No Evidence Vs Evidence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-05-2015, 12:14 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
Ok, I'll bite... so here are my thoughts...

Anything that is objectively observable could be used as evidence for something.

The "something" is usually a preliminary hypothesis or set of hypotheses formed to explain some phenomenon, event or thing. Most of these hypotheses are based on similarity to previously encountered scenarios and the probability that the new thing is probably a result of the same basic circumstances as the previous things. This is really just to save time and energy. However, we then evaluate the available evidence to determine if it: a) supports the hypothesis, b) negates the hypothesis, or c) neither supports nor negates the hypothesis.

It is possible that multiple hypotheses attempting to explain the same event may be supported by the available evidence. In this case, we must determine if one hypothesis is significantly more probable that the other or if there is significantly more evidence to support one over the other.

Also, depending on the "something" and the implications of accepting a hypothesis as the agreed upon explanation for the phenomenon, we may at times require more evidence than other times. For example, if we have someone on trial for a murder, we require there to be enough evidence to convince jurors of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. In other cases, like determining which of your two kids spilled the milk and didn't clean it up, you may rely on a lot less evidence. While you may end up convicting your child unfairly for something that the cat actually did, the consquences of being wrong is not worth the time and energy required to investigate and evaluate the evidence.

I just wanted to let you know that I love you even though you aren't naked right now. Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 12:16 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
Thread moved to A&T. This isn't a scientific discussion, but a theological one.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
06-05-2015, 12:18 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 12:12 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 12:06 PM)pablo Wrote:  I'm sure you've heard that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. As your claims escalate in absurdity, my requirements for evidence of these claims also escalates.

Extraordinary claims don't require extraordinary evidence, except for you. If someone accepted less than extraordinary evidence to believe something you'd consider extraordinary, it's just to each his own.

In fact the very notion of what is and what isn't extraordinary is subjective, a qualitative value.

I told you I'm not going into absolute truths. Next you'll be asking me how we can 'know'anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 12:20 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 12:11 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  How did you determine (aside from just writing it that way) did you conclude there was in fact a dead body?

I don't know, I just started the hypothetical question, with the hypothetical body already being dead as a given.

Perhaps I concluded just by looking at the body, appearing as if it wasn't breathing, pale bluish skin that it was dead. Perhaps I touched it, and it was cold to the touch, and didn't feel a pulse, and drew the same conclusion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 12:25 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
IMO - the reason tommy boy keeps throwing around these vague questions and thought experiments is only to help him validate his very own special world view. He has stated that he just "does not know how to not believe" what he does, and it does not align with mainstream christianity, so this oh so special version of god has to get some buy in for him to feel he is right.

This flake is quite confused and scared of why he cannot stop believing in imaginary friends. Or maybe he lost his meds or something?

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 12:25 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 12:20 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 12:11 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  How did you determine (aside from just writing it that way) did you conclude there was in fact a dead body?

I don't know, I just started the hypothetical question, with the hypothetical body already being dead as a given.

Perhaps I concluded just by looking at the body, appearing as if it wasn't breathing, pale bluish skin that it was dead. Perhaps I touched it, and it was cold to the touch, and didn't feel a pulse, and drew the same conclusion.

Dead bodies are actually a dull grayish color. Your hypothetical 'dead body' may in fact just be someone who is not yet dead but stopped breathing and passed out from lack of oxygen. Indicated by the blue coloring.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 12:29 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
(06-05-2015 12:25 PM)pablo Wrote:  
(06-05-2015 12:20 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  I don't know, I just started the hypothetical question, with the hypothetical body already being dead as a given.

Perhaps I concluded just by looking at the body, appearing as if it wasn't breathing, pale bluish skin that it was dead. Perhaps I touched it, and it was cold to the touch, and didn't feel a pulse, and drew the same conclusion.

Dead bodies are actually a dull grayish color. Your hypothetical 'dead body' may in fact just be someone who is not yet dead but stopped breathing and passed out from lack of oxygen. Indicated by the blue coloring.

Yep, I am wondering if he tested for any brain activity. Tom, why didn't you attempt CPR???

I just wanted to let you know that I love you even though you aren't naked right now. Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TurkeyBurner's post
06-05-2015, 12:32 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
Actually we should ask Tommy boy what he gone and done to this poor person. Hey tommy, did you run this person over with your car because he was wearing an atheist shirt?

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Timber1025's post
06-05-2015, 12:35 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
Maybe this person was knocked unconscious, and nearly strangled to death by Phil Robertson before you arrived on the scene.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-05-2015, 12:42 PM
RE: No Evidence Vs Evidence
Wait, likely stoned to death for cleaning his gutters on the sabbath. No, maybe he/she was someone's slave that was beaten just a bit too much. Then again, most likely smited by god for having a hardened heart or some bullshit reason like that - yeah that is it, just one of the miliions of hits put out by the big dog.

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: