If so, why do you not include at least minimal consideration of these truths in your model of understanding of the Universe?
Because I believe truth requires empirical evidence or logical deduction. Otherwise it's an opinion. It does though. Do you have a different definition of empirical evidence? |
|
|
|
I am in a paradox as if I lifted the scammer tag, Dank could slip back into the old ways and loose other peoples money
Would you feel responsible if dank ended up losing other people's money? I don't think he is attached enough to reality to be trusted for anything reality based. |
|
|
|
...And the second half was a bit of a disappointment in that they ran out of time and didn't get into how a "resource based economy" would actually work...
Nobody ever does. Not even RBE proponents. |
|
|
|
Regarding this Just had a Skype call with Amy and Pradeep of the Primate Education Network. Their fiscal sponsor http://trustforconservationinnovation.org/ does the donation receiving and processing for them, and handles quite a few charities. Amy and Pradeep want to try to convince their sponsor to accept bitcoins, but mostly had some questions regarding legal issues and regulatory stuff. Just got an update today: Pradeep S.
Hi Dmitry!
I have good news! Our organization's fiscal sponsor (for whom you answered all those questions) has finally approved of using Bitcoin as an experiment. We're signing up for coinbase on Monday most likely and enabling contributions soon thereafter.
Thank you for your time and continuous support.
Despite the delay, I hope we still have the opportunity to seek your contribution. Please let us know. Thanks again for everything.
So, looks like we'll be sending out another donation soon  |
|
|
|
If we have an international top music act and free admission for ladies
there should be no problems with the boobies supply.
Maybe we could also give a few free tickets to the press for a giveaway
to local people in general? Could draw the attention to the event,
and we want to advertise the btc, won't we?
I say fuck the press. If Bitcoin hits $1,000, it will have plenty of press already. The only thing press cares about is sensationalism. Think photos and stories of wealthy bitcoiners getting drunk, and being caught doing something embarrassing. Or stories about how they are now rich elitist assholes. And some pictures, in case your neighbors want to track you down. Stories about good or nice things don't sell. |
|
|
|
Rassah:
Do you believe there are non-empirical truths or undecideable truths (e.g. "This sentence is false") that are real?
No I do not. If so, why do you not include at least minimal consideration of these truths in your model of understanding of the Universe?
Because I believe truth requires empirical evidence or logical deduction. Otherwise it's an opinion. If not, then why don't you believe these truths exist when they have been acknowledged by prestigious mathematicians, scientists, and philosophers (and especially when some are self-evidently real)?
Because that's an argument from authority, and smart people make mistakes? We had a pretty good model of our solar system that had the earth in the center, created by some really smart people, and the middle even worked correctly to predict locations of sun and planets. They were still wrong in the end. Most importantly, a "truth" that is not based on anything real (or empirical) is about as useful as the statement that "unicorns like carrots." Sure, that's nice. Why should anyone care? |
|
|
|
I'll say it again, I do not go blind. And I will not starve. As a matter of fact, I don't believe I will die either, I will ascend to the fifth dimension. I am god and I am infinitely powerful.
OK, prove it! Stop eating and drinking, and survive as a god. And trust me, I will know if you eat or drink something. Actually, how the fuck are you still alive? Which moron is supporting your wasteful useless ass? |
|
|
|
Then people who refuse to improve and expand their skills will die off. End of story.
The problem is not absence of the skills of the people who being replaced by automation (as it was during Industrial Revolution while "Luddite fallacy" was true fallacy and workers could find new employment after extra education), it is 100% capital-vs-labor redistribution issue. When the doctors who have spent 10-15 years on education/training expected to be replaced by Watson and even programmers (!) could be affected by advanced IDEs and frameworks, you still will insist that extra training is a key to solve tech unemployment?! Are those Watson's that replace doctors just going to pop into existence? Will their medical knowledge be divinely inspired out of nothing? |
|
|
|
If God superstring particles only exist in the understanding but not in reality; then God superstring particles existing in the reality, would be greater than God superstring particles existing only in the understanding; therefore God superstring particles must exist. (because there is none greater than God 10th dimensional superstring particles, and in order to fulfill that logic/reasoning, therefore if God superstring particles existing in reality is greater than God superstring particles existing only in understanding, then God superstring particles must exist in reality then.
I replaced one fancyword with another fancyword, and it still works... Can you guys see that just slapping the word "god" into this doesn't actually do anything other than make up some new definition of the word god? |
|
|
|
The real question is "How did the super-compressed ball of energy originate?
It always has been and always will. It was never created, it just has always existed. OK, let's say this is true, and it has always existed. If you look out into space, you can see that everything is rapidly flying away from everything else. The universe is expanding. If the universe always existed, what is it expanding from? What was the universe before everything was all together in a single spot it's expanding out of? Think beyond our physical universe. Consciousness has always existed and always will. Do you know anything that is not based on your experience in the world? I would guess no. So, if we need to experience the world to think about the world and stuff in general, what were we doing and thinking about for trillions of years before the physical universe existed? |
|
|
|
However, the scientists are happy to use these same fallible minds (or 'subjects' as the joint nicely put it) to interpret other experiments. What makes those experiments better? Empirical evidence. And what makes empirical evidence so special? Well, it allows others to review it because two heads are better than one, right?
Actually no, wrong. It makes it special for one simple reason: relevance. If it affects everyone, as can be tested by repeating the experiment, then it is relevant to everyone, and can be used to change or influence everyone's world. If it is just some single guy's crazy fantasy, or even some single guy's crazy realty, but does not affect anyone else other than that one guy, that it's nothing but a nice story that doesn't really matter to anyone else. For instance, it's nice that dank can supposedly exist in many dimensions, but it is irrelevant to everyone else, and is this nothing but a useless stupid story. |
|
|
|
The real question is "How did the super-compressed ball of energy originate?
It always has been and always will. It was never created, it just has always existed. OK, let's say this is true, and it has always existed. If you look out into space, you can see that everything is rapidly flying away from everything else. The universe is expanding. If the universe always existed, what is it expanding from? What was the universe before everything was all together in a single spot it's expanding out of? |
|
|
|
Remember: there has never been a single fact, theory, or model that science has been able to prove beyond all doubt, and as long as the scientific method is utilized, this will remain the case forever.
Science can't prove shit. Never has, never will.
Which is exactly why it is the most trustworthy method we have. I trust someone who says "I don't know everything, but based on this and this, the answer is probably this" much more than I trust someone who says "I know everything, and out mpof my ass, the answer is this. DON'T QUESTION ME!" |
|
|
|
Their proof is that there is a limit to what can be conceived, and that limit is god? Well, it's not the Christian, Hebrew, or Muslim god. I don't really see how it's god at all, actually. Just a supreme limit that nothing can be conceived beyond...
By the way, scientists have disproven god a long time ago. Einstein said that god doesn't play dice with the universe, meaning that nothing is random and everything is planned and predetermined, and then quantum physics came out and proved that things in the universe are random and not planned out at all (maybe even killing a cat in the process, but we don't know), meaning god wasn't around to guide anything, or is just playing with dice, and thus was unimportant. Anyone can play with dice to make the universe completely random, or the universe can just be completely random on its own.
Ahh, but not all scientists have disproven God and this article shows that doesn't it? Could scientist be wrong? It seems completely illogical to think that the universe is random to me. How could something so complex as our universe happen by chance? Just so you know, I posted my reply half in jest. Like, "Oh yeah? Will some other scientists said this. You don't doubt Einstein, do you?" Just because these scientists figured this out, doesn't mean they proved god's existence. They basically attributed some concept to the word "god," in much the same way as dank calls the whole universe "god." It's just redefining a word to make your idea sound special, but doesn't actually mean anything. I call a spork "a divine all knowing oracle," but it's just a spork, just like space is just space, and this is just a math function. As for your question, imagine rolling a 6 sided dice, getting a 1, and then saying "That is impossible! How could I have rolled a 1, when it could have been any one of 6 different numbers?" It doesn't matter. It happened. If there was a one in bazillion chance, and it happened, then it just plain happened. Extremely improbable doesn't mean impossible. If you wish to believe that it happened with a purpose, feel free to keep doing it if it makes you comfortable. For me, it's easier to think that it just happened because there was a chance that it could. |
|
|
|
|
Then people who refuse to improve and expand their skills will die off. End of story.
|
|
|
|
|
Their proof is that there is a limit to what can be conceived, and that limit is god? Well, it's not the Christian, Hebrew, or Muslim god. I don't really see how it's god at all, actually. Just a supreme limit that nothing can be conceived beyond...
By the way, scientists have disproven god a long time ago. Einstein said that god doesn't play dice with the universe, meaning that nothing is random and everything is planned and predetermined, and then quantum physics came out and proved that things in the universe are random and not planned out at all (maybe even killing a cat in the process, but we don't know), meaning god wasn't around to guide anything, or is just playing with dice, and thus was unimportant. Anyone can play with dice to make the universe completely random, or the universe can just be completely random on its own.
|
|
|
|
If you truly believe it's flat, perhaps it will be so. If you believe you are a finite being on a finite planet, then you're destined to live a finite life and death over and over. If you want to live as an infinite being, you simply must believe you are so. You are infinite no matter what, you can keep living in the realms of time on another planet in your comfortable finite illusion, or you can understand how you are infinitely powerful and believe that you are so.
Over and over? Hah! OK, sure. You keep believing that you are infinite, and when you die, you'll just rot away into nothingness. I'll actually plan for my existence, earn and save money, and actually physically, for real, extend my life until I can genetically and mechanically make myself be immortal. We'll see which one of us ends up being "infinite"  That's what happens to you. I stare in the sun to align my frequency with the universe and to gain spiritual energy. I do not go blind. See how beliefs play a big role in one's reality?
This is why I don't really support things like medicare. Idiots like you who eventually go blind shouldn't be supported by tax dollars, and should be allowed to starve, fester, and die away. You will be very important some day in the future. Though just as a big warning to others. So the universe was created? By?
Why does there need to be a "by?" Who created the dust in your room? It's just a result of physics, and we already proved that universe creation is spontaneous and doesn't need a creator. But hey, feel free to ignore proofs and believing your magic stories. Bullox, I didn't believe in anything until I saw evidence before my eyes.
Dude, you stare at the sun and take mind-fucking drugs. If I were you. I wouldn't trust my eyes at all any more. |
|
|
|
Yes, the organization is more of a humanitarian outreach than "religious" one. I know how you feel about that.  It's not how I feel about that, it's what the organization's policy is. It's not my money that Bitcoin100 will be donating. |
|
|
|
Im in for the party so long as theres boobies.....
Should be plenty of drunk toppless fat guys for you  (oh, boobies, not moobies) |
|
|
|
|
I'm glad at least our most important providers of entertainment will be insured
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
