One can derive that, if one makes a variety of assumptions that aren't necessarily specified in the text. For example, they could have been measuring the inner circumference of the vat, but the outer diameter. (Obviously, with Bronze Age technology, the thickness of the vat wall is not insignificant.)
I've seen another source that claims that the average vat in that culture had a flared lip, so measuring the diameter across the lip, but the circumference around the main body of the vat, would have gotten them measurements that don't match up.
And then there's your other point, that they're probably just rounding the numbers. I mean, it's not like they intended to publish their findings in some kind of peer-reviewed forum, and standards for journalistic accuracy back then were pretty slack.
One of the only things I find at all respectable about Answers In Genesis is that they maintain a list of "arguments we wish Creationists would stop using" (with the subtext being "because they suck so hard and make us all look bad"). If pro-science folks had such a list — a list of "arguments we shouldn't use against Creationists, because they're crappy arguments and we can do so much better" — I'd nominate the "the Bible says pi equals 3.0!" argument for a high place on the list.
[Edit: Realized I was talking to the person I was referencing, edited first sentence of para 3 accordingly. Oopsy.]
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-07-14 01:46 am (UTC)I've seen another source that claims that the average vat in that culture had a flared lip, so measuring the diameter across the lip, but the circumference around the main body of the vat, would have gotten them measurements that don't match up.
And then there's your other point, that they're probably just rounding the numbers. I mean, it's not like they intended to publish their findings in some kind of peer-reviewed forum, and standards for journalistic accuracy back then were pretty slack.
One of the only things I find at all respectable about Answers In Genesis is that they maintain a list of "arguments we wish Creationists would stop using" (with the subtext being "because they suck so hard and make us all look bad"). If pro-science folks had such a list — a list of "arguments we shouldn't use against Creationists, because they're crappy arguments and we can do so much better" — I'd nominate the "the Bible says pi equals 3.0!" argument for a high place on the list.
[Edit: Realized I was talking to the person I was referencing, edited first sentence of para 3 accordingly. Oopsy.]