And the link for the full video on YouTube: https://youtu.be/yeCBpO7pSRM
TLDR
The main issues are:
ignoring priors because there's no prior probability in their calculation, so they really aren't doing Bayes
inconsistent use of priors -- when they address naturalistic alternatives they say, this is implausible -- so they do consider priors, but only when it suits them
they don't support the claim that their preferred model (e.g. Yahweh raised Jesus from the dead) actually produces the evidence with the high likelihood
they don't seriously consider alternatives, either natural or supernatural
they don't motivate their numbers with comparable rare events, or they would have seen that their calculation of an odds ratio of 1044 is ridiculous
they uncritically take the claims in the New Testament as the actual data we have, as opposed to the fact that what we have are ancient texts that contain those claims
an uncritical view of New Testament documents, and an unprofessional response to traditional scholarship
they don't even seem to think about why something would be explained by their preferred resurrection hypothesis. It's just assumed that everything is explained. And then they ask, how do you, skeptic, explain this?
they make up claims with no supporting citations (especially with respect to how new communities form and how hallucinations work)
they don't make the very easy step of looking at what's actually happening in the world with religious people and actually getting some data, getting some background knowledge about how people actually function
Popular Posts
Gravitational Attraction
What would happen if two people out in space a few meters apart, abandoned by their spacecraft, decided to wait until gravity pulled them together? My initial thought was that …
A Simple Physics Problem Gets Messy
A physics problem from a practice AP test came to my attention, when my daughter was in AP physics this past spring. I went over her solutions when she did …
Skepticism and Dubious Medical Procedures
In my discussion with Jonathan McLatchie on the Still Unbelievable podcast, I said that there hasn’t been a verified miracle claim even since Hume’s essay on miracles. Here I look into the papers he references in response.
Get in touch
What problems are you interested in? How can I help?