‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 > 
 
   
 

something may be intervening

 
Bongobongo Smith
 
Avatar
 
 
Bongobongo Smith
Total Posts:  310
Joined  17-04-2008
 
 
 
13 November 2008 09:17
 
Immediate Suppression - 13 November 2008 02:01 PM

..even though many people in this forum seem to attempt to pretend to think that we do know the answers about everything, and attempt to cover up their anxiety over this issue by…pretending we do know everything.

...and you will of cause back up that statement
with a few examples of the “many people
“pretending we do know everything”.

Quotes please.

 
 
Aaron
 
Avatar
 
 
Aaron
Total Posts:  1679
Joined  04-12-2006
 
 
 
13 November 2008 10:10
 

IS, you’re a lost cause. You’re going to continue justifying your predilection toward woo as “keeping an open mind.”  Nothing to learn here, folks. Move on.

 
 
Beam
 
Avatar
 
 
Beam
Total Posts:  1619
Joined  02-04-2008
 
 
 
13 November 2008 10:35
 

I’m convinced, Jefe. I’m quitting the church of The Fonz and joining your flock. Are Scratch and Dr Pepper elders?

 
 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
13 November 2008 12:02
 
Immediate Suppression - 13 November 2008 02:01 PM

I’ve never said there MUST be something intervening.  I said something may be intervening.  There is no way to rule it out, so a little speculation isn’t irresponsible here.  I’m not religious, I’m not new-age, it’s just keeping an open mind to alternative possibilities.

Speculation IS intellectually irresponsible in the absence of evidence, because that absence means there is no way to separate good ideas from bad. That’s like seeing a closed suitcase and guessing what may be on the inside without opening it or at least picking it up and shaking it.

What do you mean by “alternative possibilities”? That term sounds very vague, and vagueness in scientific endeavors is another example of intellectual irresponsibility. “Alternative possibilities” can be whatever the hell someone wants it to be for their own convenience.

 
SkepticX
 
Avatar
 
 
SkepticX
Total Posts:  13971
Joined  24-12-2004
 
 
 
13 November 2008 12:16
 
Carstonio - 13 November 2008 05:02 PM

Speculation IS intellectually irresponsible in the absence of evidence, because that absence means there is no way to separate good ideas from bad. That’s like seeing a closed suitcase and guessing what may be on the inside without opening it or at least picking it up and shaking it.

Speculation is fine. I’d hate it if Larry Niven and Neal Stephenson and Robert Heinlein (etc, etc) stopped speculating. The problem is when the speculator fails to appreciate that the speculation is pure fiction—not really “possibility” in the sense of a potential explanation (that would be premature), but rather, until evidenced, in the sense of viable fiction.

Carstonio - 13 November 2008 05:02 PM

What do you mean by “alternative possibilities”? That term sounds very vague, and vagueness in scientific endeavors is another example of intellectual irresponsibility. “Alternative possibilities” can be whatever the hell someone wants it to be for their own convenience.

Yeah ... sounds like he’s trying to move “believable fiction” into the “potential explanation” category prematurely. Actually I’d argue that he’s also trying to by-pass the “believable fiction” part too, not having gotten there yet.

Byron

 
 
eudemonia
 
Avatar
 
 
eudemonia
Total Posts:  9031
Joined  05-04-2008
 
 
 
13 November 2008 13:07
 

‘Something’ is not an alternative possibility. Too vauge. Something can be anything. Anything is nothing without evidence. Seriously, can it be said any simpler than that?

Things, ideas, illusions etc., that are vauge, baseless and speculatory and without evidence not only can be ruled out, should not even be considered in the first place.

This has nothing to do with open mindedness and has everything to do with REASON and rational thinking and understanding.

I think magic is real, and SOMETHING exists outside the laws of physics. So just because I think and say this, it cannot be ruled out? Preposterous.

 
 
Traces Elk
 
Avatar
 
 
Traces Elk
Total Posts:  5591
Joined  27-09-2006
 
 
 
13 November 2008 13:18
 
McCreason - 13 November 2008 06:07 PM

‘Something can be anything. Anything is nothing without evidence.

Nothing means nothing. Nothing don’t mean something, because nothing is something that isn’t.—Darryl Dawkins

 
 
SkepticX
 
Avatar
 
 
SkepticX
Total Posts:  13971
Joined  24-12-2004
 
 
 
13 November 2008 13:22
 
McCreason - 13 November 2008 06:07 PM

‘Something’ is not an alternative possibility. Too vauge. Something can be anything. Anything is nothing without evidence. Seriously, can it be said any simpler than that?

I personally think that’s a pretty effective cut to the chase, man.

Without some rationally viable follow-up it’s pretty meaningless, on the order of saying “something may be happening” as if that in itself says anything of meaning at all.

I was going to say it’s like being asked out to dinner and replying “colors may be involved” but that’s just random. It’s actually far more specific and intelligible than “something may be intervening.”

Byron

 
 
isocratic infidel
 
Avatar
 
 
isocratic infidel
Total Posts:  1054
Joined  08-10-2007
 
 
 
13 November 2008 13:26
 
Salt Creek - 12 November 2008 09:13 PM

Fuckwittery may be intervening.


Chaos Sir Creek… merely an attempt to visually inspire chaos to intervene.

Jefe: Now, since these E.L.F.s are too small to see, and invisible to boot, it will be mighty difficult to disprove their existence.  Since they travel around at light speed - riding their quarks like little rodeo stallions, they don’t stay in one place long enough for other detection attempts to nail them down.  Don’t let their all-but impossible-to-detect status discourage you, however.  Just keep an open mind about the possibility that they exist and are affecting you in a personal and measurable fashion.

... chaotic quark riding E.L.F.s ? Indeed.

the Beamer: Nice makeup ii. I’ve never seen the Joker look so enticing! Did something intervene at that party?

Thanks, and unfortunately, nope… nary a trick or treater… but the ones who came had to tell a joke or no treat… chaos was the rule of the night, so they each got handfuls of candy and hopefully an E.L.F.

 
 
eudemonia
 
Avatar
 
 
eudemonia
Total Posts:  9031
Joined  05-04-2008
 
 
 
13 November 2008 13:49
 

Is Darryl Dawkins Richard Dawkins’ nephew? Son? Adopted chocolate thunder?

 
 
Immediate Suppression
 
Avatar
 
 
Immediate Suppression
Total Posts:  205
Joined  19-10-2008
 
 
 
13 November 2008 15:11
 
Carstonio - 13 November 2008 05:02 PM

Speculation IS intellectually irresponsible in the absence of evidence, because that absence means there is no way to separate good ideas from bad. That’s like seeing a closed suitcase and guessing what may be on the inside without opening it or at least picking it up and shaking it.

 
Like I said on another thread, sometimes scientists need to throw some mud on the wall, just to see what sticks.  And there is evidence of alternative possibilities, the electro pulse I have experienced.

Carstonio - 13 November 2008 05:02 PM

What do you mean by “alternative possibilities”? That term sounds very vague, and vagueness in scientific endeavors is another example of intellectual irresponsibility. “Alternative possibilities” can be whatever the hell someone wants it to be for their own convenience.

It is an intentionally vague description, out of honest practicality, not convenience.  Look, there is a lot we don’t know about the universe.  Can’t all of us agree on that?

 
 
Traces Elk
 
Avatar
 
 
Traces Elk
Total Posts:  5591
Joined  27-09-2006
 
 
 
13 November 2008 15:42
 
Immediate Suppression - 13 November 2008 08:11 PM

It is an intentionally vague description, out of honest practicality, not convenience.

Image Attachments
 
rabbit_pancake.jpg
 
 
 
isocratic infidel
 
Avatar
 
 
isocratic infidel
Total Posts:  1054
Joined  08-10-2007
 
 
 
13 November 2008 23:14
 

LOL hahahahhahahahahahaha! That’s one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen Salty. (gee, maybe I better get out more often… wearing pancakes on my head of course.)

ImmediateS, No one ever said there isn’t a lot we don’t know about the universe… or even possible parallel universes. Get over your “electro pulse” already… everyone experiences the sensation you’ve described. I don’t think it’s top priority on scientists’ lists to study said phenomenon. Common sense can pretty much do the trick.
Again: ask yourself with “honest practicality,” which is more likely: that your dead grandmother; an alien; a subatomic invisible E.L.F.; or an undetectable, subconscious/emotionally-based internal stimuli; a virus or a bacteria; or a psychic parasite, caused said sensation?

Now where’s the syrup?

[ Edited: 13 November 2008 23:16 by isocratic infidel]
 
 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
14 November 2008 03:53
 
Immediate Suppression - 13 November 2008 08:11 PM

Like I said on another thread, sometimes scientists need to throw some mud on the wall, just to see what sticks.

No, one needs to analyze the mud for sticky qualities before throwing it, and it may be that none of the mud is sticky at all. Otherwise, one could be throwing mud for years without results. That’s what I mean by separating good ideas from bad.  To carry your analogy further, with many unexplained events we don’t even know if there is phenomenon called stickiness and we don’t know if there is a wall.

Immediate Suppression - 13 November 2008 08:11 PM

And there is evidence of alternative possibilities, the electro pulse I have experienced.

That assumes that the phenomenon cannot be explained by biological and neurological causes. Even if it cannot, we have no basis for any speculation about its cause. The “electro-spiritual pulse” you describe sounds like Christian “revelation” disguised as generic spirituality, although that may be not be your intention.

Immediate Suppression - 13 November 2008 08:11 PM

It is an intentionally vague description, out of honest practicality, not convenience.

What practical purpose does it serve? The only one I can imagine is to exempt any such descriptions from scrutiny.

Immediate Suppression - 13 November 2008 08:11 PM

Look, there is a lot we don’t know about the universe.  Can’t all of us agree on that?

In general. A better way to describe it is that there are many things in the universe for which we don’t have explanations. True respect for that gap in knowledge would require no speculation without evidence.

 
M is for Malapert
 
Avatar
 
 
M is for Malapert
Total Posts:  1606
Joined  23-09-2006
 
 
 
14 November 2008 10:41
 
Salt Creek - 13 November 2008 08:42 PM

In the interest of observational accuracy, that looks like two pancakes to me.

 
 
‹ First  < 5 6 7 8 >