• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is Evidence?

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
What is Evidence?

The Evident does not need any evidence, it is itself radiant enough to convince one of its truthfulness, please, right?

Regards
Yes. The Sun rises in the East every morning, circles the Earth, and dips below the western horizon every evening. -- Evident.
A big rock will fall faster than a small rock. -- evident.
 

River Sea

Well-Known Member
@Bharat Jhunjhunwala
I'm agreeing with OIT, and that's what the Common Prophet book agrees with, correct? Am I understanding this correctly? @Bharat Jhunjhunwala? Or am I misunderstanding what OIT is?

What is the most common way to show evidence? Is it archeology? When showing evidence when migrating?
  • What about Aryans merging with tribes who left India and who return to India, and when?
  • Are there even later dates when Aryans merge with tribes who returned to India, and when?
  • If you chose not to use the word aryans, then it's 'Pie' proto-Indo-European, am I correct?
  • What ways do people show what is evidence about this?
  • Is archeology the most common method for providing evidence? Or are there even more common ways to show evidence, what would that be called?
 
Last edited:

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Yes. The Sun rises in the East every morning, circles the Earth, and dips below the western horizon every evening. -- Evident.
A big rock will fall faster than a small rock. -- evident.


And yet still you place your faith only in that which is empirically evidenced; despite all the evidence of the illusory nature of observation.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
What is the most common way to show evidence? Is it archeology? When showing evidence when migrating?
If the subject is the migration of a people, there are several forms of evidence that scholars use.

Archeology and Anthropology are obviously two of them. We can deduce that the Philistines came from Greece because their pottery includes certain significant elements that are found only in Philistia and Greece.

Linguistics is another. Languages are carried by people, so as a language disperses, we can follow the migration of those people. For example, Indo-European was a language originally spoken in the Pontic-Caspian steppe (around present-day Ukraine and southern Russia) around 4,500 to 6,000 years ago. As these speakers migrated into various regions of Europe and Asia, their languages diversified and spread across a vast area, eventually giving rise to the many Indo-European languages spoken today.

And of course there is the big one: genetics. For example, we know the Ashkenazim came from the Levant because they still have genetic markers for the middle east. Another example, we know that Native Americans actually migrated in more than one time period, and from more than one place, the largest migration being from Siberia across the Bering Strait land bridge.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
An evidence: the sun is yellow.
That sounds more like an opinion. What if you measured it and looked at intensity vs color. Do you think that it would still be yellow? Or how about how our eyes actually see it if we go above the atmosphere and looked at pure sunlight. Our eyes that have a bias t them might see it as white. I would say that yellow is not a good answer:

 

GoodAttention

Well-Known Member
And of course there is the big one: genetics. For example, we know the Ashkenazim came from the Levant because they still have genetic markers for the middle east. Another example, we know that Native Americans actually migrated in more than one time period, and from more than one place, the largest migration being from Siberia across the Bering Strait land bridge.


I think we need to be very careful with genetis and postulating historically with it.

Most archaeogenetics is used to consider human populations over time periods measured in 1000 years or kya, ranging from 5-300kya. With the popularity of genetic testing these days I think the science has been reduced and put into the hands of corporations who are using these tests as a marketing ploy.

My point to make is, the more recent the genetic claim, the larger the pinch of salt to be taken.
 

GoodAttention

Well-Known Member
I can never see a "color" to the sun. It is so bright that it just looks white to me.. But you ignored the role of the atmosphere.

Don't you have sunrises or sunsets where you live?

Also, the 8 minutes = Earth's atmosphere, unlike Mars, which also has an atmosphere but doesn't have a blue sky.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
What do you mean by this? Some examples, please.


@Valjean provided two examples, from before Copernicus and Galileo.

More recently, we have discovered that all the old certainties of classical physics are merely probabilities; that nothing is solid, nothing is fixed, and that facts - about time, for example - are not absolute, but depend upon a frame of reference. The material world, which reduces ultimately to forms of forms of forms, only the arrangements of which are real, is world of illusion,
 

Audie

Veteran Member
@Valjean provided two examples, from before Copernicus and Galileo.

More recently, we have discovered that all the old certainties of classical physics are merely probabilities; that nothing is solid, nothing is fixed, and that facts - about time, for example - are not absolute, but depend upon a frame of reference. The material world, which reduces ultimately to forms of forms of forms, only the arrangements of which are real, is world of illusion,
Certainties are the province of religions.
False ones, of course. Absolutes- false ones.

Science does probabilities. Always.
No absolutes

Facts don't change.

You may want to try to understand such
basic concepts before attempting any
criticism.
Practically every " philosopher" or theist on rf
seems to think they variously see beyond,
know more than understand science better than any
scientist.
 
Last edited:

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Certainties are the province of religions.
False ones, of course. Absolutes- false ones.

Science does probabilities. Always.
No absolutes

Facts don't change.

You may want to try to understand such
basic concepts before attempting any
criticism.
Practically every " philosopher" or theist on rf
seems to think they variously see beyond,
know more than understand science better than any
scientist.


Everything changes. Including facts, which require an observer to be perceived as such.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Everything changes. Including facts, which require an observer to be perceived as such.
As I said, you've some (very) basic education
to catch up on before you try to do any critique.

Or offer lessons!

You should try learning from your mistakes instead
of digging in!

Nobody but nobody respects that.
 
Top