pinball1970

As @TheVat pointed out the biggest risk factor for cancer is age. Nothing you can do about that, people get older every day. Things are not so bad, if you would have been born 100 years ago your chances of dying at birth or before the age of five were pretty high, in some countries where modern medicine is not widely available that is still the case. Biggest cancer killers in the US and UK are lung, CRC, breast and prostate depending on your sex. So, do not smoke that pretty much eliminates the first. Screening is available for colorectal cancer and starts around 50 (UK) some oncologists say this should be reduced to 40-45. There is genetic element to this (and all degenerative disease) but you can reduce your risk by eating healthy, exercise and not drinking excessively. Obesity, smoking and alcohol three risk factors for many cancers. Genetics is the hand you are dealt, kids die of cancer every day and smoking drinking and chronic obesity obviously not a lot to do with it. Like other areas of medicine, research tries to keep up with the game and prognosis of many cancers has improved greatly over the last 50 years or so. It is not the so-called death sentence it was in the 1960s and 70s.

Noah is not part of Mosaic law

No, Mosaic law was directed at the tribe, the ancient Israelites and included rules for farming, land, animals going loose, marriage, adultery, owning and treatment of slaves etc so obviously not stories just for kids.

I'm not. I also think it is nonsense. Or I could read what scholars say about the texts. Cheaper. Can you flesh it out a little? I can then see if aligns with anything I read on the subject.

What are my options? I could read The Bible as it is now in English and make my best guess. I could listen to a priest from the pulpit who claims to know what scripture is where it came from and what it means. I could listen to random stranger. I could listen to Scholars and archaeologists, who have studied the manuscripts in the original languages they were written. A study that is their day job so to speak, seasoned qualified professional in the field who write text books for University students much like scientist do in their fields for their students. I chose the last one, I do not think that is unreasonable. When I was a student of Biology I read Alberts, Molecular Biology of The Cell. It was standard text. So it is a matter trusting their educated guesses than my own own or other unqualified people. Francesca Stavrakopoulou, Bart Ehrman, Israel Finkelstein, Neil Asher Silberman, Géza Vermes and Magnus Magnusson have been the main ones. Ehrman has debated many of his colleagues on points so one can get different perspectives too. One last point on this, simply, no i do not. The reason is they do not do that either, the purpose of the historian is try and find out what "most likely" happened in the past. Agree on that.

No, I read what scholars have to say about it.

Did Jesus think Adam and Eve were allegorical? How about the Gospel writers? Luke puts Adam in the Genealogy of Jesus. John says Jesus was around before Abraham, "before Abraham was I am." Did Abraham exist? The father of the Jews? Or Moses? Some modern, sophisticated Christians today may think some stories are allegorical but there seem to be a lot that think the Bible is inerrant. Enough to cause trouble. These are the kinds of cites and books I was referring to. A few sites and books on this. https://livingwaters.com/scientific-facts-in-the-bible/ https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/science-and-the-bible/ https://churchonthecorner.us/questions-on-faith/how-the-bible-aligns-with-science/ https://www.whyislam.org/physics-in-the-light-of-the-quran/ An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur'an: Volume 1 (The Foundational Sciences Series) Paperback – 6 July 2017 by Sh. Furhan Zubairi (Author) The Quran and Science: Guidance for Mankind with Scientific Discoveries and Prophecies Paperback – 31 May 2016 by Ghiasuddin Ahmed Khan Scientific Facts in the Bible 100 Reasons to Believe the Bible is Supernatural in Origin by Ray Comfort. Publisher, Bridge Logos Published November 2001 That is what those religions do, make claims about the real world not just the supernatural. The Bible was not put together till the 4th CE and those OT stories were absolutely not meant for children! Have you read them?

I disagree with the religion part. Sure, it deals with the supernatural but the scriptures that the three Abrahamic religions are based on, also documents gives a long human history from the creation of the universe to Adam and Eve, the flood, the Exodus and beyond. People, places, battles and Kings, much of which is at odds with history, archaeology and science. Scientists and archaeologists did not set out to the Biblical claims but key discoveries did do that along the way.

They may take your idea more serious if you lose all the fonts, italics, bolds and exclamation marks. That said, have you synthesized any of the molecules in the lab? Or is this all on paper? Plastic?

The OP sounds like the idea of "bad air" causing diseases, called miasma. The particles responsible were Miasmata. This theory was superceded by the germ theory. A few of you guys mentioned handling cadavers. A mention to Ignaz Semmelweis found that hand washing by physicians and later apparatus cleansing, decreased mortality in hospitals. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/handwashing-once-controversial-medical-advice

Astronomy, paleontology and Evolution I am interested in. Cosmology too with what is going on with all the new generation telescopes like Webb, Euclid, Vera Rubin etc. See you about!

Watching them, I knew it could be either a swift, swallow or house Martin. I tried to sing it's called to two twitchers. They have bird call aps. They told me what it was and checking on YouTube you can hear that distinctive sound. https://youtu.be/pEmtXsW2bD8?si=RlIpW3L-ZGXkXXau

It is just called "Hawking" full film here. Narlikar appears at 43:50 and the challenge to Hoyle at the Royal Society presentation in 1964 at 48 minutes. Like I said artistic licence probably.

I remember an Indian character from the 2004 film sharing Hoyle's paper with Hawking and Hoyle not being too happy about it. I thought this could have been artistic licence but it is documented that a young Hawking challenged Hoyle in a presentation.

Interesting. I live in NW England UK and this time of year we get nesting swifts. A pair usually take up residence in the gutter outside my bedroom room window. The little blighters wake me up in the morning. I will keep my eye out for newer visitors.

Thanks I will have a look at those.

I will check those out thanks!

Hi all, Nice to meet you. Education in Biology (1980s) but career since has been applications as a technologist, mainly chemistry with some physics thrown in. Interests now are physics, the big stuff, LCH, Hubble, JWST, whilst trying my best with the mathematics. Other science interests are human Evolution and Abiogenesis. Biblical scholarship, music and other tidbits perhaps but let's see what threads grab me! Cheers. PB1970

Do you have a citation?

There is a fantastic little video on YouTube that was posted on another science site. A parrot is "singing" along to the owner who is playing, "here comes the sun, " on the guitar. So first, if I had a parrot that did that I would certainly love it! They look like good friends. Second they are not talking but they are communicating, whatever it is, it sounds like a happy exchange. The sounds are not random because the bird finds the pitch (the owner smiles) https://youtu.be/XPQlMmMDm-A?si=yrncoiMBpJyx4oWC

You got me! Just discussing Mac D on another thread strangely enough.

Hi m_m The idea was probably useful at the time but now we have obesity problems in the UK and US. Mac D and other FF outlets are not the only reason but they certainly do not help. I recommend the documentary, " Super size me."

Your post is closest to how I would respond to the OP and also throw in Dawkins gene centric view of what our brains and "survival machines" are. Genes build brains as part of a body, that has come from parents who survived long enough and well enough to have offspring. So the purpose of a brain is not to make the individual happy but it is to do the things that allow that body to survive to adult hood and pass on those genes. The Selfish Gene, chapter "the gene machine" page 63. "The main way brains actually contribute to the survival machines is by controlling and coordinating contraction of muscles.......but this leads to the efficient preservation of genes only if the timing ....relates to events in the outside world." So bite something worth biting=happy, not worth biting= not happy. So happiness is a by product of being successful it is not a want.

Having a quick look on the link below and also pointed out by @mistermack sexual dimorphism/harem are linked so you get large males with access to the females. A large body advantageous for keeping the top spot and a large appendage could be a disadvantage, an injury risk. There is some sexual dimorphism in humans but not as much as Gorillas. (Males are twice the size) Plus ancient human species and ancestral primates would have been displaying their penis via upright walking from Lucy's time, so about 3.5 million years ago. A large penis could have been synonymous with fertility, large breasts and child bearing hips in a female. A large member would still be at risk of injury, humans and their primate ancestors still had to complete for mates and resources. IF that was what the evolutionary pressure was, it would be a trade off between making the females swoon and making sure you could run and fight without getting caught up in the bush. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism_in_non-human_primates https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11319778/#:~:text=Gorillas%20live%20in%20polygamous%20harem,access%20to%20female%20social%20partners.

Well met Sir!