You just keep repeating the same nonsense. There is no "charedi" position on the Ark, b/c charedim - like all religious Jews - don't fixate on it. That is YOUR personal fascination. To the rest of us, its a story in the Torah, yes, but how to understand it is not מעיקרי הדת, there are no mitzvas dependent on it, and whether it happened this way or that way or was simply an allegory is not that important.
As for being "afraid of science" - you're hysterical. Buddy, if you've seen what "science" has told us the past five years alone, you'd know that religion has absolutely nothing to fear from "science". To the contrary, more and more people are waking up every day to realize there is nobody more corrupt and dishonest than the High Priests of "science."
"There is no "charedi" position on the Ark, b/c charedim - like all religious Jews - don't fixate on it."
But if someone were to open their mouths about it, then out come the torches.
"Buddy, if you've seen what "science" has told us the past five years alone...."
You don't like science? I somehow suspect that either you're a complete loon, or someone who relies on science a dozen times before breakfast. (My money is on the latter.)
What torches? Where? Merely for commenting on the Ark story? Go ahead, show us.
And of course I use items from science past, just like you follow the calendar laid down by the original Prushim. Does that make you a Charedi?? Is that an example of the cool, considered "rationalism" of the true believers?
Nitpick. Hillel was an heir of the "original prushim", as are the Charedim of today. There may have been some natural organic evolution, but charedim today are the direct spiritual heirs of the Prushim then.
Your inability to write precisely does not make me a nitpicker. Next time, don't leave nits lying around. And if you must leave nits, they shouldn't be the size of cockroaches.
"Hillel was an heir of the "original prushim""
And so are you and me. But that doesn't make us the original prushim.
If you want credence, maybe you should admit you made a mistake instead of accusing other of being nitpickers.
"The 'science' of dinosaurs can never be reproduced, it is all flying blind. " Huh? The only thing relevant to our purposes is whether there was an age of dinosaurs before man. That is something with which science makes a firm prediction which could be falsified at any point - that dinosaur fossils are always found in different geological layers than are remains of contemporary species such as people and cows. This has been endlessly tested in a zillion locations and confirmed.
Beyond ludicrous. "A cell phone exists, ergo all science is true"?? You may not know this, but the calendar which all Jews use to celebrate Passover is made by Charedi Jews. So are 90% of all tefillin, mezuzas, and sifrei Torah. So therefore, according to your "logic", you have to accept everything from Charedim? This is "rationalism", folks.
And I'm glad you're such a true believer in science. I suppose you accept everything about "transgenderism" and "critical race" theory, because that's all science, too. (And you know its all true, not just because its all so intuitive, but also because the principles behind it were established using the vaunted scientific method of free inquiry and open testing. Not like religion, where you're not allowed to say certain things...)
"Due to the nature of the medical emergency..." - you mean the public emergency that, actually, on second thought, wasn't any more dangerous than the common flu to 98% of the public, so sorry for the inconvenience? And when you talk about the "scientific discovery" that went along with it, do you mean the "vaccines" that did absolutely nothing? Or the ones we were assured were "perfectly safe", and never mind all those people dying (and we'll make sure Twitter censors it so you can't see it, just to make sure")? Is that your God of Science, or do you have something else in mind?
The same "argument" you use every time as NS's pet-sycophant. I've no interest in doing your homework for you. You can go on shutting your eyes and putting your fingers in your ear, the heck I care. You want to try actual argument I'm willing to engage. A refusal to acknowledge reality is not argument.
" I've no interest in doing your homework for you."
It's simple. You make a claim. First, you should make the claim clear. You haven't. Then you should have to back up the claim. You haven't. Polio causes paralysis in < 1% cases. Does that mean it's not dangerous to 99% of the public?
"You want to try actual argument"
You've made a statement that's incoherent. Even without regard to its truth, it doesn't make sense. You should make an actual argument.
For three years, I did do my homework. I checked into the covid deniers claims. Most easily shown false. The rest were rather lame claims.
You're refusal to provide a clear statement of your claim is no proof of its veracity.
"pet-sycophant."
Another easily dismissed claim. I disagreed with RNS in regards to his critique of Rav Zilberstein. That was very recent! Why should I waste my time on your ill presented claims if you make such silly wrong statements like that?
This is pointless, is it not? Believe what you want to believe.
The point of my response to NS was simple: 1) There is no "charedi" position on the Ark, because most people, who have more to their life than animals, do not fixate on it. And 2) the expression "fear of science" looks laughably absurd, in light of the utter nonsense we'll all been told in the name of science in recent years. גמרנו
Sounds like you are ok with my Dad having died because selfish jerks like you couldn’t be bothered to follow the science mask up and get vaccinated. A pox on you…
Wrong. I checked into that claim. I read the hospital policy for filling in cause of death. What you're saying is not true.
To repeat what I just replied to G: "For three years, I did do my homework. I checked into the covid deniers claims. Most easily shown false. The rest were rather lame claims."
The main reason for the dinosaurs at that creationist museum is for the kids, kids love dinosaurs it's a lot cooler to see giant reptiles then another giraffe or an elephant. Just trying to make money, pretty sure they sell a bunch of dinosaurs toys and stuff in thier gift shop.
Can't blame a guy for trying to sell dinosaurs to kids
We are in the sixth mass extinction right now, and it threatens the continuation of human civilization. If regurgitated theological debate and millennia of superstition cause us to deny this horrifying reality and fail to take what action we can, then they are a direct threat to all our lives and must be abandoned in favor of ones that address the real world
I don’t understand why this is so hard to understand. Right from the start the Torah describes a race of “giants on the Earth in those days” which clearly implies these “giants” did not survive...ie became extinct. These “giants” were capable of having relations with the daughters of men. I’ve always believed the Torah is referencing Neanderthals, which are believed to have disappeared during the last Ice Age. The point is, if Neanderthals could become extinct, why not dinosaurs?
Homo sapiens from the same time of Neanderthals, had an average height of 6 feet while Neanderthals were 5.5 feet, so why would they be called Giants?
Neanderthals became extinct about 40,000 years ago, while the end of the Ice Age, which culminated in the younger dryas, which, by the way, is most certainly the cause of the Mabul story existing in all civilizations around the world, was about 12,000 years ago.
Actual “giant” skeletons were discovered in the American west, some of them as tall as 8 or 9 feet.
What would you know about being a tzaddik? You treat a complete stranger with contempt and snark. You think you’re a tzaddik? You’re a sad excuse for a religious Jew.
It's not a rebuttal at all, let alone a massive one. It's a collection of sources about Torah protecting. I don't at all deny that such sources exist. My claim is that these do not translate into any practical ramifications that charedim accept.
Wow I guess that's all it takes. Just say "it's not a rebuttal" and have your enthusiastic sycophant call the round in your favor.
No need to address the uncomfortable point that your smug, repeated ad nauseum, thesis that Torah protection is a late "mystical" invention of R' Chaim Volozhiner was just utterly debunked (not that anyone with any Torah knowledge needed it; but its nice to have the sources collected). Just revert back to smug "it's not a rebuttal", and the useful idiots will do the rest.
You know, I've always wondered how Slifkin kept his gig going for so long. Here's the secret.
Hey Yakov, do you play on request? Can i borrow you for my blog?
Slifkin's point is clear and no substantive response to it was given, which gives this round to him. I'm not sure why this is not obvious.
The sugiah of השתדלות ובטחון is thousands of years old and is addressed in all religions. There are many opinions on the subject. Slifkin is pointing out inconsistances and no one yet answered that challenge. It would have made sense to me to discuss the subject in general rather then its practice by the charedim. Charedim are just people like everyone else with their contradictions, inconsistences and inability to look at themselves in the mirror. There is nothing new or surprising there but if you look at them in totality at the end of the day it's the best way to live, imo.
Here's a wild idea - why don't you read the IrrationalistMODOXism post in question, see which Slifkin claims he references and how he debunks them, and then let us know who made a "clear point" and who neglected to provide a "substantive response".
Or do you always declare winners in debates based on being impressed by one guy's snarky dismissiveness?
When people start believing in dinosaurs with a religious zeal and dogma to it...... Amazing how a hypothesis turned into a belief system..... Paleontology is quack science at its best! Pretty convenient to find million or billion year old man on Antarctica......the irony here - from someone who rejects mystical belief, has exchanged it for the quack belief of paleontology!
" Pretty convenient to find million or billion year old man on Antarctica"
Maybe he was a moron who was looking for the edge of the earth, or the secret continents beyond Antarctica covered up by Davos and Stanley Kubrick's film crew. I don't know if people existed a million years ago, but if they did, some of them were idiots.
Paleontology is quack science, it was invented by people with very imaginative imaginations. Throwing around millions or billions of years here or there is quack, there's no basis for that. This whole stream of "science" was invented to try to debunk the narrative of the Bible. Anytime a "new" dinosaur is discovered, we need not wait very long to discover the fraud of it......
Amazing how for some dinosaurs became a dogma and religion as a desperate attempt to disprove the narrative of the Bible. These creative artists are very clever at putting together pieces of bone and feather...... Most specimens in museums are fake, and the "real" ones are enclosed in glass...... Believing in dinosaurs is like believing that the moon landing didn't happen...... S0 many religious believers of dinosaurs with a zeal to it - wonder why?!
"This whole stream of "science" was invented to try to debunk the narrative of the Bible."
Actually, it was invented by deeply religious people, in order to explain why different layers of rock contain the remains of different types of animals.
Somehow they only find dinosaur bones in places where no one is there to verify if they are legit..... pretty shocking that all these "rationalists" buy into something so far fetched and rife with fraud.....so these rock formations are all of sudden bones.... because radio isotopes indicate that the rocks are very old?! Is there frozen marrow in these bones?! This whole field of science is very shady and I mean very shady!
"Somehow they only find dinosaur bones in places where no one is there to verify if they are legit....."
You can go yourself to any of thousands of places in the world where there are fossils, and you'll see for yourself that there are distinct types of animal life in each layer of rock.
Question for the Rabbi Dr. Scientist: have you once personally verified the legitimacy of dinosaur bones? If you haven't than what is your motivation for pushing something that is rife with fraud?
"That’s Pretty Good Science (TPGScience) is satirical. The articles on this site may or may not use real names in semi-real and mostly fictitious ways"
Also from the disclaimer:
"All of the articles on this site are alt-science; yet somehow they still validate your personal beliefs and opinions and therefore make you feel pretty good, and can be used against your unsuspecting friends to win an argument."
“…Netziv answered that dinosaurs were not naturally occurring creatures. Instead, they were monstrous chimeras, hybrids produced by the sinful activities of the Generation of the Deluge. Accordingly, they were destroyed in the Deluge…”
Do you believe Rav Berlin’s solution to the dinosaurs existence — that they were the creation of sinful sexual relationships? Do YOU believe that? And if you don’t, why would you believe any of his fantastical or halachic assertions?
I was presuming that you didn’t believe it, but wasn’t sure. However, why refuse to lend credence to The Netziv’s conclusions regarding dinosaur ontogeny if he was so wrong about that and not apply the same justifiable scrutiny to his halachic decisions? If he was so wrong about the dinosaurs development, why couldn’t he be just as wrong about Halacha?
What does one have to do with the other? His statements about dinosaurs were pseudoscientific statements based on a complete lack of knowledge about the topic. His statements about halacha are based on his knowledge of halachic sources and his talent as a halachist.
The pseudoscientific statements of the Netziv are falsifiable and indeed they were proven false. His knowledge of halachic sources while exceptional are unfalsifiable and based mainly on emunah. None of Rav Berlin’s halachic expositions can be shown to be false, so why not apply the same straightforward scrutiny to his halachic pronouncements as to his pseudoscientific ones?
Don’t you recognise what the slippery slope of halachic unfalsifiability has wrought? Although you are as מהודר in all the mitzvot as folks like HappyGo and מכרכר are, you are considered practically a kofer by their unfalsifiable emunah standards because you don’t tow their unfalsifiable line.
This is not to say that I have any quarrel with your blog pursuits. Your endeavours to save traditional halachic Yiddishkeit from the ruin of their silly absurdity is commendable and I wish you much success in your pursuits. I’d like to send a donation to your museum in that respect. Is there a U.S. address?
I don't believe it either, but it would have halachic implications. He should hold that a kohen can't touch dinosaur bones. (Which are not really bones because they're fossilized, I don't know the topic that well but I'd guess they don't even have tumas neveilah, but he probably doesn't believe that either.)
Can you explain (and demonstrate) how the Chinuch defines a "species" for the purposes of his principle? Are you so sure that the extinction of the dodo is terribly relevant?
His whole point in context is about hashgacha klalius, that unlike humans who each get individual hashgacha, animals have a more general species level hashgacha. He mentions that therefore a whole species wont get wiped out. In context, it does not seem that "species" must necessarily mean any specific subgroup. It can just as easily refer to birds in general for his point.
It's not "species" in the zoological sense, it's "min (type)" in the Torah system of classification. But it's difficult to kvetch the dodo into an existing min.
Wasn't the dodo a type of pigeon? (Surely the passenger pigeon was.) Aren't "minim" in the Torah system very broad, only 365 of birds, another 365 of other group(s) (Radal, also from your discussion of braekel chickens) ?
I understand what you're saying, but you have to admit it's not terribly compelling. It's a very peripheral point in the Chinuch, his main purpose is to contrast with human hashgacha pratius. Hard to say he was being very pedantic on the choice of the term 'min'.
In context it seems his main point is that the world was created with a purpose as a backdrop to Man, so the general varieties of animals are what's necessary, and therefore have a generic hashgacha, not an individual one. For his point there's no reason to assume he was giving some blanket immunity to every specific subspecies of animal. Hard to see why someone would insist on taking it to the extreme your magid shiur did.
At least that's all I see in the Chinuch. I have been unable to locate the other Rishonim you mentioned that share his view. Can I trouble you to list some sources for those of us that don't [yet] own your book? Thanks!
You just keep repeating the same nonsense. There is no "charedi" position on the Ark, b/c charedim - like all religious Jews - don't fixate on it. That is YOUR personal fascination. To the rest of us, its a story in the Torah, yes, but how to understand it is not מעיקרי הדת, there are no mitzvas dependent on it, and whether it happened this way or that way or was simply an allegory is not that important.
As for being "afraid of science" - you're hysterical. Buddy, if you've seen what "science" has told us the past five years alone, you'd know that religion has absolutely nothing to fear from "science". To the contrary, more and more people are waking up every day to realize there is nobody more corrupt and dishonest than the High Priests of "science."
"There is no "charedi" position on the Ark, b/c charedim - like all religious Jews - don't fixate on it."
But if someone were to open their mouths about it, then out come the torches.
"Buddy, if you've seen what "science" has told us the past five years alone...."
You don't like science? I somehow suspect that either you're a complete loon, or someone who relies on science a dozen times before breakfast. (My money is on the latter.)
What torches? Where? Merely for commenting on the Ark story? Go ahead, show us.
And of course I use items from science past, just like you follow the calendar laid down by the original Prushim. Does that make you a Charedi?? Is that an example of the cool, considered "rationalism" of the true believers?
" the calendar laid down by the original Prushim."
The original Prushim existed centuries before the establishment of the pre-calculated calendar. You're off by about 500 years.
Maybe you shouldn't have used the word "original".
Nitpick. Hillel was an heir of the "original prushim", as are the Charedim of today. There may have been some natural organic evolution, but charedim today are the direct spiritual heirs of the Prushim then.
"Nitpick."
Your inability to write precisely does not make me a nitpicker. Next time, don't leave nits lying around. And if you must leave nits, they shouldn't be the size of cockroaches.
"Hillel was an heir of the "original prushim""
And so are you and me. But that doesn't make us the original prushim.
If you want credence, maybe you should admit you made a mistake instead of accusing other of being nitpickers.
@Gavin,
I would suggest that Charedim are a reformation of what historical Jewish practice was.
The word you are looking for is evolution.
"The 'science' of dinosaurs can never be reproduced, it is all flying blind. " Huh? The only thing relevant to our purposes is whether there was an age of dinosaurs before man. That is something with which science makes a firm prediction which could be falsified at any point - that dinosaur fossils are always found in different geological layers than are remains of contemporary species such as people and cows. This has been endlessly tested in a zillion locations and confirmed.
"Endlessly tested"!!!
By the same group of frauds over and over?!
I just gave you concrete evidence that dinosaurs lived before people. I guess you're incapable of conceding that.
Beyond ludicrous. "A cell phone exists, ergo all science is true"?? You may not know this, but the calendar which all Jews use to celebrate Passover is made by Charedi Jews. So are 90% of all tefillin, mezuzas, and sifrei Torah. So therefore, according to your "logic", you have to accept everything from Charedim? This is "rationalism", folks.
And I'm glad you're such a true believer in science. I suppose you accept everything about "transgenderism" and "critical race" theory, because that's all science, too. (And you know its all true, not just because its all so intuitive, but also because the principles behind it were established using the vaunted scientific method of free inquiry and open testing. Not like religion, where you're not allowed to say certain things...)
You really need to stop watching Fox.
"Due to the nature of the medical emergency..." - you mean the public emergency that, actually, on second thought, wasn't any more dangerous than the common flu to 98% of the public, so sorry for the inconvenience? And when you talk about the "scientific discovery" that went along with it, do you mean the "vaccines" that did absolutely nothing? Or the ones we were assured were "perfectly safe", and never mind all those people dying (and we'll make sure Twitter censors it so you can't see it, just to make sure")? Is that your God of Science, or do you have something else in mind?
"wasn't any more dangerous than the common flu to 98% of the public"
Source? Figures? Heck, forget about sources and figures, why not write a sentence that makes sense?
"the "vaccines" that did absolutely nothing"
Source? Figures?
"and never mind all those people dying"
Source? Figures?
You say "science", but you don't know it.
The same "argument" you use every time as NS's pet-sycophant. I've no interest in doing your homework for you. You can go on shutting your eyes and putting your fingers in your ear, the heck I care. You want to try actual argument I'm willing to engage. A refusal to acknowledge reality is not argument.
Resorting to ad hominem demonstrates the fallacy of your argument.
" I've no interest in doing your homework for you."
It's simple. You make a claim. First, you should make the claim clear. You haven't. Then you should have to back up the claim. You haven't. Polio causes paralysis in < 1% cases. Does that mean it's not dangerous to 99% of the public?
"You want to try actual argument"
You've made a statement that's incoherent. Even without regard to its truth, it doesn't make sense. You should make an actual argument.
For three years, I did do my homework. I checked into the covid deniers claims. Most easily shown false. The rest were rather lame claims.
You're refusal to provide a clear statement of your claim is no proof of its veracity.
"pet-sycophant."
Another easily dismissed claim. I disagreed with RNS in regards to his critique of Rav Zilberstein. That was very recent! Why should I waste my time on your ill presented claims if you make such silly wrong statements like that?
This is pointless, is it not? Believe what you want to believe.
The point of my response to NS was simple: 1) There is no "charedi" position on the Ark, because most people, who have more to their life than animals, do not fixate on it. And 2) the expression "fear of science" looks laughably absurd, in light of the utter nonsense we'll all been told in the name of science in recent years. גמרנו
Sounds like you are ok with my Dad having died because selfish jerks like you couldn’t be bothered to follow the science mask up and get vaccinated. A pox on you…
Do you really, honestly, think I'm going to waste m time arguing about this with you?
I don't want to argue with you, but I'm arguing quite a lot.
Thanks for the laugh, always appreciated!
Total bunk! Anyone who died in 2020 was automatically assigned on their death certificate reason for death COVID-19 !!!!!!!!!!!!
Wrong. I checked into that claim. I read the hospital policy for filling in cause of death. What you're saying is not true.
To repeat what I just replied to G: "For three years, I did do my homework. I checked into the covid deniers claims. Most easily shown false. The rest were rather lame claims."
Where do you get that assertion from?
OF COURSE there were (avian) dinosaurs on the Ark! גם מעוף השמים שבעה שבעה זכר ונקבה לחיות זרע על פני כל הארץ
The main reason for the dinosaurs at that creationist museum is for the kids, kids love dinosaurs it's a lot cooler to see giant reptiles then another giraffe or an elephant. Just trying to make money, pretty sure they sell a bunch of dinosaurs toys and stuff in thier gift shop.
Can't blame a guy for trying to sell dinosaurs to kids
Who doesn't love dinosaurs!
People with allergies.
We are in the sixth mass extinction right now, and it threatens the continuation of human civilization. If regurgitated theological debate and millennia of superstition cause us to deny this horrifying reality and fail to take what action we can, then they are a direct threat to all our lives and must be abandoned in favor of ones that address the real world
I don’t understand why this is so hard to understand. Right from the start the Torah describes a race of “giants on the Earth in those days” which clearly implies these “giants” did not survive...ie became extinct. These “giants” were capable of having relations with the daughters of men. I’ve always believed the Torah is referencing Neanderthals, which are believed to have disappeared during the last Ice Age. The point is, if Neanderthals could become extinct, why not dinosaurs?
A couple of comments.
Homo sapiens from the same time of Neanderthals, had an average height of 6 feet while Neanderthals were 5.5 feet, so why would they be called Giants?
Neanderthals became extinct about 40,000 years ago, while the end of the Ice Age, which culminated in the younger dryas, which, by the way, is most certainly the cause of the Mabul story existing in all civilizations around the world, was about 12,000 years ago.
Actual “giant” skeletons were discovered in the American west, some of them as tall as 8 or 9 feet.
I was referring to Lovelock cave in Nevada. But who knows what’s true.
Not necessarily. There is extraordinary evidence for the younger dryas impact hypothesis, but it’s still an hypothesis.
If evidence isn’t accepted by those in charge, in every society, and every discipline, then it makes no difference if it’s ordinary or extraordinary.
What would you know about being a tzaddik? You treat a complete stranger with contempt and snark. You think you’re a tzaddik? You’re a sad excuse for a religious Jew.
Also, kids tend to be fascinated with dinosaurs. #marketing
I imagine the creationist museum also didn't have Og Melech Habashan riding on the roof.
Woah, they just posted a massive rebuttal to Slifkin's post on torah protecting on Irrationalist Modoxism. They also reference this post at the end.
https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/does-torah-protect
They're a little late, but I guess better late than never.
It's not a rebuttal at all, let alone a massive one. It's a collection of sources about Torah protecting. I don't at all deny that such sources exist. My claim is that these do not translate into any practical ramifications that charedim accept.
This round goes to Slifkin. Tuche!
That's why it's important to know how to spell. So that you don't embarrass yourself by mistakenly screaming potty words in public.
Spelling is important, but it's more important to be intellectually honest.
Wow I guess that's all it takes. Just say "it's not a rebuttal" and have your enthusiastic sycophant call the round in your favor.
No need to address the uncomfortable point that your smug, repeated ad nauseum, thesis that Torah protection is a late "mystical" invention of R' Chaim Volozhiner was just utterly debunked (not that anyone with any Torah knowledge needed it; but its nice to have the sources collected). Just revert back to smug "it's not a rebuttal", and the useful idiots will do the rest.
You know, I've always wondered how Slifkin kept his gig going for so long. Here's the secret.
Hey Yakov, do you play on request? Can i borrow you for my blog?
Slifkin's point is clear and no substantive response to it was given, which gives this round to him. I'm not sure why this is not obvious.
The sugiah of השתדלות ובטחון is thousands of years old and is addressed in all religions. There are many opinions on the subject. Slifkin is pointing out inconsistances and no one yet answered that challenge. It would have made sense to me to discuss the subject in general rather then its practice by the charedim. Charedim are just people like everyone else with their contradictions, inconsistences and inability to look at themselves in the mirror. There is nothing new or surprising there but if you look at them in totality at the end of the day it's the best way to live, imo.
Here's a wild idea - why don't you read the IrrationalistMODOXism post in question, see which Slifkin claims he references and how he debunks them, and then let us know who made a "clear point" and who neglected to provide a "substantive response".
Or do you always declare winners in debates based on being impressed by one guy's snarky dismissiveness?
When people start believing in dinosaurs with a religious zeal and dogma to it...... Amazing how a hypothesis turned into a belief system..... Paleontology is quack science at its best! Pretty convenient to find million or billion year old man on Antarctica......the irony here - from someone who rejects mystical belief, has exchanged it for the quack belief of paleontology!
"Paleontology is quack science at its best!"
Quack is a term used for a medical charlatan.
" Pretty convenient to find million or billion year old man on Antarctica"
Maybe he was a moron who was looking for the edge of the earth, or the secret continents beyond Antarctica covered up by Davos and Stanley Kubrick's film crew. I don't know if people existed a million years ago, but if they did, some of them were idiots.
Paleontology is quack science, it was invented by people with very imaginative imaginations. Throwing around millions or billions of years here or there is quack, there's no basis for that. This whole stream of "science" was invented to try to debunk the narrative of the Bible. Anytime a "new" dinosaur is discovered, we need not wait very long to discover the fraud of it......
Amazing how for some dinosaurs became a dogma and religion as a desperate attempt to disprove the narrative of the Bible. These creative artists are very clever at putting together pieces of bone and feather...... Most specimens in museums are fake, and the "real" ones are enclosed in glass...... Believing in dinosaurs is like believing that the moon landing didn't happen...... S0 many religious believers of dinosaurs with a zeal to it - wonder why?!
"This whole stream of "science" was invented to try to debunk the narrative of the Bible."
Actually, it was invented by deeply religious people, in order to explain why different layers of rock contain the remains of different types of animals.
Source?
Can't you do your own homework?
Somehow they only find dinosaur bones in places where no one is there to verify if they are legit..... pretty shocking that all these "rationalists" buy into something so far fetched and rife with fraud.....so these rock formations are all of sudden bones.... because radio isotopes indicate that the rocks are very old?! Is there frozen marrow in these bones?! This whole field of science is very shady and I mean very shady!
"Somehow they only find dinosaur bones in places where no one is there to verify if they are legit....."
You can go yourself to any of thousands of places in the world where there are fossils, and you'll see for yourself that there are distinct types of animal life in each layer of rock.
Question for the Rabbi Dr. Scientist: have you once personally verified the legitimacy of dinosaur bones? If you haven't than what is your motivation for pushing something that is rife with fraud?
https://thatsprettygoodscience.com/2016/02/18/paleontology-is-rife-with-fraud-experts-conclude/
That website is a satirical site, per the site's disclaimer:
https://thatsprettygoodscience.com/about/disclaimer
"That’s Pretty Good Science (TPGScience) is satirical. The articles on this site may or may not use real names in semi-real and mostly fictitious ways"
Also from the disclaimer:
"All of the articles on this site are alt-science; yet somehow they still validate your personal beliefs and opinions and therefore make you feel pretty good, and can be used against your unsuspecting friends to win an argument."
Oy, OMG… 😂
@Inquire, here is is an article from a highly reputable source describing what *actually* happened to the dinosaurs:
https://babylonbee.com/news/hey-what-happened-to-all-the-dinosaurs-asks-noahs-wife-as-he-grills-up-a-37-foot-long-rack-of-ribs
Believe whatever you want to believe. Paleontology is very very shaky science if it's even real.
Quoting that site was really funny. Funnier if you are not actually a troll.
@Rav Slifkin
“…Netziv answered that dinosaurs were not naturally occurring creatures. Instead, they were monstrous chimeras, hybrids produced by the sinful activities of the Generation of the Deluge. Accordingly, they were destroyed in the Deluge…”
Do you believe Rav Berlin’s solution to the dinosaurs existence — that they were the creation of sinful sexual relationships? Do YOU believe that? And if you don’t, why would you believe any of his fantastical or halachic assertions?
Huh? You know I don't believe it. But what does it have to do with halacha?
@Rav Slifkin
I was presuming that you didn’t believe it, but wasn’t sure. However, why refuse to lend credence to The Netziv’s conclusions regarding dinosaur ontogeny if he was so wrong about that and not apply the same justifiable scrutiny to his halachic decisions? If he was so wrong about the dinosaurs development, why couldn’t he be just as wrong about Halacha?
What does one have to do with the other? His statements about dinosaurs were pseudoscientific statements based on a complete lack of knowledge about the topic. His statements about halacha are based on his knowledge of halachic sources and his talent as a halachist.
@Rav Slifkin,
The pseudoscientific statements of the Netziv are falsifiable and indeed they were proven false. His knowledge of halachic sources while exceptional are unfalsifiable and based mainly on emunah. None of Rav Berlin’s halachic expositions can be shown to be false, so why not apply the same straightforward scrutiny to his halachic pronouncements as to his pseudoscientific ones?
Don’t you recognise what the slippery slope of halachic unfalsifiability has wrought? Although you are as מהודר in all the mitzvot as folks like HappyGo and מכרכר are, you are considered practically a kofer by their unfalsifiable emunah standards because you don’t tow their unfalsifiable line.
This is not to say that I have any quarrel with your blog pursuits. Your endeavours to save traditional halachic Yiddishkeit from the ruin of their silly absurdity is commendable and I wish you much success in your pursuits. I’d like to send a donation to your museum in that respect. Is there a U.S. address?
I don't believe it either, but it would have halachic implications. He should hold that a kohen can't touch dinosaur bones. (Which are not really bones because they're fossilized, I don't know the topic that well but I'd guess they don't even have tumas neveilah, but he probably doesn't believe that either.)
Can you explain (and demonstrate) how the Chinuch defines a "species" for the purposes of his principle? Are you so sure that the extinction of the dodo is terribly relevant?
His whole point in context is about hashgacha klalius, that unlike humans who each get individual hashgacha, animals have a more general species level hashgacha. He mentions that therefore a whole species wont get wiped out. In context, it does not seem that "species" must necessarily mean any specific subgroup. It can just as easily refer to birds in general for his point.
Unless I'm missing something?
It's not "species" in the zoological sense, it's "min (type)" in the Torah system of classification. But it's difficult to kvetch the dodo into an existing min.
Wasn't the dodo a type of pigeon? (Surely the passenger pigeon was.) Aren't "minim" in the Torah system very broad, only 365 of birds, another 365 of other group(s) (Radal, also from your discussion of braekel chickens) ?
But this is only addressing that example
I understand what you're saying, but you have to admit it's not terribly compelling. It's a very peripheral point in the Chinuch, his main purpose is to contrast with human hashgacha pratius. Hard to say he was being very pedantic on the choice of the term 'min'.
In context it seems his main point is that the world was created with a purpose as a backdrop to Man, so the general varieties of animals are what's necessary, and therefore have a generic hashgacha, not an individual one. For his point there's no reason to assume he was giving some blanket immunity to every specific subspecies of animal. Hard to see why someone would insist on taking it to the extreme your magid shiur did.
At least that's all I see in the Chinuch. I have been unable to locate the other Rishonim you mentioned that share his view. Can I trouble you to list some sources for those of us that don't [yet] own your book? Thanks!
Wouldn't it be easier to just take dinosaur eggs onto the ark?