If you could have any question answered - what would it be?

Close the thread someone ffs forever for svetty.

Will the DA lot stop wittering on about HDX updates now?

quote:

Originally posted by Svetty:
Close the thread someone FFS!

Please let me know who is forcing you to open the thread and then forcing you to read it. That is outrageous and shouldn't be allowed . Sniper and I are simply having a little fun.

mongo,i think thats unfair,if svetty dont like it,it should be closed.

+ snigger.

quote:

Originally posted by Sniper:

quote:

Originally posted by mongo:
By Sniper;

'What argument where? Your statement of belief is not an argument. I have demonstrated this. I explained it as if to a child.'

LOL! .

Pot and kettle??

Mongo, dear boy, Please explain in detail how the following represents an argument:

'3. As far as I am aware, there is no verifiable, reproducible evidence of a link between consciousness and quantum theory.'

It is a mere statement of belief. Check with a grown up if you don't believe me.

OK, let me rephrase it:

3. There is no verifiable, reproducible evidence of a link between consciousness and quantum theory.

There - it's no longer a statement of belief - it's a valid premise, therefore my argument is valid until you can prove one of the premises wrong.

BTW - you are confusing the premises of the argument with the argument itself - but then you would, wouldn't you?

quote:

Originally posted by BigH47:
Will the DA lot stop wittering on about HDX updates now?

No chance BigH - you've now got to put up with all the 'reviews' once people have applied the update. I predict a riot

quote:

Originally posted by mongo:

quote:

Originally posted by Svetty:
Close the thread someone FFS!

Please let me know who is forcing you to open the thread and then forcing you to read it. That is outrageous and shouldn't be allowed . Sniper and I are simply having a little fun.

If the intellectual willy-waving, narcissism and 'my personality disorder is more profound than yours' that this thread largely consists of constitutes fun then by all means carry on

Incidentally I find it telling that although I have refrained from posting to this thread until latterly I am subject to piss-taking from the off - this might suggest that some might benefit from a pause for reflection?

You may be right Svetty, but my particular disorder precludes much forethought alas.

In any case I thought my comment more lightweight than pisstaking; non-reflective mild humour perhaps?

Still, if it does annoy you so much that you have to refrain from posting then you must have read a fair bit of it?

Rather begs the question.

Also I only wave my willy in the summer, It's freezing up here and people laugh so cwuelly.

Quite right, Svetty.

Mr. Dane gave a bit of a hint ( ignored by the myopically thick when he gently pointed out:



Some posters are spending too much time in The Padded Cell, with nothing better to do...


What some people might take as a Hint...

Bugger!

I thought he was referring to you mike?

And you promised to put me on your ignore list too, can't get a fellow all excited then not deliver mate. It's rude. XXX. Paul.

quote:

Originally posted by Trevp:
[QUOTE]


[QUOTE] OK, let me rephrase it:

Does that mean you recognise I am right and you were wrong? I must say I am pleased you recognised the need to rephrase your point 3 as a 13 year old acquaintence of mine saw the need long before you did.

quote:

3. There is no verifiable, reproducible evidence of a link between consciousness and quantum theory.

Oh dear, oh dear.

quote:

There - it's no longer a statement of belief - it's a valid premise, therefore my argument is valid until you can prove one of the premises wrong.

Insofar as you do not offer any evidence (whatsoever)your 'premis' is just the same as before (despite your attempt to rephrase)it is the mere statement of belief. ('mere' means 'nothing other than').

Max Planck founding father of Quantum Physics wrote 'I regard conciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness.'

Was he delusional?

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Lacey:
Quite right, Svetty.

Mr. Dane gave a bit of a hint ( ignored by the myopically thick when he gently pointed out:



Some posters are spending too much time in The Padded Cell, with nothing better to do...


What some people might take as a Hint...

pot,kettle.

Oooh ooh! I know this one!

Xylophone?

quote:

Originally posted by Sniper:
Was he delusional?

Well, someone almost certainly is. Delusions of grandeur are still delusions.

quote:

Some posters are spending too much time in The Padded Cell, with nothing better to do...

May just be a personal observation, no interpretation by others needed IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by Sniper:

quote:

There - it's no longer a statement of belief - it's a valid premise, therefore my argument is valid until you can prove one of the premises wrong.

Insofar as you do not offer any evidence (whatsoever)your 'premis' is just the same as before (despite your attempt to rephrase)it is the mere statement of belief. ('mere' means 'nothing other than').

It's not a statement of belief, it's a premise which is based on non-belief rather than belief. It is valid because it retains the scientific principle of scepticism in the absence of evidence. If you wish to refute the premise, one single piece of definite valid evidence would destroy it. You have yet to do this.

Also, I would not consider Max Planck delusional, I would merely (yes I do understand what it means)regard the statement you have quoted as hypothetical.

It's time you produced something substantive rather than hiding behind hypothetical quotations. Where is the evidence?

I don't think we will ever agree on this so I will (finally) leave it there.

quote:

Originally posted by Trevp:
Where is the evidence?

It's in the book...init.

My question of my lifetime would be....



WHY?

quote:

My question of my lifetime would be....



WHY?

Hi Mudwolf,

My answer to your question of a lifetime is as follows:

Humans are pattern seeking animals and always believe there has to be an answer to everything. Granted, curiosity justifies its own existence, but the outcome of the universe is the way it is because that is the way it is. (My understanding behind these words is based on my readings and thoughts I developed after reading Victor Stenger.) Our brains and thus our reasoning faculties are almost always predisposed to see cause, effect, cause, effect... ad infinitum. Due to the understanding mankind has of classical physics, we can theoretically predict the state of the universe in retrospect and in prospect - this is aside from saying "A caused B which produced an effect C".

Therefore by this argument there is need to ask why the big bang occurred as that was the state of the universe THEN.

Jon

PS Perhaps it's best if you read Victor Stenger yourself!!!!

With regard to my question, here is one I'd love to see forum feedback on:

So many organised religions claim there is an afterlife of eternal bliss, but almost every single human on earth is scared of death?

Does anyone see the contradiction/hypocrisy here amongst believers of those faiths?

Jon

Jon,

You're back with a bang then. And more sweeping generalisations designed to cause a fight...

Not sure how or who with you do your research.

I am not myself - not do I know anyone with faith who is - scared of death, though they - and I - may not be particularly fond of pain, which may be part of the process of the dying.

But scared of death itself, no. Therefore not a hypocrite.

I may have anxieties about the manner of the dying not

Hi James,

It wasn't a message with the intention of causing a fight, more like a text to spur a response and that (as I have written in the past) is totally with respect.

I see it as an intellectual discourse and the padded cell is the forum for this to occur!

I take your point about the manner of dying being unpleasant, but I can't help suspecting that there is such an instinctive drive amongst humans to stay alive and avoid death, to grieve because of death that there is a ring of contradiction when around 5 billion people on this planet subscribe to some form of belief in an afterlife.

That is what I find intriguing. I could happily make an amateur attempt at explaining the psychological reasons why, but notionally there appears a contradiction. In some cases I will go as far as saying hypocritical!!

Kind regards,

Jon

'The most economical conclusion to be drawn from the complete library of scientific data is that we are material beings composed of atoms and molecules, ordered by the largely-chance processes of self-organization and evolution to become capable of the complex behavior associated with the notions of life and mind.
The data provide us with no reason to postulate undetectable vital or spiritual, transcendent forces. Matter is sufficient to explain
everything discovered thus far by the most powerful scientificinstruments'.

Victor Stenger.

Stenger is adamant that ‘matter is sufficient to
explain everything’ so presumably he must know what ‘matter’ is?

Stenger again:

'If the laws of physics are the same laws as the laws of the empty void, the transition from nothing to something may not have been as difficult as people have assumed. Our Universe may be no more the re-arranged, restructured nothingness'.

If the term ‘nothingness’ is taken to mean what it generally denotes, which is a complete absence – including the absence of the
potentiality to become any kind of ‘something,’ this assertion is nothing more than philosophical absurdity, for nothing could ever emerge form this kind of complete vacant ‘nothingness’;

Stenger again:

'The laws of physics are simply the laws of nothing'.

Ok that's enough of Stenger.

Not so sure people are scared of death, more the act of dying.

Not much you can do about it once you're gone, but just hope its quick and painless.

@Sniper - did THAT email turn up?

M