What Myth?

[Erthona]

I think that archeology is considered a science, however that is beside the point. What irritates me is the numerous occasions that scientist will discount, out of hand something that conflicts with their world view. For instance, here is an example of how science should work in an iffy area. The face on Mars. After examining the rock formation that in one photo looked like a human face, Nasa found that picture taken from lower in orbit did not show the same features, or pictures taken at a different time of day, and so on. Nasa concluded after a through examination that the "face" was an optical illusion of reflected light, from the sun hitting a rocky formation at just this one particular angle, and that looking at the formation with higher resolution, without the effects of light and shadow, showed there was not a face, or anything resembling a face carved, or otherwise imposed on the rock formation. What they didn't do is say, well that couldn't happen for we would have to suppose intelligent life was once on Mars, and that just is a lot of science fiction, and if you were real scientist like us you would know that. Sniff! Instead they practiced good science, and did not dismiss it until a careful examination was made and facts gathered. And you said Ed, why wouldn't people be interested in finding the answers one way or another. However, I ran across this quote that I think explains some of it.

“Great and strange ideas transcending experience often have less effect upon men and women than smaller more tangible considerations.”
—H. G. Wells “The Invisible Man”

Or as I would state it, "We are so afraid of appearing silly, we refuse to take the risk!"

and yes, it is sad!

Dale

[abu nuwas]

I did not know about the Martian face. And that is odd, as our tabloids enjoy claims-with pics -of the Virgin Mary on a mulberry, or Jesus absolutely anywhere. Perhaps Mars was considered too serious--certainly not as good as the head-line, with picture, of a double-decker London bus on the Moon. If feel I have missed much by reading ''quality'' papers, so now, if I see a copy of ''The Sun'' lying around, I go straight to p.3, where there will be a topless girl desporting herself, with ''News in briefs'', which may inform me that 'lovely Tina is concerned about the fiscal policies being pursued by the European Central Bank'' or such-like. Unfortunately, it may give the impression that I am ogling...

Wells made a good point. To-day, I am 71, and watching my grand-children, I wondered what completely unforeseen events and inventions they will live to see. The youngest is just one. He could live until 2113. It was those kind of speculations which once drew me to science-fiction, and the late Ray Bradbury. Seventy-fucking-one, Dale!

[Erthona]

Here is the face on Mars

Here is a higher resolution from lower in orbit.

NASA could have easily dismissed this as it was the fringe MUFON types that were going on about it, and how there was a conspiracy and so on. I could never figure out how people thought NASA would want to hide something like this if it were real. I mean, can you imagine what that would do for their budget? However, they were very respectful, and presented the evidence related to what one would call a problem of perspective, along with the human brains need to find intelligible patterns in whatever information it takes in, or simply impose it onto the information, such as people do onto white noise from a cheap tape recorder that they call EVP, or Electric Voice Phenomenon that they use in "Ghost Hunting" (roll eyes here). I'll believe Lassie was actually communicating with Timmy before I'll give credence to that.

"What is it girl? Bonny Sue is trapped in a barn that's on fire, and you want me to follow you to where she is at?"

71 Ed? Why your almost old! Happy Birthday BTW!

Dale

[billy]

i remember the face on mars being shown on the news and other programs. even with scientific proof all the people in the pub were sure it was just a tick of light on a rock formation. apart from an old defrocked priest who claimed it was the work of god (for what intent he never said ) i think good science takes nowt at face value yet assumes what some of the possibilities may be, then tries to disprove them. happy birthday you young coot

[abu nuwas]

Dale --Thank you old top. I regard the blurred vision, slurred speech, the onset of Falls, as in ''he had another fall you know'' , loss of vocabulary and reasoning power, all as Rites of Passage, just like those earlier Rites, like getting a driving licence, drinking, sex, completing education, work....and I embrace them all.

Billy, old bean. Thank you too. You don't think my language is arch and old-fashioned, I hope?



PS I see in the cold light of morning, that my suggestion that my grand-son might live until 2213 was a little ambitious. Another Rite of Passage thing, but as I now have a lucid interval, I have edited 100 years of the poor chap's life. It was very decent of you not to point this out--as I should have, like lightning -- out of consideration for these white hairs, no doubt.

[Erthona]

Ray Kurzweil might agree with the date, who am I to gainsay you? Plus I would hate to be the cause of a chap losing 100 years of life!

Quite noble of you to embrace the new rites of passage, personally I'd just as soon go for another round of the other ones!

Dale

[rowens]

The Word is what's important. This is the Word of God, the Jewish God. This God goes around making statements along the lines of "This is how it should be..." And he recognizes other gods and creation myths, only to say, pretty much, "No, that's not true, this is true..." He did this twice, if you're a Christian. The Word of God is the world of the Bible. It's a reflection of our world. The people in the Bible lived by the scientific laws of that world. But that world, that Word, was revised when the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Christ tried to make the Word more down to earth, the Holy Spirit is the link between God's flesh and the world's flesh: he tried to transcend the first book. But God being God, he experienced human life and left us the Gospel of a perfectionist. So everything appears to go to shit for nonchristians in Revelations. But the Revelations of John, to be precise; so that Apocalypse is simply relevant to John and his people, along the lines of Jesus' parables but more vivid. The telling lines are these: "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."---To bring about the Kingdom of Heaven, as Jesus alludes to, we have to follow his rules. But listening to Jesus' actions and words and those of others, including Paul's and other Christian reformers, we see how the world changes and needs to be revised. Christ leaves us not with the Old Testament's commandments, but with the living Spirit. The spirit of the message, not the corpse. We're not to follow a dead man through a dead world. But the living spirit, through the living, changing world.