No one knows for sure whats up.So be AGNOSTIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Rust]

"That's rather inconsistent. That follows along the line of "The universe had to have had a creator because it is so complex. God, however, has always existed.". Wouldn't God, being even more complex than the universe, need a designer as well"

Dark_Magneto...

1. Those are not my beliefs.

2. My point was, that is rather stupid to believe something is true because it is the simplest answer. Something you tried to do when explaining that having legs would be the best answer. And I quote YOU:

"The simplest explanation is that we have legs in that scenario. Sure, they could all be products of some highly sophisticated virtual reality dreamworld, but lets not get caught up in ad-hoc rationalizations and use the simple naturalistic ones first,"

3. Wouldn't it be simple to believe that God has always been, and always will be and that he exists? Than to believe that the Big Bang happened, then evolution, etc.

Again, I’m just showing how wrong your argument was.

[Dark_Magneto]

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

Wouldn't it be simple to believe that God has always been, and always will be and that he exists? Than to believe that the Big Bang happened, then evolution, etc.

Actually, even simpler than that, one could resort to the steady-state universe scenario and say the universe has always been.

Occam's razor is a logical principle. The jist of it is, you work from the simplest hypothesys, and work your way up from there.

"Goddidit", being an untestable assertion, and incapable of validation or falsification, will not suffice in the scientific community to say the least.

[Rust]

"Actually, even simpler than that, one could resort to the steady-state universe scenario and say the universe has always been."

Wow even more simpler? Too bad I just proved that believing something was true because it was simple was stupid. Something you did a few posts ago...

""Goddidit", being an untestable assertion, and incapable of validation or falsification, will not suffice in the scientific community to say the least."

'The universe has always been', being an untestable assertion and incapable of validation or falsification, will not suffice in the scientific community to say the least.

Same thing.



"Occam's razor is a logical principle."

-------------------

John is a great guy.

He is not a faggot.

-------------------

Now magicaly with "Occams razor" bullshit, we have:

----------------------

John is a great faggot.

----------------------

Wow ! ... I fail to see how it is a logical principle.

[Dark_Magneto]

quote:Originally posted by Rust:



'The universe has always been', being an untestable assertion and incapable of validation or falsification, will not suffice in the scientific community to say the least.

Same thing.

Yeah, that's why it was abandoned as a credible theory a long time ago.

[The Crusader]

Well if science ever manages to locate the centre of the universe, some people will be surprised to learn they're not it.

[iod]

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

"Occam's razor is a logical principle."

-------------------

John is a great guy.

He is not a faggot.

-------------------

Now magicaly with "Occams razor" bullshit, we have:

----------------------

John is a great faggot.

----------------------

Wow ! ... I fail to see how it is a logical principle.

It would help if youknew what it was...

Google is a miracle worker!

[Rust]

"It would help if you knew what it was..."

'when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better.'



Ok let’s go back to my example, the one Iod couldn't understand.

----------------------

John is a great friend.

He is not a faggot.

----------------------

----------------------

John is a great friend.

He is superman.

----------------------

Both say the same thing, "he is a great friend"

Now the problems arise. Which is simpler? Simple is relative, who dictates which of those 2 theories is the simplest?

If you choose the 1st one as the simplest, then how do would you know if he is a faggot or not?

If you choose the second one as the simplest, how would you know if he is or is not superman?

If both have unproven elements (being or not being: a faggot or superman) then which one is better?

You see, you have yet again, proven my point.

Nice reply isn’t it? Considering I “don’t know what it means”.

[UrbnTbone]

^ Braindamage resulting in radical extreme fanatical logic dependancy, withdrawal syndrom and high risk.

Putting logic into a topic that doesn't require it since it is by nature unanswerable, results in assleak syllogical diarrhea, symptom of withdrawal. Heck, I can't prove this, so I need one more logic shot. But the logic of it doesn't comply with sick 21th century modern western mind. Pathetic.

Just forget about answers, it's a field with questions only, sickoes.

[iod]

quote:Originally posted by Rust:

"It would help if you knew what it was..."

'when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better.'



Ok let’s go back to my example, the one Iod couldn't understand.

----------------------

John is a great friend.

He is not a faggot.

----------------------

----------------------

John is a great friend.

He is superman.

----------------------

Both say the same thing, "he is a great friend"

Now the problems arise. Which is simpler? Simple is relative, who dictates which of those 2 theories is the simplest?

If you choose the 1st one as the simplest, then how do would you know if he is a faggot or not?

If you choose the second one as the simplest, how would you know if he is or is not superman?

If both have unproven elements (being or not being: a faggot or superman) then which one is better?

You see, you have yet again, proven my point.

Nice reply isn’t it? Considering I “don’t know what it means”.

... You are the stupidest creature I have ever encountered.

And no, you don't seem to have any fucking clue what occam's razor is or what it entails.

Please kill yourself.

[UrbnTbone]

ocam razor unveiled:

1 God is a hypothesis

2 There is no proof God exists (although it would comply with cause/effect universal law).

3 No proof of God is to be taken as proof for nogod. This is our dogma.

4 Trespassers will be excommunicated from our rationalist church.