At what odds, a miracle?

[aka CAT]

Like an earthworm, maybe? They're hermaphrodites. How about some species of aphid that reproduce without sex?

Then there are fungi - "How do I love thee? Let me count the ways." Fungi have come up with more ways to reproduce than I can count - sexually, asexually (several versions of each).

Life IS stranger than fiction.

Doug

It involves a horse. Because mares never have twins,

sometimes nature decides to combine non-identical twins.

Thus, a foal with two distinct sets of DNA results.

That is a high probability from outward indications at this point.

Based upon appearances alone, the foal is among about 10 in

4.7 million. She, bred for other attributes, is rarer for that fact.

Thence, should the filly in other ways prove exceptional for her

given lineage, she might just be as rare as is her owner.

The owner is 1 in addition to only 8 people ever confirmed to

more or less demonstrate an aptitude. While my intention isn't

to make a freak of anyone so self-effacing, my intuiting a link

between the person and the animal motivates me to document

the latter in hope of uncovering the common thread between

the two. Since I surmise the origin of that thread traces back

nearly 200 years, its discovery would, imo, be miraculous.

Involved as are the circumstances, I will probably only get to

tell a fraction of the story in a documentary-style short film.

[Doug1029]

I'm sorry, but I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by this. Could you clarify, please?

If there is a chance something will happen in a given, average year, then there is a greater chance that it will happen in two years. And an even greater chance that it will happen in three years, etc. In this case, each year is an iteration. Each iteration (year) adds to the chance that the event will actually happen. When the probability that the event will happen reaches 50% and it still hasn't happened and adding more iterations is extremely impractical, or maybe impossible, you have reached the point where the event is functionally impossible. Although, it still might happen.

Doug

[Doug1029]

It involves a horse. Because mares never have twins,

sometimes nature decides to combine non-identical twins.

Thus, a foal with two distinct sets of DNA results.

That is a high probability from outward indications at this point.

Based upon appearances alone, the foal is among about 10 in

4.7 million. She, bred for other attributes, is rarer for that fact.

Thence, should the filly in other ways prove exceptional for her

given lineage, she might just be as rare as is her owner.

The owner is 1 in addition to only 8 people ever confirmed to

more or less demonstrate an aptitude. While my intention isn't

to make a freak of anyone so self-effacing, my intuiting a link

between the person and the animal motivates me to document

the latter in hope of uncovering the common thread between

the two. Since I surmise the origin of that thread traces back

nearly 200 years, its discovery would, imo, be miraculous.

Involved as are the circumstances, I will probably only get to

tell a fraction of the story in a documentary-style short film.

Go for it! Who knows? Maybe you'll make an important discovery.

A great many important discoveries have been made by accident - penicillin, for example. My log pond chronology is happening only because the owner of an old pond decided to clean the junk out of it and found a bunch of century-old sawlogs in it - and got curious.

Anyway, sounds interesting. I'll keep my eyes pealed for it.

Doug

[aka CAT]

Go for it! Who knows? Maybe you'll make an important discovery.

A great many important discoveries have been made by accident - penicillin, for example. My log pond chronology is happening only because the owner of an old pond decided to clean the junk out of it and found a bunch of century-old sawlogs in it - and got curious.

Anyway, sounds interesting. I'll keep my eyes pealed for it.

Doug

Interesting find. Of what specie are the logs?

Do you live in a fairly cold climate where ponds

are seasonally frozen?

Thank you. If inspired, I'll succeed in making

a G-rated presentation that fosters faith. For,

provided enough of it, the domino effect would

traverse as much as transform the world.

0:-) MGby.

Edited July 14, 2014 by aka CAT

[Doug1029]

Interesting find. Of what specie are the logs?

Do you live in a fairly cold climate where ponds

are seasonally frozen?

Thank you. If inspired, I'll succeed in making

a G-rated presentation that fosters faith. For,

provided enough of it, the domino effect would

traverse as much as transform the world.

0:-) MGby.

They're shortleafXloblolly pine crosses, mostly loblolly, I think. Have a stack of the cookies sitting in a my office. I managed to get one dated: 1837 to 1907. The others are proving a little tougher (There are 24.).

The pond freezes some winters, but not others. 2011 was the first time it ever went dry. The logs have been submerged for more than a century. Still bear the brand of the original owner.

Doug

[aka CAT]

They're shortleafXloblolly pine crosses, mostly loblolly, I think. Have a stack of the cookies sitting in a my office. I managed to get one dated: 1837 to 1907. The others are proving a little tougher (There are 24.).

The pond freezes some winters, but not others. 2011 was the first time it ever went dry. The logs have been submerged for more than a century. Still bear the brand of the original owner.

Doug

8-) Time capsules !!! Edited July 14, 2014 by aka CAT

[aka CAT]

Doug, from your neck o' the woods, was the guy following?

John Denver - Eagles And Horses - YouTube

Horses are creatures who worship the earth

They gallop on feet of ivory

Constrained by the wonder of dying and birth

The horses still run, they are free

My body is merely the shell of my soul

But the flesh must be given its due

Like a pony that carries its rider back home

Like an old friend who's tried and been true

I had a vision of eagles and horses

High on a ridge in a race with the wind

Goin' higher and higher, faster and faster

On eagles and horses I'm flying again

Eagles inhabit the heavenly heights

They know neither limit nor bound

They're the guardian angels of darkness and light

They see all and hear every sound

My spirit will never be broken or caught

For the soul is a free-flying thing

Like an eagle that needs neither comfort nor thought

To rise up on glorious wings

I had a vision of eagles and horses

High on a ridge in a race with the wind

Goin' higher and higher, faster and faster

On eagles and horses I'm flying again

Flying again, I'm flying again

My body is merely the shell of my soul

But the flesh must be given its due

Like a pony that carries its master back home

Like an old friend who's tried and been true

My spirit will never be broken or caught

For the soul is a free-flying thing

Like an eagle that needs neither comfort nor thought

To rise up on glorious wings

I had a vision of eagles and horses

High on a ridge in a race with the wind

Goin' higher and higher, faster and faster

On eagles and horses I'm flying again

Flying again

Flying again

Flying again

I'm flying again

Edited July 15, 2014 by aka CAT

[aka CAT]

Then don't, because if you do, we will dissect that example, and if it is personal, you will likely take it personally.

It is nonsensical to claim that a God with the power to inflict illness should be thanked for not inflicting that illness. That isn't the sort of relationship one should encourage.

You are not God. My praying "Thy will be done" lets me readily accept the temporality of this existence.

Absorption in worthwhile pursuits, whether they be the previously described 'hobby horse' or research projects

related to holism, lets me forget everything else and, thus, numbs me to pain. As now, I have no complaints.

[aka CAT]

Taken back by the fact that Doug's misunderstanding accidentally revealed

the bizarre preoccupation of mine which precipitated both the title and subtitle

of this thread, I apologize for consequently seeming to neglect some of you.

At what point does a probability become so small that while it may still be mathematically possible it becomes functionally impossible. 1 in a million is chicken feed, ten million also chicken feed. 7 billion - that's something unique to just one member of the human population (as it currently stands, roughly speaking), so it's still a meaningless number. Arthur Dent and Ford Prefect were rescued from the vacuum of space at the improbable odds of 2 to the power of 2,079,460,347 to 1 against, if you believe the writings of Douglas Adams, I think now we may be hitting the "functionally impossible" probability. I have a recollection that mathematicians have actually suggested a specific number where this does indeed become the case, where the odds are so minute that even though it is "possible" mathematically, even if it were to be repeated a billion billion billion billion billion times over the proverbial stars simply have no chance of ever aligning to allow it to happen.

When so many things have to go just so*, there is a point beyond human control when letting go, trusting, can be exhilarating.

Once I was taking a very nubile and willing young lady to a rendezvous at my parent's seaside shack, to which I had "stolen" the key. I was driving my parent's car, while home from university. I was 19 and she was about 17 . Nearly there we hit a Kangaroo, doing some considerable damage. I was devastated, especially when my parents told me that not only did they know I had taken the key but why I had done so.

I bemoaned the lost opportunity with a girl who was my first real love, and whom I thought was to be my life partner. However, time showed to me that a permanent relationship with that young lady would have been disastrous for me (and probably for her as well). Instead, god introduced me to another woman, a bit later. I was "hit by the thunderbolt", and 40 years later have never recovered This was the relationship that was meant for me, and allowed me to have a peaceful and productive marriage, filled with love and companionship, where loyalty, trust and commitment to each other, were priorities for us both.

You example much of the reason I don’t fancy myself God:

His plan always proves preferable to mine.

A miracle is, to me, an event which should be physically impossible, but which occurs despite that. As stated, a divine miracle must have direct intervention demonstrated by a divinity. However, if I jumped off the roof and, instead of falling, I flew around the sky for half an hour or so, yes I would account that a miracle. Maybe it "did" have a natural explanation, but I can't think of any known to present science.

Now, if one day, in one of my daily attempts, I walked though a solid wall, I wouldn't call that a miracle, just a known possibility of quantum science. But it would still be interesting, as long as I passed right through and didn't get stuck half way. Most days I have a go at flying, especially if there is a good head wind for take off, and at walking through walls, just to make sure that the physical laws are still in effect. One should never start taking them for granted, or one might miss a fascinating opportunity.

I expect few miracles publicized. Many are between God and the individual

to whom they are however immediately or gradually made meaningful. Such

intimacy follows increased trust. Rapport becomes a matter of responsiveness,

momently--something I wish were so habitual as to nearly be reflexive for me.

That degree of obedience would be bliss not because we are robots but because,

among many reasons, the individual is free to lend, to the best of his singular

ability, authenticity to his actions.

It’s a shame for one to believe he need be a saint to experience a miracle,

just because those investigated by the Church are in connection with canonization.

According to quantum physics there is a physical possibility, albeit very very remote, that one can walk through a solid wall. However one would have to be incredibly fortunate (or unfortunate) to actually have that probability occur to you without the aid of science and technology.

That I flew headlong between a steel door and its frame wasn’t without repercussions,

as, even still, I can only have mixed feelings about my having proven so hard-headed.

* Circumstantial to the naming of the band Katzenjammer.

Edited July 15, 2014 by aka CAT

[aquatus1]

You are not God.

Correct?

Who said I was?

My praying "Thy will be done" lets me readily accept the temporality of this existence.

Absorption in worthwhile pursuits, whether they be the previously described 'hobby horse' or research projects

related to holism, lets me forget everything else and, thus, numbs me to pain. As now, I have no complaints.

What does that have to do with the point? As I said, that you chose to use a personal example will not prevent that example from being examined. Nor will your personal feelings be considered any more relevant to the answer than if the example was not relevant.

The question was why one should feel obligated to thank a god for sparing them pain that they had the power to not inflict in the first place.

[Grandpa Greenman]

You are not God.

I am a Pantheist, so in my path, I am God and so are you. We are all God, including the cat.

[aquatus1]

Well, my cat certainly shares the latter part of that opinion. Not the former, though.

[Mr Walker]

Correct?

Who said I was?

What does that have to do with the point? As I said, that you chose to use a personal example will not prevent that example from being examined. Nor will your personal feelings be considered any more relevant to the answer than if the example was not relevant.

The question was why one should feel obligated to thank a god for sparing them pain that they had the power to not inflict in the first place.

How does god prevent a free willed and persistent individual from doing things which cause them pain/harm? Yes he can inform, educate and warn, and generally does, (most people know and understand the likely consequences of any action they take) but this still doesn't stop many people from doing incredibly stupid and dangerous things. God can only intervene to help lessen the pain occasioning from those behaviours, through love, understanding and empowerment, once the event has occurred.

[aquatus1]

How does god prevent a free willed and persistent individual from doing things which cause them pain/harm?

Same way a parent prevents a free-willed and persistent child from doing the same.

Yes he can inform, educate and warn, and generally does, (most people know and understand the likely consequences of any action they take) but this still doesn't stop many people from doing incredibly stupid and dangerous things.

Of course, unlike parents, God is omnipotent.

God can only intervene to help lessen the pain occasioning from those behaviours, through love, understanding and empowerment, once the event has occurred.

According to whom? Who has set this limit on God's powers?

[aka CAT]

aquatus1 initially wrote:

It is nonsensical to claim that a God with the power to inflict illness should be thanked for not inflicting that illness. That isn't the sort of relationship one should encourage.

CAT:

The reasons I emphasized the fact that You are not God:

your neither being Him nor me gives you no grounds

whereupon to judge either his motives nor my cause for

maintaining faith even in the face of adversity. What's

more, it isn't for you nor anyone else to determine what

"sort" of relationship I have with God nor, much less,

feign the authority to dictate whether or not I even "should"

worship Him.

The difference between us is my refusing to blame God,

play the victim versus accepting responsibility as means

of self-empowerment. That strength is afforded me by

reverently praying, "Thy will be done," i.e. by trusting God

is good, I am enheartened by virtue of sharing His will.

And, so, to the extent that my heart remains in the right

place, I can brave nearly anything for my being that much

closer to home--heaven.

Edited July 16, 2014 by aka CAT

[aquatus1]

I don't care about his motives, nor your faith. Your personal reasons are yours alone, and I warned you about using a personal example and assuming it had some sort of explanatory power beyond what it was. I don't care if you are talking about God, about your ex, or about whoever you currently have a relationship of any sort with.

Whatever excuse, reasoning, or justification you can come up with, nothing is going to change the simple fact that having the power to hurt someone, but not doing so, is not something that one should be thankful for; it is something that someone should expect. No one should have to live under the belief that one is hurt or not hurt by the whim of the authority in their lives, that they should be thankful when the authority chooses not to hurt them, and they should be thankful to receive mercy when it stops.

[aka CAT]

I don't care about his motives, nor your faith. Your personal reasons are yours alone, and I warned you about using a personal example and assuming it had some sort of explanatory power beyond what it was. I don't care if you are talking about God, about your ex, or about whoever you currently have a relationship of any sort with.

Whatever excuse, reasoning, or justification you can come up with, nothing is going to change the simple fact that having the power to hurt someone, but not doing so, is not something that one should be thankful for; it is something that someone should expect. No one should have to live under the belief that one is hurt or not hurt by the whim of the authority in their lives, that they should be thankful when the authority chooses not to hurt them, and they should be thankful to receive mercy when it stops.

To me, your logic doesn't even hold for parents in general.

There is a point to where any father, including Our Father,

must let his children err in order for them to learn from

their own mistakes. Not meant to be kept on a leash even

supposedly for their own protection, children must learn

to meet the world on their own terms in order to become

adults. Whereas parent's fostering dependence in their

young is not only dysfunctional but hinders people from

acquiring the emotional maturity necessary to love

unconditionally, such over-weaning behavior is usually

selfishly manipulative and, thus, deserves to be met with

deep-seated resentment as opposed to heartfelt thanks.

[JGirl]

Every child born was once considered a miracle?

Proving a miracle should be simple should they exist. For instance If you were to send me a quiet-made recording generated from your PC, and uploaded it for me to open up here. Then If that recording was to alter this end (altering it likewise at your end.. adding noise that was not pre-recorded by you.. from an unknown signal) Would that be considered a miracle?

huh?

[JesseCuster]

People, how often have you been relieved that what could have happened did not occur?

Thank God.

If we should thank God when something bad doesn't happen, should we blame him when it does?

To suggest otherwise requires either a double standard or special pleading.

[JGirl]

If we should thank God when something bad doesn't happen, should we blame him when it does?

don't people already do that?

[JGirl]

there can be no odds at all if it's a miracle. if there is even the remotest chance then it's not miraculous.

[JesseCuster]

I have a recollection that mathematicians have actually suggested a specific number where this does indeed become the case, where the odds are so minute that even though it is "possible" mathematically, even if it were to be repeated a billion billion billion billion billion times over the proverbial stars simply have no chance of ever aligning to allow it to happen.

I'm pretty sure that the idea that mathematicians consider something beyond a certain probability happening as being functionally impossible is an idea invented by creationists to try and attribute some fudged numbers they've invented as proving that life is mathematically impossible to evolve and therefore God. Some creationist websites for example use the arbitrary figure of 1 in 10^50 (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) as being the odds beyond which something is mathematically impossible.

Yet, if you take a deck of cards and give it a really thorough shuffle, the odds that the deck would end up in the order it does is 1 in 52! (52x51x50x....x4x3x2x1) = approx. 1 in 80,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (I think I have that right). According to that logic, shuffling a deck of cards is an impossibility because it's 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 less likely to happen than a mathematical impossibility. You could rewind and rerun the universe from the big bang to present millions of times over and you're guaranteed that any given combination of cards in a pack will never be shuffled by a human being, such are the overwhelming combinations of 52 cards in a pack.

Therefore shuffling a pack of cards is mathematically impossible and if you think you've seen it done or claim to have done it yourself you are clearly imagining it. Because it can't happen.

Or does the mathematics that people trot out to make these kind of arguments simply result from a fundamental misunderstanding of how statistics and probabilities work?

[JesseCuster]

don't people already do that?

But *should* they? No religious people I know tell me I should blame God for my misfortunes, but I'm always being told I should thank God if some misfortune doesn't come my way.

If someone tells me that I should thank God I narrowly avoided some catastrophe, should I blame him when the same catastrophe happens to a family member?

For the record, I'm an atheist and thus neither thank nor blame God for anything.

[JGirl]

But *should* they? No religious people I know tell me I should blame God for my misfortunes, but I'm always being told I should thank God if some misfortune doesn't come my way.

If someone tells me that I should thank God I narrowly avoided some catastrophe, should I blame him when the same catastrophe happens to a family member?

For the record, I'm an atheist and thus neither thank nor blame God for anything.

oh i hear ya - i was just pointing out that it's already a double standard

[aka CAT]

If we should thank God when something bad doesn't happen, should we blame him when it does?

To suggest otherwise requires either a double standard or special pleading.

If special pleading means prayer; then, yes, I do believe the devout

more deserving. Hence, very close calls can, by the grace of God,

be Divine Mercy. At very least, they are cause for gratitude much

as is a warning versus a citation from a highway patrolman.