Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Bill Rea <bsr15 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz>]

Karl wrote:-

>After checking the dictionary, I see the multiple authorship theory as
>more complex than the single authorship picture given in the text. Hence,
>I don't see how parsimony fits this theory.

Ok, I haven't got time to explain this any further. You would need
to understand some basic statistics to understand standard usage
of parsimony in that field.

>As for the other definitions, I got them from reading Dr.s George Gaylord
>Simpson and William S. Beck and many other scientists. Look on
>Amazon.com, how many books authored by them are still being sold: how
>many books on science by you should I find there?

Question: What's the name of the logical fallacy you are using here?

I'm surprized you fell into that trap seeing how often you have blasted
others for the same error in argument. I'm not questioning Simpson or
Beck. What I question is your understanding of them. Clearly you don't
know what science is, how it is done, what constitutes an observation and
so on. Over many years quite a number of list members have pointed out
the flaws in your definitions and you continue to use them unchanged.
Just to point out one concrete example. You often claim evolution is
a religion. It is an established empirical fact. Evolution has been
observed on timescales as short as a single reproductive season,
i.e. less than one year. Even using your extremely narrow definitions
evolution passes your own standards as science.


>I had a professor many years ago try to convince us in class that DH was
>the way to go, but then he included in his lectures what sounded like
>contradictory statements which made me wonder if the only reason for DH
>was philosophical (religious) and not based on objective standards. Then
>I read a PhD dissertation showing the history and philosophy of DH that
>verified my initial impression of the theory.

I answered most of this in my earlier reply to Edward. I would only add
that when I encountered the DH I did not change my religion but I was
persuaded by the evidence and the arguments to change my view of my
religion's sacred texts. But this is really going beyond the scope
of the list so I had better stop.

Bill Rea, ICT Services, University of Canterbury \_
E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz                </   New
Phone 64-3-364-2331, Fax  64-3-364-2332        /)  Zealand
Unix Systems Administrator                    (/'