think it's a fair conclusion that the antichrist will be born on Halloween--and he'll have 8 fingers instead of 10.

#43924: Alon Levy — 10/14  at  12:49 PM
Please don't tar all of mathematics with Dembski's name. Most mathematicians don't succmub to religious insanity.

#43927: — 10/14  at  01:04 PM
Well, I am a christian and I am certainly underwhelmed. Is is Dembski's official position that the chapters and verses are inspired?

Please, Please Please, Mr. Dembski, don't read Dr. Matrix! My favorite: In the KJV the 46th word in the 46th Psalm is "Shake." The 46th word from the back of that Psalm is "Spear." Shakespeare was 46 years old when the KJV was published, so he contrived to get his name put in.

While this is prbably garbage, I wonder if WS was a "consultant" in the KJV?

#43928: — 10/14  at  01:09 PM
It's bull like this that make me glad I, an atheist, have that Bible degree from back when I was deluded. While a Christian is free to believe that the words of the Bible are inspired in their original texts, only an occultist would believe that the chapter and verse divisions were in any sense inspired. Given that Greek (wish I could speak for Hebrew, but I never took it) doesn't even have punctuation, verse divisions are necessarily subjective. Further, there are whole sections of the Christian Bible, notably Mark 16:9-20, which the two oldest surviving Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus, do not contain. In all likelihood they were added after the original Gospel of Mark was written because Mark just leaves things hanging with no real resurrection (just an empty tomb and some women too scared to talk about what they'd seen). How can someone work math when the variables are so fluid and subjective? Well...by adhering to a fluid and subjective faith, I suppose.

#43930: — 10/14  at  01:13 PM
No. This is just too stupid, even for someone like Dembski. Surely his Web site was hacked and someone slipped a parody in. Surely the next hacked post will be something about how the length of one base of the great pyramid in Egypt is exactly divisible into the mean distance from the Earth to the Moon, and therefore ancient aliens built the pyramids. Surely.

#43931: — 10/14  at  01:14 PM
Brethren, who will get on the mission of determining what is the exact middle sentence in The Origin of Species (or if you prefer, The Double Helix)? Who has that much free time to waste? Who among ye, who I ask good people?

#43932: charlie wagner — 10/14  at  01:14 PM

God Bless America

Here they go again,
The Yanks in their armoured parade
Chanting their ballads of joy
As they gallop across the big world
Praising America's God.

The gutters are clogged with the dead
The ones who couldn't join in
The others refusing to sing
The ones who are losing their voice
The ones who've forgotten the tune.

The riders have whips which cut.
Your head rolls onto the sand
Your head is a pool in the dirt
Your head is a stain in the dust
Your eyes have gone out and your nose
Sniffs only the pong of the dead
And all the dead air is alive
With the smell of America's God.

Harold Pinter January 2003

Harold Pinter has won the 2005 Nobel Prize in Literature.

#43933: — 10/14  at  01:29 PM
Wow, Dembski's just. Wow. Has he just given up on trying to appear remotely rational?

-Schmitt.

#43934: — 10/14  at  01:35 PM
Crikey, absolutely beautiful pictures in the slideshow though. It's a pity that clicking made pathetic dribble spread across the images.

-Schmitt.

#43936: Orac — 10/14  at  01:37 PM
Actually. I do check out Dembski's blog every now and then, if only for blog fodder. I saw the link and PowerPoint .pps file. Lots of pretty pictures. Lots of really stupid numerology.

#43937: — 10/14  at  01:46 PM
I love the fact that the PowerPoint is simply a "send to 10 people" viral spamfest.

Blessed art the innumerate.

#43938: Joolya — 10/14  at  01:55 PM
Oy. Numerology is silly enough - but numerology based on a translation of a translation of a translation? That is sheer inanity. If this is is what Dembski and his ilk consider to be a good example of God's plan for perfection, I think they are doing God an enormous injustice.

#43940: — 10/14  at  01:59 PM
The subsequent verses in Psalms 118 are likely ones that give Dembski and the DI the warm feeling:

10 All the nations compassed me about,
but in the name of the LORD will I destroy them.
11 They compassed me about, yea, they compassed me about;
but in the name of the LORD I will destroy them.
12 They compassed me about like bees, they are like the fire of thorns;
for in the name of the LORD I will destroy them.

#43942: Lord Runolfr — 10/14  at  02:03 PM
"Don't forget, though: ID is a completely non-religious theory. We promote it heavily to Christians, and we make sure everyone knows that it's compatible with Christianity, but it's not a Christian theory. No sirree, Bob. It's just science!"
-- knee-jerk ID=Religion denialist

#43943: — 10/14  at  02:04 PM
Numerology is silly enough - but numerology based on a translation of a translation of a translation?

Ahh, but don't you see? - that just proves that God is still with us, guiding His Word throughout history!

#43946: — 10/14  at  02:07 PM
LOL, I can imagine PZ's face as he read that :D I thought this guy was nuts before.. If theres any doubt this is for relgious motives, its long, long, long past. Although, they clicking was annoying the pictures were nice though. I will give him that. But ugh.. geez.

#43952: — 10/14  at  02:34 PM
You know, I thought that the Jewish "bible codes" stuff was silly and sloppy... But at least it had a *gloss* of serious math wrapped around it. This is just sloppy nonsense.

Is he *really* a math prof? Please tell me that's just a joke!

-MarkCC

#43955: — 10/14  at  02:39 PM
Oy. Numerology is silly enough - but numerology based on a translation of a translation of a translation?

Heh, no kidding. It's astounding. For some reason, it reminds me of a radio campaign we're hearing a lot here in Seattle. It's for one of those lasik eye surgery clinics, and it's trumpeting a new method that doesn't use a blade. The ads say it's safer than ever. Then it actually says, "Lasik surgery has always been safe, but takes safety to a whole new level!" It's safer than safe! Just like this stuff is dumber than dumb.

#43956: DouglasG — 10/14  at  02:42 PM
Okay! I've finally got it.
First take the number of people at the last supper. That's 13

Next, take the number of books in the new testament minus the number of people in the Garden of Eden. That's 25

Now take half the number of plagues in Egypt. That's 5

Then take the number of members in the holy trinity times number of working days. That's 18.

Finally, take the number of lashes Jesus took minus half the flood days. That's 19.

Now you have 5 letters which is how many letters in Jesus's name. Thus, according to my calculations, the second coming of Christ's name must have, let me see ... M ... Y ... E ... R ... S...

Perhaps, I got the numbers wrong.

#43962: Adam Ierymenko — 10/14  at  02:54 PM
Oh wow... this is... kooky! I think my prediction that ID will eventually end up in the "new age fluff" category alongside things like "technical remote viewing" and "reverse speech" is proving correct.

William Dembski: The Uri Geller of information theory.

#43964: — 10/14  at  03:00 PM
Of course, the piece Dembski posts works only on one version of the Bible -- it doesn't work on the Catholic Bible, for example. Catholics have another nine or so books, etc., etc.

For that matter, has anyone ever checked the piece that Dembski posted? Is it accurate for ANY Bible?

Who was the twit who spent a weekend counting the verses in the Bible and numbering them?

Dembski forgot the shortest verse in the Bible: "Jesus wept." It must trouble Dembski.

#43971: — 10/14  at  03:40 PM
As if all that weren't bad enough, if anyone has ever taken a writing class, they'd know not to put the most important message smack in the middle of a paper of any length. No wonder God's word was lost on me, I was pressed for time, and I just read the introduction and conclusion.

#43978: Geoffrey Brent — 10/14  at  04:23 PM
Catholics aren't Christians, just ask Jack Chick :-(

It pains me to say it, but if Dembski had added up the verses in the Bible and got it wrong, that wouldn't much reflect on his mathematical credentials. Most good mathematicians I know are lousy at arithmetic.

What it reflects on is (are? Argh!) his *scientific* credentials: somebody else told him that Psalm 118 was the 'center of the Bible' and he took it on faith because it fit in with his world-view, rather than checking to see if it was true.

#43983: — 10/14  at  05:15 PM
If pressed, Dembski can claim it's a prank intended to get our collective goat and prove how predictable we "kneejerk Darwinists" are. See, for example:

http://evolutionblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/dembski-baffles-me.html
Dembski: 'I stated the quote this way on purpose, leaving off a little parenthetical in that sentence that doesn’t at all change its significance. I was waiting how long it would take for kneejerk Darwinists to jump on it. See for yourself at The Panda’s Thumb: “Dembski quote mining Dawkins.”'

Dembski is a big fan of the "Ha ha! Made you look!" school of witticism.

That or I'm being way too generous, and he thinks that some email spam forwarded by dear aunt Mildred is truly the most profound and inspiring thing he's ever read.

#43986: Raven — 10/14  at  05:35 PM

Thus, according to my calculations, the second coming of Christ's name must have, let me see ... M ... Y ... E ... R ... S...

Perhaps, I got the numbers wrong.

No, you just made a sign error.