bzzzzt. wrong. I gave you the hebrew word and it indicates the outer edge, while you insist on a HYPOTHETICAL circle. Yet non-Christians at purplemath were able to quick figure it out too - tsk tsk.
Your journey of self discovery has begun! The biblically-derived value of pi can only be correct with further interpretation and context!
Context is PART of the bible record bucky boy, there is no interpretation necessary to it as has been proven over and over and over again. Nor have you proven that the intent of the scripture at that spot was to define pi (crickets). Nothing extrabiblical is necessary - it is all there in the passage. Since you admit the record could not be precise, it is a resulting fallacy to demand accuracy to two significant decimal places.
Come on—you’re not really a scientist, are you? I mean, this is simple. Perhaps you just play a scientist on TV.
Yes I am , even more so that the wanna be intellectual you try to play here in this thread.
It is the height of intellectual arrogance to demand precision to two decimal places when the means of measurement were not to that same level of accuracy - I know it is kinda of a hard concept for you to grasp, but as a scientist it comes naturally. When one precise number is multiplied by an imprecise number, the product should be reported with no more precision than the least precise factor (ooooh that is a scientific kinda thing too), deal with this kind of thing on almost a daily basis. Skeptics who allege an inaccuracy are wrong, because they fail to take into account all the data - that is not interpretation and context is the rest of the data. As a scientist, I deal with all the data, not just the cherry picked phrase you get from a skeptic site. Because you refuse to define WHERE those measurements were taken AND the level of technology of the period AND the context of a DESCRIPTION of an object and not a mathematical text, I think all here see just who is playing who here.
Laughing Placemarker!
Kinda basic stuff there that I had in every freshman and sophomore science class I took in college.
Since it comes naturally to a scientist, it strongly suggests that Buck is no more a scientist than he is a Christian.
BTW, Buck, just what IS your educational experience? What are your scientific credentials? What field of scientific inquiry are you currently pursuing?
Come on, you’re no scientist! Judging by your posts, it’s obvious that your not even very bright. I have not demanded two-digit accuracy. I have simply stated that scripture cannot stand on its own in the calculation of pi. Inference and context are necessary. Scripture, therefore, is not literally inerrant.
Now, go mix some chemicals in Mom’s kitchen and play scientist again.