Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-08-2015, 01:59 PM
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(29-08-2015 12:55 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(29-08-2015 11:03 AM)Anjele Wrote:  I am not the troll here.

He's just butthurt 'cos he is clearly seen for what he is. So he attempts to pretend that he's been wronged. He's maybe managed to convince one person - himself. Maybe.

But he has to keep repeating it to even convince himself. Fake it till you make it I suppose.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
29-08-2015, 11:26 PM
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(28-08-2015 11:49 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Hugh Everett's many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics would explain our observations of effects that do not have local causes. However I find God to be more plausible than the idea that reality is continuously branching off into sub realities.
Evidence for the existence of at least one reality? Overwhelming.
Evidence for the existence of a single god? Not a shred.

One of those is more plausible then the other, but it's not the one in your presuppositions corner. You have failed to demonstrate that a god is even possible let alone plausible and [i][i]even less so[/i][/i] that he is the more plausible of the two ideas.

Your just regurgitating your talking points after you are done wrapping them around the news science, a thing the religious have been doing for centuries.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
30-08-2015, 12:49 AM
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(29-08-2015 10:41 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Yes, because it fits your preconceived notions. As I said, presupposition.

It's nice that you have these just-so feelings. Great. Have a cookie. But if you want to convince anyone else that your beliefs merit consideration, you'll need to show why.

If Many Worlds and God are the only two explanations and I make no presuppositions, then I should apply the principle of indifference and weight each equally. That would mean there is a 50% chance God is the explanation for the observed effects without causes and there is a 50% Many Worlds is the explanation for the observed effects without causes. This means there is at least a 50% chance that God exist.

However If I have no presuppositions, I have to conclude that it is much more likely than 50% that God exists. Why? Because Many Worlds does not preclude God's existence. If I make no presuppositions, as you say I should, then when Many Worlds is correct, 50% or the time God is responsible for those Many Worlds and 50% of the time He isn't.

Do the math. Making no presuppositions, as you want me to do, leads to the conclusion that there is a 75% chance the God exists.

Of course you won't accept that because your world view is based entirely upon the presupposition that God doesn't exist.

(29-08-2015 10:41 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  In a discussion where you're pointing to theorems and what-not, a slinky equivocation to a colloquialism is dishonest. Maintain the same standards throughout.

And what I was doing there was demonstrating your distaste for admitting error. Thanks for obliging.

I'll be happy to admit that I was technically wrong when I said the world was a sphere. I don't ever expect that you will admit to being a nit however.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2015, 12:52 AM
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(29-08-2015 11:26 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Evidence for the existence of at least one reality? Overwhelming.

By definition there is only one reality. It maybe broken into sub realities. You need to show there is at least one sub reality before you would have any evidence of Many Worlds.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2015, 02:33 AM (This post was last modified: 30-08-2015 04:53 AM by Matrim Cauthon.)
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(05-08-2015 11:54 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I forgive you for calling me a passive-aggressive cunt.
I have forgiven 90 unprovoked insults directed at me in this forum.

What do you mean by, 'unprovoked'? LOL If all I need to say is "I didn't deserve that" to justify someone's reaction as 'unprovoked' - this is about to be an awesome next few hours...

Learned as a child - outside a courtroom, not having legally convictable evidence of provocation, doesn't mean flaming shit - least of all whether or not it can be effectively identified (or called out) without it.

Edit: I.e., sometimes just sitting on the wrong side of the stadium will do it. Further, it's the beholder's perception that counts - not yours, else offensive people would just say, "nope, that wasn't offensive".

While we're at it, putting hands over your eyes doesn't make you invisible either.

“Narg know people come back somtimes. Narg wait. You no need sword. Put sword down. Narg no hurt.” – Narg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Matrim Cauthon's post
30-08-2015, 10:49 AM (This post was last modified: 30-08-2015 12:07 PM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(30-08-2015 12:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  If Many Worlds and God are the only two explanations and I make no presuppositions, then I should apply the principle of indifference and weight each equally.

Well, there's a false-dichotomy right there.

(30-08-2015 12:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  That would mean there is a 50% chance God is the explanation for the observed effects without causes and there is a 50% Many Worlds is the explanation for the observed effects without causes. This means there is at least a 50% chance that God exist.

No, it wouldn't. Simply because there are only two explanations doesn't mean that both explanations are equally likely. For instance, if someone stole the fish tacos off your cafeteria tray at school, it could have been the kid sitting next to you, or it could have been a hungry polar bear that wandered down from the Arctic searching for food.

This is sloppy thinking on your part.

(30-08-2015 12:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  However If I have no presuppositions, I have to conclude that it is much more likely than 50% that God exists. Why? Because Many Worlds does not preclude God's existence. If I make no presuppositions, as you say I should, then when Many Worlds is correct, 50% or the time God is responsible for those Many Worlds and 50% of the time He isn't.

No. You see, the likelihood of your god's existence has absolutely nothing to do with any other hypothesis, and that is determined only by weighing actual evidence. Theorizing a god into existence is stupid and should be beneath you.

(30-08-2015 12:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Do the math. Making no presuppositions, as you want me to do, leads to the conclusion that there is a 75% chance the God exists.

Your math is fatally undermined by the flaw pointed out above, that in a binary situation both alternatives are necessarily of equal probability. They aren't.

(30-08-2015 12:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Of course you won't accept that because your world view is based entirely upon the presupposition that God doesn't exist.

Well, you're wrrong about that, but that's okay. You don't know me and should therefore be expected to be wildly off the mark on occasion.

(30-08-2015 12:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I'll be happy to admit that I was technically wrong when I said the world was a sphere. I don't ever expect that you will admit to being a nit however.

I sure as hell can be pedantic at times ... especially when addressing some guy online who doesn't know half as much as he pretends to. Don't like the comeuppance? Do your fact-checking before you post, and read replies for comprehension rather than argumentation. Not only would you avoid pedantry from the likes of me, you might actually help fashion a useful discussion, rather than shit it up with half-baked thoughts and grandstanding piety.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
30-08-2015, 10:55 AM
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(30-08-2015 12:52 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  By definition there is only one reality. It maybe broken into sub realities. You need to show there is at least one sub reality before you would have any evidence of Many Worlds.

Blink

What? No! I know I have little more than High school education behind me but even I can see that's a bad argument/statement/what ever.

Many worlds theory(Hypothesis?) definitely does NOT need our reality some how,

(30-08-2015 12:52 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  It maybe broken into sub realities.

That isn't how it works.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
30-08-2015, 12:08 PM (This post was last modified: 30-08-2015 12:16 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(30-08-2015 12:49 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  If Many Worlds and God are the only two explanations and I make no presuppositions, then I should apply the principle of indifference and weight each equally. That would mean there is a 50% chance God is the explanation for the observed effects without causes and there is a 50% Many Worlds is the explanation for the observed effects without causes. This means there is at least a 50% chance that God exist.

You do not know how to apply the principle of indifference properly which is not surprising given your limited understanding of statistics and well, just about everything else you pretend to be an expert in. The many worlds interpretation of the multiverse is obviously preferred over the God hypothesis in that it has explanatory powers to understand our observations in a rigorous and rational manner and God has no such thing. God explains nothing and does not help us predict anything. It is effectively useless and irrelevant if not counterproductive and deceptive.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like GirlyMan's post
30-08-2015, 12:15 PM
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(30-08-2015 02:33 AM)Matrim Cauthon Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 11:54 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I forgive you for calling me a passive-aggressive cunt.
I have forgiven 90 unprovoked insults directed at me in this forum.

What do you mean by, 'unprovoked'? LOL If all I need to say is "I didn't deserve that" to justify someone's reaction as 'unprovoked' - this is about to be an awesome next few hours...

Learned as a child - outside a courtroom, not having legally convictable evidence of provocation, doesn't mean flaming shit - least of all whether or not it can be effectively identified (or called out) without it.

Edit: I.e., sometimes just sitting on the wrong side of the stadium will do it. Further, it's the beholder's perception that counts - not yours, else offensive people would just say, "nope, that wasn't offensive".

While we're at it, putting hands over your eyes doesn't make you invisible either.

Heywood has incredibly low self-esteem and comes here for therapy.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
30-08-2015, 12:20 PM
RE: Commentary on Peebo's and Heywood's Comfy Corner
(30-08-2015 12:52 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  By definition there is only one reality.

No there's not. Dude, you only make yourself look silly when you pretend to know shit which you clearly do not.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: