RE: [asa] Explanatory filter

Hi Joel:

I actually do know of one unmistakable intervention, but whether it
proves the rule I don't know. About three years ago a tornado hit our
apartment complex. It was not a strong one, but it did tear off some
roofs and did some damage. I saw it coming by watching TV and the
funnel cloud was being reported. I went outside, saw it coming, and
took shelter inside the laundry room with my daughter. My next door
neighbor at the time is a street preacher named Jane who had been in a
nearby shopping center at the time unaware of an impending tornado. She
just heard words spoken to her, "Go home!" Obedient to her inner voice
she went home, went to bed, and slept through it. She didn't know there
was a tornado until I told her about it the next day.

Yours faithfully,
 
Dick Fischer, author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
www.historicalgenesis.com
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Duff,Robert Joel
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 11:17 PM
To: Randy Isaac
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] Explanatory filter

The bat on its end was a timely example for me of just how probabilities
are misunderstood and misused. I had just been working on a SS lesson
on providence and had included the following excerpt from the CBN
network promoting a recent video about supposed miracles that happened
on 911. Here is just a bit of that:

"John Todd, executive producer, says "Miracles in Our Midst tells the
story of just a few of the thousands of miracles that occurred at Ground
Zero that day-miracles of survival when all odds were against it. These
amazing stories of survival, where there is no scientific explanation,
clearly show where science stops and God begins."
"The hundreds of stories of survival on that day are evidence that a
greater number of miracles probably occurred on September 11 than on any
other recorded day in our history," says David W. Balsiger, senior
producer of the documentary. "I challenge anyone to remain unmoved by
these stories of heroic sacrifice, divine intervention and demonstrated
heartwarming humanity."

Here we find that miracle is being defined as "when all odds were
against it" or when there is "no scientific explanation." So if the odds
are against the bat coming up on its end does that then mean that we
should call upon supernatural intervention. Just how badly do the odds
have to be against something before one can claim that God has
intervened? This use of probabilities just makes no sense. In 911 the
odds were actually pretty good that of the thousands in the building
that some would actually survive even under the incredible conditions.
Just like the odds that some bat at some point will end up balancing on
its end given the number of opportunities over time. I raised the
question, why is it that only those that were saved against all odds
seem to be the only ones that qualify for miraculous intervention? If
God can intervene (I don't like the word but it gets the idea across)
to save a person from harm why should we not believe that God doesn't
intervene to!
 
  cause a person that could have survived by ordinary providential means
to die. By doing so he might set into effect a chain of events that
leads to many good things. I'm sure there have been Christians for
which the odds of death at a particular point in time were very small
but I doubt that the CBN team would claim that those peculiar deaths
were the result of divine intervention.

Joel

________________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf
Of David Opderbeck [dopderbeck@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 10:32 PM
To: Randy Isaac
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Explanatory filter

Randy, I thought that's where you were going. So the point is that a
highly improbable event can happen; saying something is highly
improbable doesn't rule out that it in fact happened. Thus, even if
Dembski et al are right and evolution without design is highly
improbable, nevertheless it happened.

I don't think this is a terribly strong illustration. No one, so far as
I know, denies that highly improbable events can happen -- everyone
knows "improbable" doesn't mean "impossible." The issue is what we can
infer as likely from what we actually know. We were able to confirm
that the improbable event shown in that video actually happened because
there were eyewitnesses to the event and people created contemporary
records of that testimony. We therefore have direct evidence, not only
circumstantial evidence, of the event. If we had no such direct
evidence, it would be entirely reasonable for someone to argue that the
event probably didn't actually happen as apparently depicted in the
video. At the very least, we wouldn't rule out a priori the possibility
that the video was staged. Without more, the improbability of the event
would at least leave the range of reasonable inferences to be drawn from
the video open.

Of course, we have no eyewitnesses to the entire history of evolution
(yes, I know, we can witness evolution in nature today, but obviously
not on the grand scale of the entire evolutionary process). This isn't
to raise some false questions about the legitimacy of historical
sciences, but it does, IMHO, render the range of inferences that can be
drawn from probabilities concerning the history of life more open than
the range of inferences that can be drawn about an improbable event as
to which there is testimony from contemporaneous witnesses.

If you think about it, we reason this way all the time in everyday life.
There are lots of possible explanations for things I observe that I
discard for practical purposes because they are so highly improbable.
Yes, it's possible that someone poisoned the Tylenol I'm about to take,
but it's so improbable that I discard it as a working hypothesis. The
fact that Prado's bat really performed that unlikely feat doesn't cause
me to hesitate about the long tails on the probability curve concerning
my Tylenol one bit.

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Randy Isaac
<randyisaac@comcast.net<mailto:randyisaac@comcast.net>> wrote:
Yes, Steve, you identified it correctly. It really did happen. There are
a lot of fixed cameras in addition to the manned ones. When I was a boy
playing baseball the ends of the bats were convex instead of concave so
it would have been even less probable.

I just thought this was an interesting object lesson about how we
normally react when we encounter an extremely rare event. Probabilities
are hard to quantify. Now, if only someone had specified this complex
occurence ahead of time instead of commenting on it afterwards...

Randy

----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Matheson"
<smatheso@calvin.edu<mailto:smatheso@calvin.edu>>
To: <asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:37 PM

Subject: Re: [asa] Explanatory filter

The batter was Martin Prado of the Atlanta Braves. The improbable event
occurred in a game with the Mets in September of 2007. Discussion at
the time centered on neither peculiar camera angles nor invisible
strings, but on whether Prado's bat was oddly weighted. Personally, I
think it's just an improbable event, sort of like an evangelical
employing critical thought. I've ruled out chicanery, at least because
that really is Keith Hernandez' voice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mart%C3%ADn_Prado

Steve Matheson

"Randy Isaac" <randyisaac@comcast.net<mailto:randyisaac@comcast.net>>
05/25/08 10:13 PM >>>
How would we apply the explanatory filter to this video? Can we
determine by probabilities whether it was edited? Or designed?

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1775904

Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to
majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to
majordomo@calvin.edu<mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu> with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

--
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.