Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-02-2016, 04:30 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(02-02-2016 04:23 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(02-02-2016 04:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  As has been pointed out, you do not understand infinity. Your "or otherwise" is quite simply wrong.

I guess it is asking too much for you to explain why I "do not understand infinity", and why my "otherwise" is quite simply wrong. I guess because such a response will require more than two fuckin' sentences.

See below for your answer.

Quote:
(02-02-2016 04:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  Completed infinities (actual infinities) abound in mathematics.

Um, please explain why my syllogism is logically false.

As I pointed out, your assumptions are false, therefor your syllogism is unsound.

Quote:
(02-02-2016 04:14 PM)Chas Wrote:  You make grandiose claims about things of which you are actually ignorant.

I didn't think so. Tell me how my syllogism is logically false, Chas. If you can't do that, then just stfu, will ya??

I just told you why, but you are too fucking stupid to understand that.

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
02-02-2016, 04:41 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(02-02-2016 04:06 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  1. An actual infinite amount of discrete things cannot be "possessed" in reality (or otherwise).
2. An actual infinite amount of discrete points cannot be traversed in reality (or otherwise).
3. Therefore, an actual infinite amount of things cannot exist in reality (or otherwise).

Another non sequitur. Thanks for demonstrating you have not a clue what you're pretending to be able discuss.

(02-02-2016 04:06 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Now, take a look at #1 and #2 above. Those premises are true, so the conclusion that follows in #3 is true. There is just simply NOTHING you can do about it but bitch, cry, and complain. You are hopeless against the truth.

You have neither demonstrated or proven any of your stupid assertions.


(02-02-2016 01:03 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  You can't claim to base your "proofs" on mathematics when you clearly fail to understand mathematics.

But he does know mathemathics. Thumbsup

Tell your Jebus the junior varsity (you COTW) has failed miserably. Has he no one who is up to this ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
02-02-2016, 04:48 PM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2016 04:52 PM by ClydeLee.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(02-02-2016 04:17 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(02-02-2016 12:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  You think things in philosophy are proven?

Depending on the syllogism.

(02-02-2016 12:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  That's a horrible miscalculated concept, parts of philosophy constantly are diametrically opposed.

I used philosophy as a tool, integrating it with a specific argument that I use.

(02-02-2016 12:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Which element there is proven when some say induction is accurate and other philosophical truths explain induction being flawed via the concepts of how things in the future may change unexpectedly.

Unjustified, and over-analyzed.

(02-02-2016 12:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  This is the second time in other posts you seem to posit you think I think X particular things without having a clue what that is. So no, I wouldn't be flawed in thinking some only science is pure in this way but not when theism is involved scenario. Science isn't a certain proof in any case, that's part of it's charm is that it doesn't even need to claim to be. It's theists who claim to have actual certain knowledge like you are saying you think science proves for your flawed assertions. You actually stopped responding to those other posts for some reason too, because it's silly when you just assume things about people without any context to why you would generalize them in such a way.

Babble.

(02-02-2016 12:45 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  You understanding of these points you brought up is just wrong anyway, the 2nd law of thermodynamics directly isn't applied to any possible system or scenario, that's a significant part of the concept to it.

I disagree.

Wow nice troll job. Literally complain for multiple posts about Chas doing something then do these exact actions yourself. Well done.

So why is it you disagree about that about thermodynamics. Exactly under what and whose determination? What about the 2nd law of Thermodynamics and what particular understanding of it makes you think it applies universally to all scenarios? Pointing this out because this is not the typical actual understanding of the 2nd law of thermodynamics so I am curious why you think that understanding is wrong. What is your basis for that?

If you think induction is overblown, what do you constitute as the qualification for knowing something? How do you claim something is good enough known to be proven vs asserted? The study of induction goes a long way to help the concept of studying how and when we can say we actually "know" something. What do you use as a base for how you know something is proven if not this philosophical position? That's the point of skepticism is to search for a baseline and demonstrate if this passes a threshold for knowledge.. where is your base for a threshold for when you anoint it? What made you proclaim your statements are PROVEN? What specific guidelines or are you just winging out claims like others have proclaimed you are?

Your claim the premises 1 & 2 are true is clarified by what SPECIFICALLY. What SPECIFICALLY makes you proclaim it is KNOWN to be true that everything begins to exist has a cause & that the universe began to exist. Where are these shown to be known and true premises? Based on whats specific claims? where is it known how everything came to be exactly and how everything began to be caused exactly. What is the exact basis? Not just a moronic answer of "science" like a teenage blogger would approve of. An actual response is what is being asked about if you're attempting to say this premise is actually proven true.

By the way, in case you're just too socially stalled to have learned this by years of this behavior. If you don't care for a response manner you don't hamper on about it for 5 posts if you're honestly here to talk about an issue you think is legit... that's what trolls do, that's what deflecting does. You could easily ignore and hamper on your point without spending time to just post responses to responses saying they're poor responses. That's how you demonstrate legitimate idea spreading.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2016, 04:51 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(02-02-2016 04:06 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(02-02-2016 01:03 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  In all your posts on this forum, you have never shown any evidence of possessing the slightest understanding of the mathematics of infinity. That was my main point, and I stand by it.

1. An actual infinite amount of discrete things cannot be "possessed" in reality (or otherwise).
2. An actual infinite amount of discrete points cannot be traversed in reality (or otherwise).
3. Therefore, an actual infinite amount of things cannot exist in reality (or otherwise).

Who says that real time and space consist of discrete things?

And what do any of your points have to do with mathematics? In mathematics, infinity is tricky to deal with until you master the techniques, but once you do, it's no problem at all. Mathematicians have no difficulty dealing with infinite expanses of time and/or space, infinite numbers of dimensions, or even infinite collections of "discrete" things (like, for example, the integers).

You sound like you never got past Zeno's paradoxes. But Zeno himself knew that the paradoxes were inherently artificial -- i.e., he knew that motion is indeed possible, and that Achilles does indeed catch up to the tortoise. The distance between any 2 points A and B can be divided into an infinite number of intervals or points, yet it is no problem at all to traverse that distance in a finite time. Take a calculus course some time. Among other things, it is infinitely more interesting than trying to prove the existence of imaginary people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
02-02-2016, 04:54 PM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2016 05:06 PM by Chas.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(02-02-2016 04:12 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(02-02-2016 03:41 PM)Chas Wrote:  So? What's your point?

No point at all, Chas. Just run along and play somewhere. I am not responding to any more of your "two sentence" nonsense. I will rather waste my energy on posts that, although they may consist of utter nonsense...at least the effort was there.

You, on the other hand, are posting nonsense, but WITHOUT the effort...which is what I am refusing to entertain any longer.

You think it nonsense because you are too dim to grasp it. Drinking Beverage

Pro tip: No one but you thinks the responses to you are nonsense. You are all alone.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
02-02-2016, 04:59 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
No one actually knows (at this point) what dark energy and dark matter are, and what properties they have. They comprise 94 % of this universe. No one can claim "all things" do or have any property, or require anything at this point. Kalam is not only wrong, but premature.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-02-2016, 07:03 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(02-02-2016 04:51 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Who says that real time and space consist of discrete things?

I will not entertain such a foolish question.

(02-02-2016 04:51 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  And what do any of your points have to do with mathematics?

Because it deals with...math. And the last I checked, when you deal with math, you are dealing with mathematics.

(02-02-2016 04:51 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  In mathematics, infinity is tricky to deal with until you master the techniques, but once you do, it's no problem at all. Mathematicians have no difficulty dealing with infinite expanses of time and/or space, infinite numbers of dimensions, or even infinite collections of "discrete" things (like, for example, the integers).

That is stuff you do on paper. It is all theoretical. Please explain to me what is the number prior to infinity? If you can't give me the number that is prior to infinity, you've just made my point for me.

(02-02-2016 04:51 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  You sound like you never got past Zeno's paradoxes. But Zeno himself knew that the paradoxes were inherently artificial -- i.e., he knew that motion is indeed possible, and that Achilles does indeed catch up to the tortoise. The distance between any 2 points A and B can be divided into an infinite number of intervals or points, yet it is no problem at all to traverse that distance in a finite time.

Look, either you can traverse an ACTUAL infinite number of things, or you can't. Plain and simple. If there are an infinite number of intervals between A and B, and if you tried to traverse each point in between A and B, you would never reach B if you started from A.

If the past is eternal, that would mean that for each event that comes to pass, there were an infinite amount of events which preceded it. So that would mean that for us to "arrive" at today, an infinite number of days preceded it....so we've basically traversed infinity.

But that is impossible, because if you go back in time the EQUAL number of days backwards that it took to arrive forward, what day would you stop at??? You wouldn't be able to stop at any day, would you? Well, if you can't reach equal intervals going BACKWARDS...then how in the hell would you ever reach any discrete day moving FORWARD.

You can only arrive at "today" if there was a beginning reference point...that is EXACTLY why we can only go back to 13.7 billion years when time began.

(02-02-2016 04:51 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Take a calculus course some time. Among other things, it is infinitely more interesting than trying to prove the existence of imaginary people.

Not even calculus can save you, pimp. That is one thing that mathematics cannot solve....and that is philosophical problems.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2016, 07:06 PM (This post was last modified: 02-02-2016 07:19 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(01-02-2016 03:06 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  My arguments prove beyond any reasonable doubt that a transcendent First Cause is necessary. Now, if the POE proves theism false, then my arguments for a First Cause should therefore falter. But do they? No, they don't.

You misunderstand Aristotle.

(01-02-2016 03:38 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause
2. The universe began to exist
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause

And you've never read Hume.

(02-02-2016 07:03 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  That is stuff you do on paper. It is all theoretical. Please explain to me what is the number prior to infinity? If you can't give me the number that is prior to infinity, you've just made my point for me.

Was the point you were making is that you lack an elementary understanding of basic mathematics? 'Cause that's what you just did. Not the first time either. You should probably just avoid any discussion of mathematics because your ignorance undermines your arguments.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
02-02-2016, 07:07 PM
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
(02-02-2016 07:03 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  I will not entertain such a foolish question.

What that means is, he hasn't a fucking clue how to even begin to address it.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 08:46 AM (This post was last modified: 03-02-2016 09:06 AM by true scotsman.)
RE: Who Created The Supernatual Realm.
I've got about 5 minutes to post this morning so I want to get this in. I'll deal with the rest of your comments as time is available.
(01-02-2016 11:58 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(01-02-2016 10:27 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  What it proves is that the claims of theism can not be true.

No it doesn't. If it does, then provide the independent evidence against any of the theistic arguments that I am advocating for...

Kalam
Ontological
Consciousness
Resurrection
Origins of life
Origins of language

I have provided evidence. The primacy of existence is all the evidence we need. We deal with reality every waking moment of every day and we can observe the relationship between our consciousness and the things we are aware of. Every moment of every day attests to the fact that the objects of consciousness have primacy. It's not just Humans who have this relationship with reality, its every form of consciousness that we can observe. So yes there is plenty of evidence against God being real. I even proved to you that truth rests exclusively on the primacy of existence, logic also rests on the primacy of existence, and you conceded that argument with your statement that the facts of reality are not dependent on consciousness. You even put the "not" in all caps for emphasis. So not only have I brought irrefutable evidence to bear I've also pointed to major fallacies in those arguments. They have been thoroughly refuted.

If you think that the primacy of existence is no problem for these arguments, is this true because you want it to be true? Be very careful in answering.
(01-02-2016 11:58 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Actually, I hold that physical existence depends on the will and consciousness of a necessarily existence and necessarily conscious entity.

When I said the "facts of reality is independent of consciousness", my point was even if there was absolutely NOTHING that existed, this "nothingness" would be reality, and it would be reality regardless of whether there are minds to conceive it.
If you hold that "physical existence depends on the will and consciousness of a necessarily[sic] existence and necessarily conscious entity" and that "facts of reality is[sic] independent of consciousness, then this could only mean that "physical existence" isn't a fact.
(01-02-2016 11:58 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Here is the bottomline; existence is necessary. But physical existence is contingent.

Does physical existence exist? If it does then it is part of existence as a whole and is therefore necessary. It's so wonderful to have one more written record of the absolute intellectual bankruptcy of Christianity. You are just piling on the evidence that the Christian devotional program stunts the mind.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like true scotsman's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: