ward@hao.UUCP (Mike Ward) (03/24/84)
[] All this discussion about state mandated science (laws about what is and is not science) leads me to beleive that its time to resurrect something that the state of (I think) Arkansas tried a few years ago: Lets make a law that PI is equal to 3 Its so much neater, and who do those elitist pigs think they are, anyway making it a number that can't even be written, ever.
amigo2@ihuxq.UUCP (John Hobson) (03/26/84)
Mike Ward suggests: >> All this discussion about state mandated science (laws about >> what is and is not science) leads me to beleive that its >> time to resurrect something that the state of (I think) >> Arkansas tried a few years ago: >> >> Lets make a law that PI is equal to 3 >> >> Its so much neater, and who do those elitist pigs think they >> are, anyway making it a number that can't even be written, ever. The reason that this law was suggested (I think that it was in Tennessee, Martin Gardner mentions it in "Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science") was that a lawmaker said that since the Bible states that the "great sea" in the Temple in Jerusalem was 10 cubits across and 30 cubits in circumference, then since the Bible is inerrant, pi is equal to three. This is a perfect example of how some people try to squeeze science to fit the Bible. It should be pointed out that the error between 30 cubits and 31.45926+ cubits is less than 5%. John Hobson AT&T Bell Labs--Naperville, IL ihnp4!ihuxq!amigo2
hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (04/03/84)
<Cut me another splice of that pi> The reason the Bible gives pi as equal to three is that the notational discoveries allowing real numbers to be expressed had not been made at the time it was recorded. Ignorance is one thing and is excusable, but mockery out of ignorance is quite another and is not so tolerable. Hutch
robert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding) (04/06/84)
>> The reason the Bible gives pi as equal to three is that the notational >> discoveries allowing real numbers to be expressed had not been made at >> the time it was recorded. >> >> Hutch Haven't you just proved that you CAN'T use the Bible as the base for all scientific knowledge, even about creation. As it didn't know about real numbers, why should it be more accurate about anything else in the sciences? :-) Robert Virding @ L M Ericsson, Stockholm
hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (04/09/84)
<murph gag spit toowey . . . much better> Uncomfortable, having words shoved into my mouth. To elucidate. >> The reason the Bible gives pi as equal to three is that the notational >> discoveries allowing real numbers to be expressed had not been made at >> the time it was recorded. >> >> Hutch > Haven't you just proved that you CAN'T use the Bible as the base for all > scientific knowledge, even about creation. As it didn't know about real > numbers, why should it be more accurate about anything else in the > sciences? :-) > > Robert Virding @ L M Ericsson, Stockholm I never claimed it could be so used. I am not a creationist, at least not in the currently popular mode. However, wherever the Bible presents a record of events, it does so in the way that an involved observer would, and not the way that a trained scientist or totally impartial observer might. This does not invalidate it even as a source for historical records. Hutch
robert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding) (04/13/84)
<> To Chuck: I never said that YOU imferred that because the bible states that Pi = 3 then Pi DOES equal 3. My comment was more in the line that it is useless and rather stupid to use the bible as a source of *scientific* fact as you had just shown that they were wrong. Claiming that, because they didn't know about real rumbers their statement about Pi is justifiable can lead to totally absurd arguments. E.g. as the bible states nothing about relativity, or quantum mechanics or plate tectonics, or whatever, then it is false. It also shows that using the bible as a source of *scientifuc* truth even in cases where it does state something is also not valid. It was this last case which I was mainly aiming at. However I say nothing about using the bible in a spiritual sense, that is each persons' own business. Robert Virding @ L M Ericsson, Stockholm