Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. 17 Oct '17 15:20
    Does modern science allow us to know the truth, or simply what we understand?

    For instance, assuming Jesus created wine out of water, could modern science deduce the method by which the wine was created?

    If one could go back in time, take a sample of that wine moments after Jesus turned water into wine, could science determine the process by which it was made. Assuming Jesus made actual wine based on actual grapes, could science determine the kind of grape used? How long it was allowed to age?

    Or would this be cheating and Jesus intentionally lied to us by making such a perfect wine? Did Jesus intentionally mislead people by making wine out of water?
  2. 17 Oct '17 15:43
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Does modern science allow us to know the truth, or simply what we understand?

    For instance, assuming Jesus created wine out of water, could modern science deduce the method by which the wine was created?

    If one could go back in time, take a sample of that wine moments after Jesus turned water into wine, could science determine the process by which i ...[text shortened]... making such a perfect wine? Did Jesus intentionally mislead people by making wine out of water?
    What's the hypothesis? Premise? Rationale? Caveats? Design the experiment you want to run. If the laws of nature haven't changed since Jesus, then why do we need to go back in time?

    Of course we know you can turn water into wine, we do it by the millions of gallons. What are you testing? The type of grape?

    If you can't design an experiment to test a hypothesis, then you have found the limit of science.
  3. 17 Oct '17 15:45 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @wildgrass
    What's the hypothesis? Premise? Rationale? Caveats? Design the experiment you want to run. If the laws of nature haven't changed since Jesus, then why do we need to go back in time?

    Of course we know you can turn water into wine, we do it by the millions of gallons. What are you testing? The type of grape?

    If you can't design an experiment to test a hypothesis, then you have found the limit of science.
    I am talking fact, not your religious beliefs.

    The question was asked. If a sample of Jesus' wine created from water were to be determined to be from water or would it be determined it was made by grapes. The assumption that it was actual wine.
  4. Subscriber moonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    17 Oct '17 16:25 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Does modern science allow us to know the truth, or simply what we understand?

    For instance, assuming Jesus created wine out of water, could modern science deduce the method by which the wine was created?

    If one could go back in time, take a sample of that wine moments after Jesus turned water into wine, could science determine the process by which i ...[text shortened]... making such a perfect wine? Did Jesus intentionally mislead people by making wine out of water?
    Are you asking whether it was a zinfandel or a shiraz? Or whether someone could tell by tasting that it had been made by a miracle?
  5. 17 Oct '17 18:06
    Originally posted by @moonbus
    Are you asking whether it was a zinfandel or a shiraz? Or whether someone could tell by tasting that it had been made by a miracle?
    Place any name you like, the principle is the same.
  6. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    17 Oct '17 19:05 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Place any name you like, the principle is the same.
    If its wine it's wine. There is white, red, rose (mixed) blush and so forth. The thing you seem to think is that story is true just because it is in the bible. Since you don't have a sample the point is mootr one way or the other. It's really funny the way you religious folks try to foist on us in the sciences that scienceis our religon. You don't seem to understand we go by evidence. So what we call confidence within some window, you want to force us to think therefore we just believe in some answer as cut in stone.

    The only cut in stone is in fact your religion and every other religion on Earth. You cannot now, in the past, in the future, change your dogma about creation or evolution no matter what evidence comes along refuting both of those issues.

    So you do your backup program, telling us science is a religion and it's all based on faith.

    That is 100% wrong no matter HOW you slice it.

    Evidence changes, we change our perspective, not faith.

    Here is a hot news item that changes attitudes in one science:

    http://www.sciencealert.com/more-than-30-000-scientific-studies-could-be-wrong-due-to-contaminated-undying-cells
  7. 17 Oct '17 19:05
    Originally posted by @eladar
    Does modern science allow us to know the truth, or simply what we understand?

    For instance, assuming Jesus created wine out of water, could modern science deduce the method by which the wine was created?

    If one could go back in time, take a sample of that wine moments after Jesus turned water into wine, could science determine the process by which i ...[text shortened]... making such a perfect wine? Did Jesus intentionally mislead people by making wine out of water?
    We don't have evidence that Jesus created wine out of water, so we can't perform any experiments on the wine in question.
  8. 17 Oct '17 19:18
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    If its wine it's wine. There is white, red, rose (mixed) blush and so forth. The thing you seem to think is that story is true just because it is in the bible. Since you don't have a sample the point is mootr one way or the other. It's really funny the way you religious folks try to foist on us in the sciences that scienceis our religon. You don't seem to ...[text shortened]... cealert.com/more-than-30-000-scientific-studies-could-be-wrong-due-to-contaminated-undying-cells
    The assumption is that the story is true.
  9. 17 Oct '17 19:18
    Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
    We don't have evidence that Jesus created wine out of water, so we can't perform any experiments on the wine in question.
    We can't go back in time either.

    The question is if science can determine if something was made by a miracle or if it was made by natural methods.
  10. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    17 Oct '17 22:26
    Originally posted by @eladar
    We can't go back in time either.

    The question is if science can determine if something was made by a miracle or if it was made by natural methods.
    This is no doubt a trap question, answer yes, you go to plan A, we answer no, you go to plan B. Either way you figure you win.
  11. 17 Oct '17 23:29
    Originally posted by @sonhouse
    This is no doubt a trap question, answer yes, you go to plan A, we answer no, you go to plan B. Either way you figure you win.
    It is not a win question. It is a this is the reality of the situation question.

    The only question is if you want to be intellectually honest or if you want to be ideological purist.
  12. Standard member DeepThought
    Losing the Thread
    18 Oct '17 00:01
    Originally posted by @eladar
    We can't go back in time either.

    The question is if science can determine if something was made by a miracle or if it was made by natural methods.
    I think it's possible to distinguish between wine made in different wineries by chemical analysis. So one could see if the sample of miracle wine corresponded to the output of mundane vineyards. The catch is that if it did correspond to Chateau Latour, for example, one could not rule out a miraculous copy. Having said that, since God is meant to be righteous he presumably would not infringe on copyrights, so there ought to be a detectable difference. The devil, on the other hand, is under no such constraint, so demonic wine might be indistinguishable - unless God were to intervene to confound the fraud.
  13. 18 Oct '17 01:07
    Originally posted by @deepthought
    I think it's possible to distinguish between wine made in different wineries by chemical analysis. So one could see if the sample of miracle wine corresponded to the output of mundane vineyards. The catch is that if it did correspond to Chateau Latour, for example, one could not rule out a miraculous copy. Having said that, since God is meant to be r ...[text shortened]... so demonic wine might be indistinguishable - unless God were to intervene to confound the fraud.
    The question is could science tell if the wine was made from grapes or water.
  14. Standard member HandyAndy
    Non sum qualis eram
    18 Oct '17 01:21
    Originally posted by @deepthought
    The devil, on the other hand, is under no such constraint, so demonic wine might be indistinguishable - unless God were to intervene to confound the fraud.
    And, of course, the devil would be portrayed by Orson Welles.
  15. Standard member Soothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    18 Oct '17 01:55
    We don't know how J.C. is supposed to have pulled off his "miracle." Maybe he had a gob of wine concentrate concealed in the sleeve of his robe. So, he passes his hand through the water, letting slip the concentrate using the arts of distraction of any clown circus magician, and lo! -- there is wine.