Computer Scientists Prove God Exists

[Vod]

Yeah, like when people sleep and don't dream.

People dream when they sleep.  People don't dream in a coma.

Can't make it easier than that for you.   

[Rassah]

Theories can be right, wrong, large or small in scope, consistent or inconsistent, incomplete, etc.  Someone could indeed state that they believe reading tea leaves is a method by which knowledge is acquired.  Whether you think it's bs or not doesn't mean it's not a theory.  A theory is simply a explanatory description of something.

But it's not a theory. It's their hypothesis. Or postulation. Or opinion. They have to prove that they actually aquire some knowledge from reading tea leaves, and are not just making stuff up, for it to be a theory. Unless you mean colloquial "theory," which if that is the case, then we should switch to saying "the substantiated fact of collecting knowledge through science" vs "the theory of reading tea leaves." Personally I'd rather use scientific "theory" to be coonsistent.

I'm not sure why you think it's weird to that's the scientific method as a theory of knowledge because that's essentially what it is.  It's the idea that one can learn about reality through empirical study.

It's weird, because learning through science is an action, not a phenomenon. One that has immediate results. Results that have been done and confirmed over and over millions of times. And most importantly, because "the scientific method is the theory of knowledge" to me sounds like saying "a painting a sheet of paper red is the theory of applying red paint to paper." It's not so much a theory as it's just what it actually is.

[Rassah]

Yeah, like when people sleep and don't dream.

People always dream. They just sometimes don'tremember their dreams. People typically have 3 to 6 different dreams a night, but you might only remember the last one. Also, it's even more than that. Even if you were right, and people could not dream when they sleep, it's still not the same, because even if you don't dream, your brain still processes, organizes, and files memories into long--term memory while you sleep. When you are in a coma, your brain just does nothing at all.

[dank]

Yeah, like when people sleep and don't dream.

People always dream. They just sometimes don'tremember their dreams. People typically have 3 to 6 different dreams a night, but you might only remember the last one. Also, it's even more than that. Even if you were right, and people could not dream when they sleep, it's still not the same, because even if you don't dream, your brain still processes, organizes, and files memories into long--term memory while you sleep. When you are in a coma, your brain just does nothing at all.

And how can you make a statement such as that people always dream?  Doesn't sound very scientific.

Comas do not prove we are unconscious robot beings.

When computers learn to have a sense of humor amongst other feelings, that's when I'll believe consciousness is a phenomenon caused by neural networks, not the other way around.

[Vod]

Yeah, like when people sleep and don't dream.

People always dream. They just sometimes don'tremember their dreams. People typically have 3 to 6 different dreams a night, but you might only remember the last one. Also, it's even more than that. Even if you were right, and people could not dream when they sleep, it's still not the same, because even if you don't dream, your brain still processes, organizes, and files memories into long--term memory while you sleep. When you are in a coma, your brain just does nothing at all.

And how can you make a statement such as that people always dream?  Doesn't sound very scientific.

What do you want?  Research papers?  I doubt you could understand them.  It's been proven people dream in REM sleep.  Without REM sleep you could not survive.

[dank]

And is that the only stage of sleep?  No?  Oh, maybe dank does know something.

I'm not even arguing against the concept of people dreaming all the time.  I'm just pointing out that Rassah debases first hand experience as evidence when he makes a statement that could only be proven by empirical data.

[Vod]

And is that the only stage of sleep?  No?  Oh, maybe dank does know something.

I'm not even arguing against the concept of people dreaming all the time.  I'm just pointing out that Rassah debases first hand experience as evidence when he makes a statement that could only be proven by empirical data.

REM sleep is the only part of sleep that heals and rebuilds your mental capacity.  It is required to survive.

What does it matter that there are other irrelevant parts to the sleep process?  You know nothing other than how to take your drugs.

[dank]

I had enough childish insults for a night.  I know everything and that's why I know you're a shill.  So goodbye.

[Vod]

I had enough childish insults for a night.  I know everything and that's why I know you're a shill.  So goodbye.

You know everything, yet you are $10,000 in debt just on this forum alone, and you considered a fool on this forum.

How did THAT happen?  Couldn't you see you would become a fool (and go into debt) and make changes to your personality?  Or did you go into debt and become a nut job on purpose?

[dank]

You are a paid internet shill or a very hateful person.  I don't think anybody actually hates dank that much to attack him consistently like you do.  Even the people that were going to stick a bullet in my head were doing so for fear of being killed or money.  And so I predict you are in a similar situation where you lack any real life skills so you work for the government as an internet shill.

And we will all find the truth when we die.

Goodnight vod, you are dead to me.  You'll get my love when you show me you have some in you.

[Vod]

Goodnight vod, you are dead to me.  You'll get my love when you show me you have some in you.

Yah, you said that before tonight, yet here you are, still replying to me.   

I don't care about you or your drug filled life.  I only want to see the forum user squall get reimbursed as you promised.

You make a payment of .42btc to him next week and you won't hear from me until the next time you miss a payment.

Until then, I'll continue to comment on your lies, even if you don't reply. 

[Vod]

Goodnight vod, you are dead to me.  You'll get my love when you show me you have some in you.

and WHOOPS!  You said you loved me unconditionally.  I guess that was another lie?

[dank]

I love your soul vod, but I am tired of talking to your ego, it gets none.  So let me know when you find some love in you.

[Vod]

I love your soul vod, but I am tired of talking to your ego, it gets none.  So let me know when you find some love in you.

So I guess I'm not dead to you?  Why would you lie about that?  What perverse pleasure does it give you?

[dank]

You are to me.  Because who I am talking to is not you.  I am talking to your ego, I can't recall one positive thing you said in the last year you were here.

And your ego gets no love.

[Vod]

You are to me.  Because who I am talking to is not you.  I am talking to your ego, I can't recall one positive thing you said in the last year you were here.

And your ego gets no love.

If I am dead to you, why do you keep replying to my posts?   

[dank]

Because you need some light.

[Vod]

Because you need some light.

So then you should say "Vod, you need some light".  Don't say "Vod, you are dead to me" because that makes you a liar.

[dank]

The former being directed to the real vod, your soul.  The later meaning your false sense of negativity - your ego.

[Vod]

The former being directed to the real vod, your soul.  The later meaning your false sense of negativity - your ego.

So when you are addressing someone, you are only addressing a part of them?

The other parts are OK to you, and should ignore your rants?  Or are you attacking all parts at once?

Are you purposely trying to be confusing, like a person lying would be?