Sklansky's Christian/Math Challenge

[blah_blah]

[ QUOTE ]


I can only pity the students of Princeton, because after only a cursory glance at the web site of my alma mater, the University of Kansas, offers both a B.A. and a B.S. in mathematics.

I can only pity the Princeton folk who don't have that additional option.

[/ QUOTE ]

the distinction between a B.A and a B.Sc is more or less meaningless. the distinction between a university that is barely among the top 100 universities in the US at best and one that is at worst among the top 3 is meaningful.

do you see why

[felson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Challenge still stands. You have to believe that you have NO chance of going to heaven unless you are sure that Jesus is the son of God but are almost certain to go to heaven if you do believe that. (This eliminates all Catholics and most Christians and Ken Jennings as well.)

50K bet on the math SAT taken in half the allotted time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You withdrew this a long time ago. Do you honestly not remember?

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember. But I withdrew it only because it was stirring up cans of worms about polygraphs and my motive for it was misunderstood. Not because there was an actual taker I was trying to avoid.

[/ QUOTE ]

So we agree that you lied! Good.

Anyway, it sucks that the archives are broken, b/c you admitted that you made the challenge hoping that some headstrong B+ student would challenge you while hoping that a 720 would be good enough. When I said that no one should step up unless they expected an 800, you complained that I ruined your fun.

If you had any balls you would submit to an IMO/Putnam-type metric, or revise the challenge to pay to scores of 780 or more (or even demand an 800). The reason that you won't, is because you know that you have the safety net of your likely 800 score. And this way, you can continue to mouth off, making yourself look credible to people who don't know any better.

[/ QUOTE ]

You still don't get it. This wasn't about me. The SAT challenge was just a publicity stunt to make a point. The actual point there is no way I can prove. But I will phrase it thusly:

Although very few people achieve it, I would think that perhaps five pecent of people could, if their life depended on it, obtain a Phd in physics from Cal Tech. But among evangelicals I would expect that perhaps one in a thousand could. Even if someone was holding a gun to their child's head.

[/ QUOTE ]

You describe your 50k challenge as a "publicity stunt." Is that your way of conceding all my points? Because you haven't answered any of them.

As for the point that I don't "get," you may allege anything that you like. As you said, it's unprovable anyway.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
DS... have you taken into consideration the number of evangelicals that are born gifted.. but as described in earlier posts "were brain washed into their religion" or do you think the majority of these individuals took a critical look at their beleifs and revaluated their beliefs...??

also..

[ QUOTE ]

I look at it this way.

If Sklansky is correct and there is was no Jesus who died for OUR sins, then oh well, he was correct and nothing happens after he dies.

But if Sklansky is incorrect about this, then he is going to hell.


[/ QUOTE ]

whats this philosphy called.. i forget

[/ QUOTE ]

Its called being a moron or at least not knowing anyone with enough respect for you to tell you that Pascal's Wager is retarded.

[Crane]

[ QUOTE ]

Does anyone know if he previously posted any justification about why he was backing out on a very clear wager that he had offered?

[/ QUOTE ]

[felson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Does anyone know if he previously posted any justification about why he was backing out on a very clear wager that he had offered?

[/ QUOTE ]



[/ QUOTE ]

sklansky:

[ QUOTE ]

"No More Takers on 50K Challenge Accepted "

Anybody who has posted and anybody whose name has already been mentioned is still eligible. But not anybody new. Because at this point anybody else who accepted would be a big favorite to score an 800...

When the challenge first went up I hoped somebody would think 770 would make him the favorite. With that possibility gone I'm left with the exact opposite of what I hope to achieve. A match with an exquisitely rare fundamentalist that will end in a result that seems to contradict my premise. Even though it doesn't.


[/ QUOTE ]

later in the thread, he says:
[ QUOTE ]

Actually Felson you screwed up the chance to prove things one way or another by scaring off everybody. Without your post, many who felt they were decent fravorites to score 800 would have accepted. Now we will never know how many such people there were.


[/ QUOTE ]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1

[studmuffin]

[ QUOTE ]


He has to also believe that believers go to heaven automatically.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have now excluded 100% of Christians. Belief and salvation are two completely different thing. It's not like the devil is an athiest. You really don't have the foggiest idea what Christianity is.

[IronUnkind]

[ QUOTE ]
Thus very smart people are extrmely unlikely to believe such drivel.

[/ QUOTE ]

Their lack of absolute certainty (or even "near" certainty) is not tantamount to an admission that such a belief is "drivel."

[bobbyi]

Keep in mind that as long as you are sufficiently good at math, the lie detector part is a freeroll since DS is paying and you might beat it.

[dogmeat]

Was David simply making a point with his challenge? Something along the lines of:

Serious mathematic academians believe in science, logic and proof, and that leaves out people who believe in heaven and hell?

Does a person who has deep enough religious beliefs to believe in heaven and hell also possess the ability to beat him at his math forte (even if it is something most people forget about after turning 20 years old)?

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[Maple Leafs]

If you saw David's challenge for a heads-up match with Brandi (with 6-5 edge for him, and ridiculous blind structure), there's clearly a pattern here.

First, make offer that on the surface seems like a pretty solid "put up or shut up" challenge. Then, if in danger of losing, start adding qualifications and new rules until you're a big enough favorite and/or there's nobody left who qualifies for the challenge.

So basically it's "I bet that, given ten pitches in the strike zone, I can hit a home run off you. By the way, you have to be standing at second base when you make the pitch, the fences will be fifteen feet away from me, and you have to have lost both your arms in a WWII battle. Any takers?"