tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.comments2023-05-11T04:38:06.086-04:00Analysis of the Post-chareidi Phenomenon Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3536125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-54458692180543120812019-03-24T13:11:32.008-04:002019-03-24T13:11:32.008-04:00BH
18 days and still no answer from Natan Slifkin....BH<br />18 days and still no answer from Natan Slifkin.<br />Yizchak BetechDr. Isaac Betechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378845941377831107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-49037013200461517932019-03-06T12:39:56.179-05:002019-03-06T12:39:56.179-05:00BH
As previously stated and reiterated, you are we...BH<br />As previously stated and reiterated, you are welcome to fully identify yourself to continue this conversation in this forum.<br />The alternative is to to fully identify yourself in private email.<br />KTDr. Isaac Betechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378845941377831107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-28930741170414792132019-03-06T11:38:05.799-05:002019-03-06T11:38:05.799-05:00I am being honest, I could sign under a pen name a...I am being honest, I could sign under a pen name and yet I don't want to mislead you. Let me know if that would be acceptable.Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-71876017965307522432019-03-06T11:33:27.850-05:002019-03-06T11:33:27.850-05:00BH
As previously stated and reiterated, you are we...BH<br />As previously stated and reiterated, you are welcome to fully identify yourself to continue this conversation in this forum.<br />KTDr. Isaac Betechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378845941377831107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-73935502631870399912019-03-06T11:11:39.770-05:002019-03-06T11:11:39.770-05:00Unfortunately your explanation is lacking and fail...Unfortunately your explanation is lacking and fails to address why the Torah would make a clear distinction between kosher animals such as sheep and goats, yet by Llama, Alpaca and Camel make no such distinction and lump all these under one <br />category according to your reasoning. You fail to make a compelling argument as to why the Maalay geirah of the Gamal and all other Kosher animals should somehow be different when relating to Shafan and Arneves. Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-68938414321175004022019-03-06T08:52:06.710-05:002019-03-06T08:52:06.710-05:00BH
Modern Orthodox, I understand that you do not w...BH<br />Modern Orthodox, I understand that you do not want to identify yourself even in private email.<br />In consequence your question will not be discussed in this forum, probably you are interested to know that the issue you present was addressed in our shafan book in chapter 5 (g).<br />Kol tuvDr. Isaac Betechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378845941377831107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-37208938906071302532019-03-06T07:52:37.579-05:002019-03-06T07:52:37.579-05:00Unfortunately, this won't work for me. However...Unfortunately, this won't work for me. However, I will note that in order to come to an accurate conclusion to the identity of Shafan and Arneves, one must examine their counterparts the kosher animals that have hooves and chew their cud as well as the pig which has real hooves. If the cud chewing or the feet are unlike these animals then you know for certainty that you have the wrong identification. As the Torah is uniform and doesn't talk about 2 different types of split or not split hooves as well as 2 distinct types of cud chewing. Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-79374853294116945732019-03-05T23:49:04.147-05:002019-03-05T23:49:04.147-05:00BH
If you want, you can send me a private email, a...BH<br />If you want, you can send me a private email, and then we will see BH what to do.<br />isaacb@tovnet.com<br />Dr. Isaac Betechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378845941377831107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-78881355280383555562019-03-05T18:47:39.953-05:002019-03-05T18:47:39.953-05:00Please respect my privacy as I don't want my t...Please respect my privacy as I don't want my true identity to be known. I comment frequently on Natan Slifkin's blog mostly pointing out his errors. Trust me I seek the truth and have no intention of trolling your blog.Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-82322687831730077482019-03-05T17:57:39.293-05:002019-03-05T17:57:39.293-05:00BH
Dear Modern Orthodox
Thank you for your comment...BH<br />Dear Modern Orthodox<br />Thank you for your comment.<br />It will be a pleasure trying to answer your question, as you read at the end of the post published today, it is necessary that your question or comment will be signed with the real full name.<br />SorryDr. Isaac Betechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378845941377831107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-81372535125031775032019-03-05T15:36:52.858-05:002019-03-05T15:36:52.858-05:00It's worth mentioning that Rabbits, Hyraxs and...It's worth mentioning that Rabbits, Hyraxs and Hares all have paws, hence they are classed under "kol holeich al kapayim" not under the category of animals that are "mafreses parsah" hooven animals.Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-52259403592385717462019-03-05T15:35:49.189-05:002019-03-05T15:35:49.189-05:00The Shafan is unfortunately neither the Hyrax or t...The Shafan is unfortunately neither the Hyrax or the Rabbit. As the Torah clearly states regarding the Shafan and Arneves "They chew their cud but don't have split hooves". Obviously the animals under discussion must have hooves or hoove like feet in order for the Torah to suggest that their feet aren't split. <br />Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-6305970246946725582019-03-05T13:51:50.066-05:002019-03-05T13:51:50.066-05:00BH
Please see a follow-up entitled:
Natan Slifkin ...BH<br />Please see a follow-up entitled:<br />Natan Slifkin sent a letter to Artscroll. Response to some points.Dr. Isaac Betechhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17378845941377831107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-26361751205715751872016-08-23T08:24:23.977-04:002016-08-23T08:24:23.977-04:00Hi Marc,
You wrote: "Hi. Please explain what...Hi Marc,<br /><br />You wrote: "Hi. Please explain what you mean by a 'detailed Darwinian pathway'."<br /><br />Dr. Ostroff explained it in his post. He defined it as a "sequence of step-by-random-steps with an estimate of likely probability over the proposed time frame"<br /><br />Here’s an example of what he means. Let’s take birds. Evolutionists claim that birds descended from dinosaurs. Dinosaurs, like all reptiles, most likely had hard, scaly type skin whereas birds have an outside layer of soft feathers. So the skin of the terrestrial dinosaur had to gradually transform into feathers to accommodate the flight abilities of its avian descendant. Now obviously the skin didn’t just mutate overnight from hard scaly skin to soft feathers. It took many steps. So, in order to fulfil Dr. Ostroff’s requirement for a detailed and testable Darwinian pathway outlining the evolutionary transformation of terrestrial dinosaur skin to avian feathers, we need to do the following.<br /><br />Step 1. – Identify precisely how many steps it took for random mutation + natural selection to go from scales to feathers. <br /><br />Step 2. – Identify precisely how many non-beneficial mutations could possibly occur at each step.<br /><br />Step 3. – Propose a time frame for the scale to feather transformation <br /><br />Step 4. – Based on Step 1 and 2, calculate the number of mutations necessary to achieve the evolutionary goal of scales to feathers. <br /><br />Step 5. – Based on your conclusion in Step 4, provide a mathematical estimate of the likelihood of scales turning to feathers over the period of time proposed in Step 3.<br /><br />Step 6. – Come up with some type of system that other scientists can confirm all of your conclusions in the above five steps via laboratory experimentation or the like. <br /><br />There we go Marc! This is what Dr. Ostroff means by a detailed and testable Darwinian pathway. The truth of the matter is, he’s just mocking evolution. You see, Evolution never gets past Step 1 for even a single organ of a single biological entity amongst the millions of species that we have on earth. Let’s take our feather example. Scientists have no idea how many steps it took for scales to finally mutate to feathers. Did it take fifty steps? Did it take a hundred? Did it take a thousand? They have no clue whatsoever! You know why? Because all you find in the fossil record is fully formed dinosaur skin or fully formed bird feathers. You never find a creature that has lost, say, ten percent of its scaly skin and adopted ten percent of a feathery substance, or some such nonsense. They would LOVE to find something like that but they never do. And even if they did, that would only be one transition. In order to even get off the ground with Step 1, you need to find a complete fossilized set of slowly transitioning creatures so you can identify precisely how many steps it took for random mutation to work its magic. <br /><br />The Bottom line is, Evolution doesn’t even have a prayer of ever satisfying these criteria, despite the fact that essentially they form the basic requirements of any mainstream operational field of science.<br /><br /><br /> Simcha Cofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01243327012385531727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-66056988404846654522016-08-10T06:28:30.022-04:002016-08-10T06:28:30.022-04:00Hi. Please explain what you mean by a 'detaile...Hi. Please explain what you mean by a 'detailed Darwinian pathway'.marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17132897422584024930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-957812458767281922016-08-07T22:56:53.871-04:002016-08-07T22:56:53.871-04:00Ok, I took a look at all the comments, which add v...Ok, I took a look at all the comments, which add very little to the discussion (Commentary anyway allowed all of them to have their say, and its mostly a rerun). Still no detailed Darwinian pathway for the eye. Here is a point that is not even addressed by Berlinski (the original paper was enough grist for the mill). Where are all the phenomenal details needed to connect an eye to proto-brain, i.e. something to interpret the signals and react appropriately to it? Once you start adding all the parts needed (and their construction plans) to make even the most basic light sensitive spot work like an eye, we will be way out of probabilistic resources. YSOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05388331841479384468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-40955390070298809732016-08-07T06:39:57.106-04:002016-08-07T06:39:57.106-04:00See Dr. Nilsson's response, about halfway down...See Dr. Nilsson's response, about halfway down, for starters.<br />http://www.talkreason.org/articles/blurred.cfm#lundThe Bald Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06989601722428444663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-64690548297400873422016-08-05T12:23:25.761-04:002016-08-05T12:23:25.761-04:00Not sure what you mean by "come clean"? ...Not sure what you mean by "come clean"? "Commentary" allowed all sides to comment, including the original authors Nilsson and Susanne Pelger. As I said it is fun to read. YSOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05388331841479384468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-61602695880771954962016-08-05T10:12:53.192-04:002016-08-05T10:12:53.192-04:00I'd suggest you come clean about Mr. Berlinski...I'd suggest you come clean about Mr. Berlinski - be intellectually honest and post some of the responses from the scientific community to Mr Berlinski's scathing criticism. Also, I'd suggest that you post some of the updated scientific information that can explain the presence of traces of soft tissue in bones supposed to be 65m years old.The Bald Guyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06989601722428444663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-69191271365476646082015-12-24T16:25:23.700-05:002015-12-24T16:25:23.700-05:00I am naive enough to hope it is true!I am naive enough to hope it is true!Marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552274278203964187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-46714514710618184322015-12-21T21:55:07.741-05:002015-12-21T21:55:07.741-05:00Very kind comment. Would that it was true. This bl...Very kind comment. Would that it was true. This blog dropped out of circulation for the past few years. Probably not too much readership. In the good old days even NS used to comment. But now... I suspect only "friendlies" (i.e. people aligned with the hashkafos of this blog) read the occasional article. <br /><br />How are you Marc? Long time no speak. I wish you and your family well.<br /><br />Simcha Simcha Cofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01243327012385531727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-18170926736815998882015-12-17T18:26:33.338-05:002015-12-17T18:26:33.338-05:00Shtika k'hodoh...Shtika k'hodoh...Marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552274278203964187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-289926656112773382015-11-26T22:37:36.968-05:002015-11-26T22:37:36.968-05:00Dr. Isaac Betech,
Please don't engage with R&...Dr. Isaac Betech,<br /><br />Please don't engage with R' Slifkin and David Oshie, they are evil people who seek to pervert and distort the words of our Holy sages and all that is sacred to us as Torah Jews. They are non believers in the Torah of Hashem. Their very goal is to distort the Torah to the point of denial of the Hashem himself. They engage in useless debate for the sake of discrediting and distorting the statements of the true followers of Hashem and his Torah.<br />Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-37169623643589772482015-11-26T22:31:13.212-05:002015-11-26T22:31:13.212-05:00David Ohsie, I would like to see you debate a topi...David Ohsie, I would like to see you debate a topic without quoting the person you are responding to. Are you capable of such? It would seem you use quotes in counter responses as end not as a means. It is hardly scholarly to debate every sentence of your opponent and pick each word apart that he writes. This is pseudo scholarship at best and intentional distortion at worst. <br />Sometimes a thought or idea can be wrong - even though it can’t be proved conclusively incorrect. It's always possible for falsehood to hide behind some speck of truth and formulate an irrefutable thought!<br /><br />David, you hide behind grains of truth to present your mangled falsehood. You do this on R’ Slifkin’s blog as well. You pervert the truth and have no agenda other than distorting truth in place of falsehood. You are a non believer in God and his Torah. You have displayed this rather openly in many posts. Your disrespect for The Talmud Rishonim and Rabbi’s is despicable and nothing short of outrageous. “Vlamasheenem Al Tihee Sikvah” may your treacherous lies and distortion of the words of the Holy Sages and Rabbis cease. “Vhcol Harisha K’Rega Toiyvaid” may your wickedness and evil intentions cease to exist. <br />Inquirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08314011220573083937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999467500145167346.post-25636221667391536292015-08-07T04:28:02.628-04:002015-08-07T04:28:02.628-04:00Don't you need to take into consideration the ...Don't you need to take into consideration the amount of 'stuff' on earth? Even if there is a super low chance of forming a protein in 13.7 billion years, perhaps with trillions and trillions of tonnes of chemicals the odds reduce?Marchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552274278203964187noreply@blogger.com