1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. TALK.ORIGINS

  • Pareidolia

    From Burkhard@21:1/5 to All on Tue Feb 28 14:01:24 2023
    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jillery@21:1/5 to b.schafer@ed.ac.uk on Wed Mar 1 08:41:48 2023
    On Tue, 28 Feb 2023 14:01:24 -0800 (PST), Burkhard
    <b.schafer@ed.ac.uk> wrote:

    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807


    My initial reaction to seeing these photos is they were photoshopped.
    Which is not to say they were faked, but is to say it might be
    difficult to show they were not.

    --
    You're entitled to your own opinions.
    You're not entitled to your own facts.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Athel Cornish-Bowden@21:1/5 to Burkhard on Wed Mar 1 19:16:41 2023
    On 2023-02-28 22:01:24 +0000, Burkhard said:

    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by
    creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it
    was designed - and then we see this... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807

    Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that it's not faked.


    --
    athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From brogers31751@gmail.com@21:1/5 to Athel Cornish-Bowden on Wed Mar 1 11:13:50 2023
    On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 1:20:15 PM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
    On 2023-02-28 22:01:24 +0000, Burkhard said:

    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it
    was designed - and then we see this... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807
    Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that it's not faked.


    --
    athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016
    That one shot of crashing waves out of 4000 that the photographer took that day should look enough like a face that a brain interprets it as one does not seem to me to require photoshopping or other forms of fakery. Indeed, the cool thing about
    pareidolia is that the brain does its own photoshopping.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 1 14:32:58 2023
    On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:13:50 -0800 (PST), the following
    appeared in talk.origins, posted by "broger...@gmail.com" <brogers31751@gmail.com>:

    On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 1:20:15?PM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: >> On 2023-02-28 22:01:24 +0000, Burkhard said:

    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by
    creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it
    was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807
    Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that it's not faked.


    --
    athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016
    That one shot of crashing waves out of 4000 that the photographer took that day should look enough like a face that a brain interprets it as one does not seem to me to require photoshopping or other forms of fakery. Indeed, the cool thing about
    pareidolia is that the brain does its own photoshopping.

    "one...out of 4000" is the point; cherrypicking has become
    *much* easier with modern computers and photography. And
    statistics might as well be Sanskrit to most.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jillery@21:1/5 to brogers31751@gmail.com on Thu Mar 2 07:21:54 2023
    On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:13:50 -0800 (PST), "broger...@gmail.com" <brogers31751@gmail.com> wrote:

    On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 1:20:15?PM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote: >> On 2023-02-28 22:01:24 +0000, Burkhard said:

    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by
    creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it
    was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807
    Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that it's not faked.


    --
    athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016
    That one shot of crashing waves out of 4000 that the photographer took that day should look enough like a face that a brain interprets it as one does not seem to me to require photoshopping or other forms of fakery. Indeed, the cool thing about
    pareidolia is that the brain does its own photoshopping.


    The problem I have is, that one shot out of 4000 looks too much like a
    face. I might be convinced if I saw the previous and following shots,
    to observe its evolution.

    --
    You're entitled to your own opinions.
    You're not entitled to your own facts.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Kalkidas@21:1/5 to Burkhard on Thu Mar 2 07:41:37 2023
    On 2/28/2023 3:01 PM, Burkhard wrote:
    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807


    And how do we know that the "face" in the water wasn't designed?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Burkhard@21:1/5 to jillery on Thu Mar 2 11:28:05 2023
    On Thursday, March 2, 2023 at 12:25:15 PM UTC, jillery wrote:
    On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:13:50 -0800 (PST), "broger...@gmail.com" <broger...@gmail.com> wrote:
    On Wednesday, March 1, 2023 at 1:20:15?PM UTC-5, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
    On 2023-02-28 22:01:24 +0000, Burkhard said:

    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by
    creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it >> > was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807
    Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that it's not faked. >>

    --
    athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016
    That one shot of crashing waves out of 4000 that the photographer took that day should look enough like a face that a brain interprets it as one does not seem to me to require photoshopping or other forms of fakery. Indeed, the cool thing about
    pareidolia is that the brain does its own photoshopping.
    The problem I have is, that one shot out of 4000 looks too much like a
    face. I might be convinced if I saw the previous and following shots,
    to observe its evolution.
    --
    You're entitled to your own opinions.
    You're not entitled to your own facts.

    From the way the article was done, my assumption would be that the BBC did this, and also checked for the more obvious signs of photoshopping. They have different handling procedures for "full articles" like this one, and "submitted by our viewers"
    pieces where it is clear that they just republish what was sent in. So while there is always a question mark, I'd be reasonably confident with this one.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jillery@21:1/5 to Kalkidas on Thu Mar 2 16:53:27 2023
    On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 07:41:37 -0700, Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub> wrote:

    On 2/28/2023 3:01 PM, Burkhard wrote:
    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807


    And how do we know that the "face" in the water wasn't designed?


    How do you know that anything wasn't designed?

    --
    You're entitled to your own opinions.
    You're not entitled to your own facts.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Robert Carnegie@21:1/5 to jillery on Thu Mar 2 15:29:03 2023
    On Thursday, 2 March 2023 at 21:55:16 UTC, jillery wrote:
    On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 07:41:37 -0700, Kalkidas <e...@joes.pub> wrote:

    On 2/28/2023 3:01 PM, Burkhard wrote:
    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807


    And how do we know that the "face" in the water wasn't designed?
    How do you know that anything wasn't designed?

    I think this was covered with Nando one time.
    I mentioned the tradition of throwing salt grains
    over your shoulder for luck, is how the salt falls
    designed? And he's like, yes it is.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Robert Carnegie@21:1/5 to Athel Cornish-Bowden on Thu Mar 2 15:23:38 2023
    On Wednesday, 1 March 2023 at 18:20:15 UTC, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
    On 2023-02-28 22:01:24 +0000, Burkhard said:

    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it
    was designed - and then we see this... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807

    Links to https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-57770547

    Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'm not sure I'm convinced that it's not faked.

    We're just very good at seeing human faces.
    Even faces that aren't there.

    :-)

    We communicate through our faces. So we
    take an interest in faces.

    ( ^ _ ^ )

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 2 18:07:35 2023
    On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 07:41:37 -0700, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub>:

    On 2/28/2023 3:01 PM, Burkhard wrote:
    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807


    And how do we know that the "face" in the water wasn't designed?

    "Designed" being equal to "photoshopped"? Without access to
    the raw file we don't. Was there some point you wished to
    make?

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From jillery@21:1/5 to rja.carnegie@excite.com on Thu Mar 2 23:15:13 2023
    On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 15:29:03 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> wrote:

    On Thursday, 2 March 2023 at 21:55:16 UTC, jillery wrote:
    On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 07:41:37 -0700, Kalkidas <e...@joes.pub> wrote:

    On 2/28/2023 3:01 PM, Burkhard wrote:
    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807


    And how do we know that the "face" in the water wasn't designed?
    How do you know that anything wasn't designed?

    I think this was covered with Nando one time.
    I mentioned the tradition of throwing salt grains
    over your shoulder for luck, is how the salt falls
    designed? And he's like, yes it is.


    That meaning implies all things are designed, and so uselessly makes
    no distinctions.

    However, I give Kalkidas the opportunity to speak for himself. That
    he chooses to not answer my challenges says more about Kalkidas than I
    ever could.

    --
    You're entitled to your own opinions.
    You're not entitled to your own facts.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Fri Mar 3 09:10:26 2023
    On Thu, 02 Mar 2023 18:07:35 -0700, the following appeared
    in talk.origins, posted by Bob Casanova <nospam@buzz.off>:

    On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 07:41:37 -0700, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by Kalkidas <eat@joes.pub>:

    On 2/28/2023 3:01 PM, Burkhard wrote:
    that topic comes up regularly - Mount Rushmore is often used by creationists as an example of something we just have to see to know it was designed - and then we see this...
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-64797807


    And how do we know that the "face" in the water wasn't designed?

    "Designed" being equal to "photoshopped"? Without access to
    the raw file we don't. Was there some point you wished to
    make?

    And as usual, Kalki runs away.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)