Henke 2022cd

The Relevance of Science in Evaluating Claims about Past Events

Kevin R. Henke

September 15, 2022

In Henke (2022b), I stated:

“Lundahl (2022a) claims that “Genesis 3 is a piece of history.” Yet, in none of these seven essays (Lundahl 2022a-g) does he ever present any evidence for this claim. Lundahl (2022a) also claims that “history is verified historically” and not scientifically:

“History is verified historically, not scientifically, at its most basic, since science cannot verify whether only scientifically verifiable phenomena exist or occur.”

This statement is merely vague tautology. Archeology and forensic science are legitimate sciences, along with paleontology and other geologic sciences that investigate the remaining evidence of past events. Historical sciences that investigate human endeavors may not be able to determine the why, the how or other details about what happened, but in some circumstances, as discussed in Section 6.0 and Henke (2022a), they can definitely identify the who, what, when and/or where.”

Lundahl (2022m) makes the following brief and ambiguous reply:

“This is taking ‘science’ in a broader view than I meant, and than the one Henke uses on other occasions, like wanting zoological (or paleozoological) evidence for talking snakes.”

Henke (2022bp) explains why biology is relevant in doubting the Talking Snake story. Snakes simply don’t have the vocal cords and brains for speech. However, as I previously stated, I’m open to changing my mind if someone produces a snake that can have an intelligent conversation as Josephus thought (Jewish Antiquities book 1:4; https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/ant-1.html ). Now, Lundahl (2022k) uses the lame excuse that angels or demons can use animals as ventriloquist dummies to make them “speak.” As I discussed in Henke (2022bp), anyone can make up a baseless supernatural excuse to defend a baseless supernatural story. That is, angels or demons can supposedly make snakes and donkeys talk in the Bible. There’s no evidence for any of this. In contrast, the sciences of archeology, anthropology and geology are important in evaluating the evidence of past events. Geology, physics and chemistry also investigate present day phenomena. Meteorology and climatology attempt to predict future atmospheric conditions. I think that Mr. Lundahl should learn what science and the scientific method really are before he even attempts to discuss these issues (Strahler 1999, pp. 1-58).

Reference:

Strahler, A.N. 1999. Science and Earth History: The Evolution/Creation Controversy: 2^nd ed., Prometheus Books: Amherst, NY, USA, 552 pp.