Re: Attention: David Carl PChristiansen

"Marshall Price" <d021317c@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:13f1tp96sgbf3a1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Engineer wrote:
Yowie wrote:

Dr Thiering has published - to the best of my
knowledge - both in peer reveiwed journals and
in 'the popular press'.

But she has never published *how her pesher method
works* in any journal or in the popular press.




This I guess is the point. I am *not* an expert in the field. Therefore, I
trust other people who *are* experts in the field to evaluate the process
and method someone has used to reach their conclusions. That is what peer
review is about.

Anyone can publish anything in a book - it doesn't have to be true, the
conclusions don't have to follow the data, the methods don't have to be well
established. It could say *anything*.

If someone writes a book, they could well be using vigourous scientific
method. Their conclusons could well be inferred from the results they
published, and the method they used could be well set out so that anyone
with the same level of expertise as the author could replicate the result.
That could well be the case with Thiering's book. But since it has *not*
been formally reviewed by a group of her peers, the interested lay person
who lacks the expertise of the author's fellows cannot be assured that the
methodology, data and conclusions are trustworthy. The might well be, but
they don't *have* to be to be published in the popular press.

That is all there is to peer reviewed versus not peer reveiwed, its simply a
matter of meeting standards.

Can I use an analogy? You are out to buy a nice gold ring. You see two rings
that look identical, and they are the same price. One has a certificate from
a well known and reputable assaying laboratory attesting to the fact that
the ring it refers to has been analysed and found to be at least 18ct gold.
The other has no certificate. When asked what the difference is, the seller
shrugs and says they both look the same to her. Which one do you purchase?
Why?

Being published in a peer reviewed journal is like the ring with the
certificate. Being in the popular press is like the ring without the
certificate. The quality could well be the same, but you can't know unless
you are also have the correct 'equipment' to carry out the analysis.

Your dissatisfaction with the medium in which she chooses to communicate
is getting in the way of discernment. She *has* published how her
pesher method works, but you're too busy complaining about the user
interface.

I find said web page extremely difficult to follow but not impossible. I
still however couldn't find her methodology, only her conclusions.

Perhaps you, Marshall, would be kind enough to answer the following
questions instead of David or at least be more specific as to where to find
the answers:

Referring to the web page
<http://www.pesherofchrist.infinitesoulutions.com/Finding_the_pesher/Special_meanings.html>

*Where* does it say that "father" meant "pope" or "priest"?

*Where* does it say that "Star" meant star of David rather that tne usual
understanding of a celestial body seen at night?

*how* does she know that the three hours of darkness of good friday wasn't
the common astronomical event that is a solar eclipse?

*Where* does it say that 'virgin' actually means 'nun' and that 'sinner'
actually means 'married man'?

What is her evidence that led her to the conclusion that Hades was actually
a sabbath toilet at the end of the Qumran esplanade?

*How* does she conclude that "god" in the New Testament referred to both
the demiurge and a Sadducee priest of the Annas family rather than the true
God?


Yowie


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A Little Quiz on the British Peerage
    ... it might be worth trying a quiz. ... They are quite popular on some ... but I don't recall one here before. ... of whom inherited a title or married a peer, but all of whom were the ...
    (alt.talk.royalty)
  • Re: A Little Quiz on the British Peerage
    ... it might be worth trying a quiz. ... They are quite popular on some ... but I don't recall one here before. ... of whom inherited a title or married a peer, but all of whom were the ...
    (alt.talk.royalty)
  • Re: What is a "peer" for peer review?
    ... list of such journals somewhere? ... The 'peers' who review the paper are generally selected by the journal ... "If it appears in the popular press, ... The definition of 'peer' is highly context-dependent except in the UK, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: God=G_uv Proof of 40k BC Creation (READ ONLY)
    ... You've said again and again that your bullshit was published in "peer ... reviewed journals". ... "The absolute truth of theology"! ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)