Veritas?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-05-2014, 12:35 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 11:32 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  Wrote stuff here...
Am at work and doing the whole quote thing is just not an option.

"You use it the same way you use it when making inferences about anything that is not immediately accessible by our senses."

Except, as has been pointed out to you, our senses actually kind'a suck.

"Scientists believe black holes exist."

No, I'm pretty sure they now have evidence to go from the original hypothesis to modern theory.

"No scientist has ever seen a black hole directly."

Are you talking about INSIDE the event horizon? There's a lot more going on outside that. Like the accretion disc and plasma jets. I'm also pretty sure they've found said plasma jets, but I'll await any astronomer on the forum to weigh in on that.

"However but believe they exist by observing the effects it produces in objects near its circumference."

I think that's kind of a 'backward' statement. What they've observed would seem to indicate their theory is on the money.

"They look at the data and then through inductive reasoning form hypotheses that attempt to explain the data available."

Again, I do believe the hypothesis came out of Einstein's work. ( Any one know the tale behind the Star Trek episode trumping black hole papers?)

"The hypothesis that best explains the data is then tentatively called a theory."

Yeah, kind of but not.

"Our familiar five senses tell is that we live in a universe that is fine tuned for life."

No, they don't.
"Our senses tell us that the universe came into existence some fifteen billion years ago."

No, they don't.

"In an explosion from a super dense singularity."

No, it wasn't an explosion.

"Our senses tell us that we are creatures with a sense of right and wrong."

No, they don't

"And of what ought or ought not to be."

No, they really don't tell us 'What ought and ought not to be.'

"Our senses tell us that through out history people have had this queer sense that something above and beyond them existed "out there"."

No...a part of our brain is wired to detect patterns. Even when there is nothing actually of meaning within said patterns.

Running from something that might be a predator is an advantage when you're three to four foot tall and naked. Even if/when there is NO predator/meaning to any pattern.

"These observations are just a small sample of the available data."

Well...some of them are more like 'Statements' than 'Data'.

"Now what hypothesis best explains the data?"

The some statements...many of which are shown to be slightly wrong?

How about "Junk in, junk out of the thought experiment"?

Much cheers to all
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2014, 12:35 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 12:28 PM)Charis Wrote:  
Jeremy Wrote:our familiar five senses tell is that we live in a universe that is fine tuned for life.

No, you twit. Our "familiar five senses" tell us squat about a universe beyond seeing sparkly points of light in the night sky. Scientists have made inventions allowing us to reach beyond our familiar five senses, enhancing them (telescopic vision is not exactly one of *my* five senses... is it one of yours, Jeremy?) and leading to some pretty amazing discoveries.

Our five senses show us that we live in environments that are *conducive to* and *permissive of* life... but our environments are still in either constant or intermittent turmoil. Hardly "fine-tuned." Quite nice many times, yes... especially for those of us AT THE TOP OF THE FUCKING FOOD CHAIN.
And that's certain environments on Earth. Not the flipping universe.

No, our "familiar five senses" do not tell us that "we live in a universe that is fine tuned for life."

Ugh.

Dodgy
yes it is.

start here: http://quake.stanford.edu/~bai/finetuning.pdf
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2014, 12:38 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 12:35 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(31-05-2014 11:32 AM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  Wrote stuff here...
Am at work and doing the whole quote thing is just not an option.

"You use it the same way you use it when making inferences about anything that is not immediately accessible by our senses."

Except, as has been pointed out to you, our senses actually kind'a suck.

"Scientists believe black holes exist."

No, I'm pretty sure they now have evidence to go from the original hypothesis to modern theory.

"No scientist has ever seen a black hole directly."

Are you talking about INSIDE the event horizon? There's a lot more going on outside that. Like the accretion disc and plasma jets. I'm also pretty sure they've found said plasma jets, but I'll await any astronomer on the forum to weigh in on that.

"However but believe they exist by observing the effects it produces in objects near its circumference."

I think that's kind of a 'backward' statement. What they've observed would seem to indicate their theory is on the money.

"They look at the data and then through inductive reasoning form hypotheses that attempt to explain the data available."

Again, I do believe the hypothesis came out of Einstein's work. ( Any one know the tale behind the Star Trek episode trumping black hole papers?)

"The hypothesis that best explains the data is then tentatively called a theory."

Yeah, kind of but not.

"Our familiar five senses tell is that we live in a universe that is fine tuned for life."

No, they don't.
"Our senses tell us that the universe came into existence some fifteen billion years ago."

No, they don't.

"In an explosion from a super dense singularity."

No, it wasn't an explosion.

"Our senses tell us that we are creatures with a sense of right and wrong."

No, they don't

"And of what ought or ought not to be."

No, they really don't tell us 'What ought and ought not to be.'

"Our senses tell us that through out history people have had this queer sense that something above and beyond them existed "out there"."

No...a part of our brain is wired to detect patterns. Even when there is nothing actually of meaning within said patterns.

Running from something that might be a predator is an advantage when you're three to four foot tall and naked. Even if/when there is NO predator/meaning to any pattern.

"These observations are just a small sample of the available data."

Well...some of them are more like 'Statements' than 'Data'.

"Now what hypothesis best explains the data?"

The some statements...many of which are shown to be slightly wrong?

How about "Junk in, junk out of the thought experiment"?

Much cheers to all

cheers to you!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2014, 12:39 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 12:09 PM)War Horse Wrote:  
(31-05-2014 12:02 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  too* busy

Quote: i used google translate. i took latin in highschool but forgot most of it. i did not mean to give a precise rendering of the English in Latin. sometimes i get lazy and do not capitalize my words. sometimes i use my cell-phone and just want to get my point across. as long as u understand me i think that is fine.

^^^^^^^^^^^ Really ???? What an asswipe. Clap

Apparently Jerry is allowed to question us about any little word ad nauseum, trying to narrow the definition til it fits on the head of a pin. He, on the other hand can sloppy-spell or mistranslate and it's all good.

All righty then....

We have enough youth. How about looking for the Fountain of Smart?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thinkerbelle's post
31-05-2014, 12:40 PM
RE: Veritas?
And WTF? Our senses tell us that we're creatures with morals? nooooo, they don't. Our "familiar five senses" are shared by most other mammals, and these "familiar five senses" are not "telling" me that we are creatures with a sense of oughts and ought nots. Nor are these "familar five senses" telling us about queer feelings of things "out there."

Sight.
Taste.
Touch.
Smell.
Sound.

You're confusing these senses with other attributes, like perhaps cognitive thought.

A person very dear to me was badly hurt through a misunderstanding and miscommunication. For this, I am sorry, and he knows it. That said, any blaming me for malicious intent is for the birds. I will not wear some scarlet letter, I will not be anybody's whipping girl, and I will not lurk in silence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2014, 12:45 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 12:39 PM)Thinkerbelle Wrote:  
(31-05-2014 12:09 PM)War Horse Wrote:  ^^^^^^^^^^^ Really ???? What an asswipe. Clap

Apparently Jerry is allowed to question us about any little word ad nauseum, trying to narrow the definition til it fits on the head of a pin. He, on the other hand can sloppy-spell or mistranslate and it's all good.

All righty then....

my arguments do not hinge upon precise translations from other languages or precise spelling.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2014, 12:46 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 12:35 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(31-05-2014 12:28 PM)Charis Wrote:  No, you twit. Our "familiar five senses" tell us squat about a universe beyond seeing sparkly points of light in the night sky. Scientists have made inventions allowing us to reach beyond our familiar five senses, enhancing them (telescopic vision is not exactly one of *my* five senses... is it one of yours, Jeremy?) and leading to some pretty amazing discoveries.

Our five senses show us that we live in environments that are *conducive to* and *permissive of* life... but our environments are still in either constant or intermittent turmoil. Hardly "fine-tuned." Quite nice many times, yes... especially for those of us AT THE TOP OF THE FUCKING FOOD CHAIN.
And that's certain environments on Earth. Not the flipping universe.

No, our "familiar five senses" do not tell us that "we live in a universe that is fine tuned for life."

Ugh.

Dodgy
yes it is.

start here: http://quake.stanford.edu/~bai/finetuning.pdf

No, it's not. The 'principle' has the cart before the horse. We are fine-tuned for the universe.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
31-05-2014, 12:46 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 12:35 PM)Jeremy E Walker Wrote:  
(31-05-2014 12:28 PM)Charis Wrote:  No, you twit. Our "familiar five senses" tell us squat about a universe beyond seeing sparkly points of light in the night sky. Scientists have made inventions allowing us to reach beyond our familiar five senses, enhancing them (telescopic vision is not exactly one of *my* five senses... is it one of yours, Jeremy?) and leading to some pretty amazing discoveries.

Our five senses show us that we live in environments that are *conducive to* and *permissive of* life... but our environments are still in either constant or intermittent turmoil. Hardly "fine-tuned." Quite nice many times, yes... especially for those of us AT THE TOP OF THE FUCKING FOOD CHAIN.
And that's certain environments on Earth. Not the flipping universe.

No, our "familiar five senses" do not tell us that "we live in a universe that is fine tuned for life."

Ugh.

Dodgy
yes it is.

start here: http://quake.stanford.edu/~bai/finetuning.pdf

That link starts off by talking about a universe where life is possible, and then starts talking about EARTH. Basically re-stating what I was saying, except mistakenly calling that "fine-tuned for life." No... that would make it, and I repeat, "conducive to or permissive of life."

You can get faulty gears to turn... it's very possible. This doesn't make it fine-tuned. And a rusty gear with a shinier spot on it isn't fine-tuned either. It just has a shiny spot.

A person very dear to me was badly hurt through a misunderstanding and miscommunication. For this, I am sorry, and he knows it. That said, any blaming me for malicious intent is for the birds. I will not wear some scarlet letter, I will not be anybody's whipping girl, and I will not lurk in silence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2014, 12:46 PM
RE: Veritas?
Um.... no to come across snarky? But I was kind of hopeing for more than a pat on the head and 'Thanks'.

Typing all that out on a phone is MURDER!

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2014, 12:47 PM
RE: Veritas?
(31-05-2014 12:40 PM)Charis Wrote:  And WTF? Our senses tell us that we're creatures with morals? nooooo, they don't. Our "familiar five senses" are shared by most other mammals, and these "familiar five senses" are not "telling" me that we are creatures with a sense of oughts and ought nots. Nor are these "familar five senses" telling us about queer feelings of things "out there."

Sight.
Taste.
Touch.
Smell.
Sound.

You're confusing these senses with other attributes, like perhaps cognitive thought.

if you see a husband beating his wife and you ask him why he is doing it and he says she is nothing more than a punching bag, then you see that this is wrong and that he ought not to do it. you hear her cries, you see the blows he gives her.

your senses relay all of this to your brain and you process it and think it is wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: