|
|
Post by Gorn on Aug 3, 2017 7:01:32 GMT -7
When you can demonstrate something unequivocally, I'll accept it. rabid showed that some Scientists from a different time and climate almost 100 years ago acted in an understandable if erroneous way. Since Science is SELF CORRECTING, that Science-violating policy was ultimately overcome and corrected.
So? Big effing deal. If rabid thinks this proves anything, all it shows is that human nature can overcome Scientists who should know and do better. That is already evident in a % of them suspending Scientific principles to go telepathically communicate with invisible magic skydaddy on the weekend.
The reason Scientists get together and present their material to OTHER Scientists is to overcome and eliminate such errors with PROOF. That's why it's superior to philosophy. Philosopher.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2017 8:28:30 GMT -7
Could "Nothing" exist in an Infinite Improbability Field? Not a large amount of nothing, just a finite quantity of nothing...
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Aug 3, 2017 9:12:30 GMT -7
Technically - yes! Since it's an Infinite Improbability Field - anything...or nothing...is possible!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2017 17:33:44 GMT -7
But does an Infinite Improbability field create a Finite Impossibility? That's the crux... you need a Finite Impossibility for even a Nano-Nothing to exist. But once you have a Nano-Nothing, you have an limitless source of energy since the potential difference between any amount of anything and any amount of Nothing is, in fact, infinite.
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Aug 3, 2017 21:06:22 GMT -7
The only answer is .... SPOOOONNN!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 4:22:30 GMT -7
ONCE AGAIN rabid: STOP assigning religious creationist motivations to those who DO NOT HAVE THEM. I did NOT say "creation". I did NOT imply any type of "creator" I did NOT imply belief* of any form. STOP misrepresenting what I say in your terms. , you've been doing exactly that to me since I got on this forum. While I find religion interesting, I do not follow a religion, and have no plans to do so. I do not go to church (I find it inexplicably "creepy"). I have stated to friends that I often find churches symbols of criminal excess. I do not believe in God, or any demi-god. I don't believe that if I pray hard enough, I'll get a gold-plated Mercedes Benz - because I know it won't happen. I have stated all of these things in this forum multiple times, yet I am constantly accused of worshiping God and being the follower of a religion. If you want to bust my balls a little, that's fine. But It never stops. Never. Not even when I agree with you. How 'bout taking it down a notch or two. * - I think this needs to be backed up. Where did I state that I had Religious Belief? I agree with JAFisher44 when he says you have a weird obsession with the word "Belief".. I also agree with him when he states that that you should focus less on semantics and more on concepts. |
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on Aug 4, 2017 17:52:05 GMT -7
How about it drops a notch or two when you STOP posting bullshit and misrepresentations.
The weird obsession with belief is a huge thing for the USA. Check how many times it's a statement in movies. Some hero BELIEVES something. The GOP is going hogwild with the word "belief" to counter Science facts and cast doubt upon agencies, never mind the individual Scientists working at them.
It needs to be crystal clear that Science cannot allow a shred of "belief"; but only facts.
Once that happens in this forum, then I will have nothing to say. Or, there could be a moratorium imposed upon Science, politics, and religion in this sub section. I think it would be a disservice to the ideal GR stood for, but it's not my call to make.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 18:29:05 GMT -7
How about it drops a notch or two when you STOP posting bullshit and misrepresentations. The weird obsession with belief is a huge thing for the USA. Check how many times it's a statement in movies. Some hero BELIEVES something. The GOP is going hogwild with the word " belief" to counter Science facts and cast doubt upon agencies, never mind the individual Scientists working at them. It needs to be crystal clear that Science cannot allow a shred of "belief"; but only facts. Once that happens in this forum, then I will have nothing to say. Or, there could be a moratorium imposed upon Science, politics, and religion in this sub section. I think it would be a disservice to the ideal GR stood for, but it's not my call to make. You evaded the point of my post. That is up there with your "Imply and Deny" tactic. You have, many times, accused me of being religious, and I have asked you to stop. Even other forum members have brought this to your attention. You have no facts in this case. You don't have any facts here. You have no proof that I am a follower of any skydaddy of any description. It is not a fact that I am religious. It is a fact that I am not religious. Despite this, you carry on insisting that I worship the invisible giver of goodies in the sky. If something is factually false, yet you cling to it as truth... what does one call that if not belief?
I offered to leave this thread, remove all of my posts from it, leave you alone in this forum, and never post anything in a thread you created. Gorn , I don't actually seeing us agreeing on anything or getting along, and I am totally tired of having to deal with you on an otherwise interesting forum, so I'll make the following offer: 1. I'll "GFTO" of "your*" thread and delete all of my posts contained therein, if you will do the same in "my" "Even Mo' Global Warming Thread". 2. I will put you back on my ignore list, if you will return the favor. 3. I will refrain from responding to your posts, if you will reciprocate in kind.3a. I will refrain from responding to posts quoted by other members of this forum which I think may have originated form Gorn, if Gorn will do the same for quoted material he thinks may have originated from ironnerd.
3b. I will not mention Gorn in any post, if Gorn will refrain from mentioning ironnerd in any of his posts.4. I will refrain from posting in any thread started by Gorn, if you will refrain from posting in any thread started by ironnerd.Gorn , Can you agree to and abide by the above? JAFisher44 , this is your forum. Do you find this to be an acceptable compromise? You ignored this offer. Gorn, you claim that you want me to stop posting bullshit, when I offer to do exactly that, you ignore the offer. This clearly shows that there is no truth in what you post here. |
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Aug 5, 2017 3:58:52 GMT -7
Are you guys trying to get this part of the forum locked up?
No, what you mock and spuriously claim claim to be entirely without is a huge thing for humanity. Humans believe in many things, it's not ONLY germaine to religion. There is nothing wrong with it. If you want to suppose your life to be free of supposition go ahead. The problem is when you deride and otherwise mock people for expressing a basic aspect of humanity that you don't appreciate. Keep your wonky opinions to yourself or choose to stop insulting people when you express them.
@ironnerd I get your frustration but I don't see what you can accomplish by this. No one will respect a complicated agreement like that. Just ignore him. He said before he would prefer it that way. But now that you've been outright about your atheism for like the 100th time maybe it will let up.
Gorn You aren't "shooting down" "bullshit". Your arguments primarily
1. rail at religion or the merest mention of God or any form of "believe". Other triggers include "faith" and now "creates/creation".
2. Present unsourced Pollyanna opinions about science such as "anti global warming science isn't peer reviewed" that are all too easy to debunk.
3. Act as an authority by citing your college transcripts and grades (that doesn't make you look pathetic at all), opinions from scientist friends and even that genius you dated once.
4. Imply or infer with passive aggressive language, always just short of requiring moderator action, that people who don't share your views on topics are stupid.
5. Constantly act like you are the only authority on any topic from biology to cosmology, Mocking anyone who disagrees with you---even when their presentation appears to be one that you nominally agree with just so you can restate it a different way.
That said I know I have my own problems, and I have unadvisedly responded in kind. But my point is you aren't the only one who can grasp the profundity of science. People should be able to say what they like without your bullshit.
In this thread alone I was amazed at your last post. I cited references in response to your claim that scientists don't change their minds about things when religion is peripherally involved. They did and they still do. I don't see how you can claim that some of those were 100's of years ago but you have already done it and doubled down. Then you admitted to something that you treated as unthinkable when I first presented it, that scientists are fallible human beings prone to vice and prejudice like anyone else. Science may be self correcting but it is harder to correct misinformation when the goal is ideological conformity.
There is more besides that, I was making a larger point re: universe from nothing, forget it. Have you read Krausse's book? If so, do you want to admit what other unproven theory his universe from nothing relies on? Heck even Krausse spent 4 pages on it. Is that admission too inconvenient for this topic? These would be things worth discussing between reasonable people. Not with someone who acts like anyone who disagrees with him is dumb.
If the mod has to lock up this forum that would suck, but it wouldn't solve anything. To post on this forum you have to learn to ignore the bullshit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 5:04:11 GMT -7
ironnerd I get your frustration but I don't see what you can accomplish by this. No one will respect a complicated agreement like that. Just ignore him. He said before he would prefer it that way. But now that you've been outright about your atheism for like the 100th time maybe it will let up. 1. rail at religion or the merest mention of God or any form of "believe". Other triggers include "faith" and now "creates/creation". 2. Present unsourced Pollyanna opinions about science such as "anti global warming science isn't peer reviewed" that are all too easy to debunk. 3. Act as an authority by citing your college transcripts and grades (that doesn't make you look pathetic at all), opinions from scientist friends and even that genius you dated once. 4. Imply or infer with passive aggressive language, always just short of requiring moderator action, that people who don't share your views on topics are stupid. 5. Constantly act like you are the only authority on any topic from biology to cosmology, Mocking anyone who disagrees with you---even when their presentation appears to be one that you nominally agree with just so you can restate it a different way. . I concur. Gorn would never agree to let anything go anyway. He says he dos not do belief, but exhibits every indication that he does, including vociferous denial. He won't let up on his belief that I am devoutly religious, because it's a belief and can never be disproved. I think what really pisses me off is that no one can just shoot the breeze in this forum without Gorn showing up, killing the conversation, and turning it into a trailer park screaming match. He's at least tolerable in the game-dedicated section. But in here, he's just an internet troll. JAFisher44 Perhaps a temporary closure of this section of the forum is the best course of action. It has been essentially rendered useless anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Aug 5, 2017 6:18:34 GMT -7
I don't want the section blocked. I'm going to keep talking about what I want to talk about. This is ridiculous when it's easy to avoid getting into the fight, but hard to ignore the invectives. That's probably why he keeps calling you religious because it gets a reaction. These tactics are as old as the internet, it's not a discussion of any kind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 6:31:17 GMT -7
I don't want to close this part of the forum either. What I do want is to be able to have a conversation with someone without having to send my comments to Gorn for prior approval (or risk the discussion-destroying, and monkey-shit-fight-starting entrance of Gorn). But Gorn trolls these threads looking for ways to remove any enjoyment anyone else may derive from the conversation, so what's the point?
He's already gotten about all the reaction from me he's going to get.
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Aug 5, 2017 14:01:56 GMT -7
Yeah Gorn - you're starting to remind me of this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkqgDoo_eZEYour ego won't allow you to admit to any form of error. Anytime you get called out - you try to turn it around into some kind of false victory. You might need to grow up a bit... |
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on Aug 6, 2017 7:21:20 GMT -7
I did not "ignore" ironnerd's offer, I rejected it, saying I would NOT get out of GW thread, because he was posting bullshit in there, too, that I would not allow to pass. I'm not going back with a fine toothed comb every time he posts lies, (or, generously, gross inaccuracies,) but I'll respond to them quickly. If someone's defending religion, then I'll shoot them down, and assume them to be religious in doing it. That could be an error. I thought ironnerd as religious due his profound ignorance of Science, his erroneous statements and outright fantasies about Paleontology in particular, and especially defense of the religious to continue doing horrible things; ref: www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwGYl-mIbb0&t=1642s That's not trolling. Trolling would be what you pulled after JA removed your posts. Putting the posts right back up and trying to get an angered response is an example of trolling. As I said, I really don't give a damn what you or religious people think of the truth; it's getting posted to counter bullshit, not to provoke a rage response. That's on you guys. rabid, to a lesser extent, does the same things. To correct rabid: 1. I'll attack religious bullshit where it pops up. If you want to defend it, batten down; I'm not stopping voluntarily. "Belief" is not a "trigger", it is a FALSE statement you and ironnerd ascribe to Science. You don't GET to have your bullshit pass, and you don't GET to make it look like a mechanism of a "trailer park screaming match" loss of control. That was ironnerd, never me. 2. [sarcasm]Oh! Of course I should allow peer review being peer DENIALIST review![/sarcasm] There's another reason I thought you both religious. You're apparently Republicans. Aside from the fact that accusing the accuser of exactly what they accuse you of, (i.e., blameshifting) strongly correlates with religion. 3. There's a reason we call them "authorities". They know something. The instant someone with more authority on a subject shows up in here, I'll have nothing to say on a matter they prove. That's why I'm posting alot whenever you guys talk. 4. People don't have to "share my views"; people have to make statements on a topic that is upheld by current knowledge about it. I have no "view" about Sun being fusing H. That's the actual case. When some idiot lectures on the electric universe, I'll shoot him down like the moron he is. 5. When someone posts crap, it gets exposed as crap. When someone posts correct things, I have no comment. (I can't post on every word you or ironnerd says, so some crap does slide by.) When you're posting loads of inaccuracies (to be generous), I'm certainly quite the authority by comparison. Why would I or any Scientist change our minds where religion is involved? It's proven to be utter bullshit, over and over. What mind change do you expect? Big Bang? A case where it easily allowed religion more influence and power in a climate where religion had considerably more power than it does today? I already demonstrated that it was eventually corrected since THAT IS WHAT SCIENCE DOES. Philosopher. __________________________ Back to the main point: theories can't be unproven. There is so much Science evidence for them,we are very confident they are correct, unless we've been grossly misinterpreting the data. Such as Relativity. Gravity. Evolution. Krauss is putting forth an HYPOTHESIS. That means something which has yet to be studied deeply, and profoundly, and over and over, so that we can confidently make it into a theory. ONCE AGAIN; we might not be able to prove Krauss's hypothesis at the moment. It may take decades. It may take centuries. It may take millenia. It may ultimately never be provable. We don't know at the moment, but that doesn't make it "religion". That doesn't make it "belief". That makes it an unproven hypothesis at the moment. Do I have to spoon feed you this stuff? Given Krauss is an accomplished cosmologist and you have so far been nothing other than a philosopher who has put forth an alternative - at best, consistent with - invisible magic skydaddy, I'm quite satisfied and secure to agree with the cosmologist's hypothesis, for the reasons he put forth as well as my own experience with Physics, Organic Chemistry, Maths, Biology, Astronomy, Cosmology, Geology and Statistics; but ultimately because the Universe (to put it in your apparent level of Science understanding) really really really looks like it came from Nothing. I would make the charge of your being a philosopher here, but you appear alot more to be religious; defending a Universe from SOMEthing, despite it several lines of evidence pointing to the opposite. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2017 15:56:30 GMT -7
Sooo... Gorn... B+ in english, A+ in crazy rant?
I mean...WOW
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2017 17:37:04 GMT -7
Agreed @zephram . So since I'm not religious, I must be a Republican (this is my surprised face...). WOW! Just ... WOW! Wrong again Gorn . Wrong again. I told you that in an earlier post when I said I didn't give two fucks for the GOP, but you just don't seem able to accept anything that does not fit into your preconceived notions. Actually your reply in that post was that "I don't know who is GOP in this website"... Right Here in fact: [ LINK] But now you DO know who is GOP in this website. Well, that's interesting. Did the Magical Skydaddy you drag into every conversation whisper that into your ear? C'mon, Gorn. Pick a lane, willya? I don't really know what Gorn 's problem is at this point*, but I do know it is not a problem I can solve. I know from his posts that he misrepresents the truth when it suits him, and that I therefore view nothing he says on this forum as having meaning or substance. His goal is simply to troll me until I get angry again. Again... not going to happen. I'm better than. I forgot that I was, but I remember now. It's so easy to lower yourself to Gorn's level, and I just fell for his baiting. That was my bad, and I apologize to the forum for my behavior. It was really bad (I mean awful!), and it was not intended to insult anyone but Gorn and JAFisher44. Since then, I have chatted a bit with JAFisher44, and find my grievances with him are misplaced. I owe him an apology as well, and he has my respect.
* - he'll say it's me, or republicans, or religious people, or bullshit, but I stopped buying that line a long time ago. |
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Aug 6, 2017 20:12:26 GMT -7
No - his problem requires professional help. Some serious delusions and possibly even a serious phobia (religio-phobia...is that a thing?).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2017 4:44:01 GMT -7
The internet says that Religiophobia is a real thing, but the internet also says Elvis is commanding a fleet of space ships defending Earth from alien invasion... so take it with a grain of salt.  |
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on Aug 12, 2017 6:44:19 GMT -7
Sooo... zephram... deleted member....and no knowledge of what a "crazy rant" actually is?
I mean...WOW
Sooo...ironnerd isn't a GOP nor religious....yet he defends them all the time. Or perhaps, he just seems to do it out of retaliation for the things I say. And I require professional help? hahahahaha.
I'm not interested at all in trolling you, ironnerd. ONCE AGAIN, when you post bullshit about Science that I can weigh in on, you can rest assured I will weigh in on it.
ONCE AGAIN, that's why I don't post in the aviation thread. You can get away with all kinds of aviation bullshit in there, if that's your pleasure. Seeing as you are employed in the industry, I would suppose you could weigh in on those threads, but you aren't qualified to weigh in on the Science and especially its disproof of religious precepts that started everything.
It's a particularly self-centered view that assumes people's actions are designed towards yourself. That is common with the religious worldview, which thinks everything is designed with YOU in mind and relates directly to YOU. That's why I thought you were religious; you act exactly like them. The Universe itself was mere prelude to YOU and now YOU'RE here, enjoying it all and dealing with the assholes put in YOUR way who are here merely to confound YOU and to torment and provoke YOU. And I require professional help? heh. Not that it's my business at all, but I pity any family that has to deal with that level of childish rage even rarely.
Please list the delusions you think I'm afflicted with, starcruiser. I have no phobia about religion, I do not fear it. I think it is the worst tool of mankind in the modern world. It was adaptive and very useful for leaders millenia ago in the Cu and Fe ages, but it was no longer needed by the time the Greeks were discovering Science principles. We've had it for over 2000 years too long. You can be damn sure I'll speak out against it. That doesn't make it a phobia nor irrational, nor ranting. So try painting your labels somewhere else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2017 12:42:09 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on Aug 14, 2017 10:37:43 GMT -7
I'm not into pretending. That would be a fantasy world I don't engage in; I don't need to stroke my own ego. The fantasy escapism of Trek and some D&D is enough for me.
This can be the last post, if JA likes.
I restate my point, which has yet to be overturned in any way: The Universe, appearing to billionth decimal place precision, appears very much to be literally Nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Aug 14, 2017 18:30:50 GMT -7
Hmm - does that indicate that in fact...you do not exist? For the Universe to be literally nothing - then we would not exist either, nor the Earth or the Sun or any of those little bright spots up in the sky. Is that like saying that you haven't done something for "literally" a million years?  |
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Aug 14, 2017 19:20:13 GMT -7
There you go Jumping to claim "victory" and trying to get the thread locked again. I haven't been posting, there's no point arguing with dishonest people.
That whole post...What a funny way of saying "I don't know". If someone knew the other theory that the universe from nothing relies on they would admit it. The theory that ALSO has no empirical support...it doesn't even have a workable model yet (per physicist Carlos Rovelli this year). Also conveniently not mentioning what that theory (and the universe from nothing) requires for verification.
The universe from nothing is nowhere near the same level of empirical certainty as relativity, gravity or evolution. Just like before, pivoted from Krauss's theory, which it suits you to pretend is settled fact sans empirical evidence, to universal geometry before posting as a reference a book you didn't read. Not throwing you any more bones Gorn. Be honest or be quiet.
"Theories can't be unproven". You want to revisit that obviously wrong statement? Or are you just going whip your rationalization hamster into overtime (again) to make it seem like you didn't actually say something so galactically stupid?
There is NO evidence in support of Krausse's theory. It's speculation and conjecture. It also violates the laws of physics, like the holographic universe (another debunked fad theory) when it is finally out to the test, it doesn't look good for Krausse. I only hope I'm alive to see him eat humble pie.
The BIG BANG is the current model of cosmology, it has more evidence than the "nothing" and it has the added benefit of being consistent with the laws of physics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gorn on Aug 15, 2017 0:36:33 GMT -7
The BB is part of Krauss's HYPOTHESIS. You're clearly ignorant of the entire thing, as you are of Science parlance. I have stated several times that [bullhorn to rabid's ear]The Universe, appearing to billionth decimal place precision, looks exactly like it should if it came from nothing.[/bullhorn to rabid's ear] You can ignore proven empirical evidence all you like, people who know better will laugh at you as I do. What reference book do you claim I "didn't read", and how did you come by this amazing clairvoyant knowledge?
If you mean "A Universe From Nothing", you are the one who clearly didn't read it, claiming Krauss' HYPOTHESIS is "speculation and conjecture with no evidence to support it". He gives ample evidence, on top of the killer one above.
I'll have to go back and see where I wrote "Theories can't be unproven" and the context you're likely misrepresenting again. Here's a news flash: you're not in the league of Tom Cruise. Yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Aug 15, 2017 3:15:39 GMT -7
This is what happens when I don't give you a hint. Just admit you don't know already!?
|
|
