Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Discussion > Religion & Philosophy
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Religion & Philosophy Discuss 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God' at the General Discussion; Originally Posted by winston53660 Then why did you post it? Considering your history of postings and all. Again, Winston, the ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 10:53 AM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,168
Thanks: 808
Thanked 1,552 Times in 1,057 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
Then why did you post it? Considering your history of postings and all.
Again, Winston, the fact that you always engage in ad hominem rather than real arguments is telling.
I posted it because I thought it was interesting and thought others might as well.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 11:07 AM
Manitou's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,994
Thanks: 268
Thanked 5,734 Times in 4,160 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeyy View Post
2X2=unicorns
In other words, Mikeyy, Trump = AntiChrist, according to you. The AntiChrist is Biblical, and people voted for Trump/AntiChrist, you believe Trump to be the AntiChrist, so logically, you must believe in the Spirit in the Sky, God, who is everywhere at the same time. I knew it!
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 11:49 AM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,519
Thanks: 10,079
Thanked 15,231 Times in 9,231 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
As I said, make of it what you will. You did, so you did what I wanted you to do; I'm not defending the article.
Why even post a piece of crap article in the first place then?

Are people's beliefs so weak that they have to lie about such stuff in order to pretend they have credibility?

What if I posted an article proclaiming "Science proves God doesn't exist" and then left a response "Make of it what you will".
Would all that seem like it's intelligent to you?


Quote:
Originally Posted by winston53660
Then why did you post it? Considering your history of postings and all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe
Again, Winston, the fact that you always engage in ad hominem rather than real arguments is telling.
Don't lie. There was no ad hominem there.
He's asking you why you posted it and you're effectively dodging the question.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe
I posted it because I thought it was interesting and thought others might as well.
Lies typically aren't that interesting.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln

Last edited by foundit66; 01-26-2017 at 12:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 03:24 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,168
Thanks: 808
Thanked 1,552 Times in 1,057 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Why even post a piece of crap article in the first place then?

Are people's beliefs so weak that they have to lie about such stuff in order to pretend they have credibility?

What if I posted an article proclaiming "Science proves God doesn't exist" and then left a response "Make of it what you will".

It's amazing that every now and then, you seem to have to be reminded the purpose of this forum: to DISCUSS things. If you were to post such an article, I would discuss it. Rather that be belligerent like you're being.
If you don't like the topic, no one is forcing you to post.
Geeez.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
He's asking you why you posted it and you're effectively dodging the question.
Are you not able to read today for some reason??? I'll repeat even though his question was already answered (rather than 'dodged', which is a lie on your part) in post #21:
I posted it because I thought it was interesting and thought others might as well.
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???

Last edited by Joe Shoe; 01-26-2017 at 03:29 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 03:34 PM
Manitou's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,994
Thanks: 268
Thanked 5,734 Times in 4,160 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post

It's amazing that every now and then, you seem to have to be reminded the purpose of this forum: to DISCUSS things. If you were to post such an article, I would discuss it. Rather that be belligerent like you're being.
If you don't like the topic, no one is forcing you to post.
Geeez.



Are you not able to read today for some reason??? I'll repeat even though his question was already answered (rather than 'dodged', which is a lie on your part) in post #21:
I posted it because I thought it was interesting and thought others might as well.

You're right. Some people simply cannot help being belligerent. Or stupid. Not pointing out anybody in particular.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Manitou For This Useful Post:
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 07:49 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,519
Thanks: 10,079
Thanked 15,231 Times in 9,231 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
It's amazing that every now and then, you seem to have to be reminded the purpose of this forum: to DISCUSS things. If you were to post such an article, I would discuss it. Rather that be belligerent like you're being.
Joe.
I DID discuss it.
Right here.
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/rel...tml#post867967
Click the link.
You are the one who didn't want to discuss it.

Instead of discussing it, you whined about TWO WORDS in a different post.
So don't put out this b.s. pretense that I'm the one at fault here.
My real underlying position is that people should put out stuff WORTH DISCUSSING.
Your article was a lie.
And you don't want to admit that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
I posted it because I thought it was interesting and thought others might as well.
Does it matter that it's a lie?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Manitou
You're right. Some people simply cannot help being belligerent. Or stupid. Not pointing out anybody in particular.
That's okay Manitou.
You can come out of the confessional now...
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln

Last edited by foundit66; 01-27-2017 at 11:01 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2017, 11:22 AM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,168
Thanks: 808
Thanked 1,552 Times in 1,057 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
My real underlying position is that people should put out stuff WORTH DISCUSSING.
Your article was a lie.
And you don't want to admit that.
And again, if you don't think its worth discussing, no one is making you post about it. The funny thing is, I never said I AGREE with the article.
As per your usual tactics, you've opened up a discussion here NOT about the article, but about the fact the article was posted. Anything but relevance, as usual.

And before you predictably accuse me of ignoring your claim that the article is a lie, I think a better way to describe is 'overreach'. More the likely the author of the report doesn't really understand the fundamentals what is actually happening here (due to this being an odd convergence of ontological philosophy and computer science. I seriously doubt there any intent by anyone there to tell a "lie".
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???

Last edited by Joe Shoe; 01-27-2017 at 11:42 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2017, 12:43 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,519
Thanks: 10,079
Thanked 15,231 Times in 9,231 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
And again, if you don't think its worth discussing, no one is making you post about it.
Simple questions for you Joe to cut through your b.s.
1) Do YOU think it's worth discussing?
2) If yes, why have you not even tried to discuss it here before your last post?
(And even then, you aren't really discussing it. You're just trying to quibble over how to classify the false information put forth in that article.)


And for my side, even though I did discuss it unlike you, I explained why it's not worth discussing.
Cause the article is a lie. And if you don't want to admit that, it's just plain false.
The "mathematical calculation" did NOT do what the article claims.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
The funny thing is, I never said I AGREE with the article.
Because you haven't said ANYTHING about the article preceding this other than to pose it as possibly worth discussing...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
As per your usual tactics, you've opened up a discussion here NOT about the article, but about the fact the article was posted. Anything but relevance, as usual.
This is a dumb lie.
I DID discuss the article.
Right here.
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/rel...tml#post867967

And what's ironic is YOU are the one refusing to discuss the topic as you solely complain about me.
But you accuse me of that. When I did discuss the topic and you ignored that post.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
And before you predictably accuse me of ignoring your claim that the article is a lie, I think a better way to describe is 'overreach'. More the likely the author of the report doesn't really understand the fundamentals what is actually happening here (due to this being an odd convergence of ontological philosophy and computer science. I seriously doubt there any intent by anyone there to tell a "lie".
And you say that cuz convenience.
ABSOLUTELY NO FACTS on the subject.
But you just don't want to admit you posted a lie.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln

Last edited by foundit66; 01-27-2017 at 05:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2017, 02:40 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,168
Thanks: 808
Thanked 1,552 Times in 1,057 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Simple questions for you Joe to cut through your b.s.
1) Do YOU think it's worth discussing?
I posted it, didn't I?

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
2) If yes, why have you not even tried to discuss it here before your last post?
The "last post" was plenty early enough, out of merely 20 something posts. I note you're STILL doing more arguing over the poster or things like whether someone posted than the issue of the thread. Typical.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Cause the article is a lie. And if you don't want to admit that, it's just plain false.
The "mathematical calculation" did NOT do what the article claims.
'False' and 'lie' are two very different things. The article gives the impression it is more of an ontological issue, when it's more of a computer science demonstration. There is no evidence anyone was out to "lie".
__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2017, 06:05 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,519
Thanks: 10,079
Thanked 15,231 Times in 9,231 Posts
Default Re: 'Scientists use mathematical calculations to PROVE the existence of God'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
I posted it, didn't I?
You posted it but didn't even bother to try to discuss it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
The "last post" was plenty early enough, out of merely 20 something posts. I note you're STILL doing more arguing over the poster or things like whether someone posted than the issue of the thread. Typical.
I've made a variety of points.
Let's call them A, B, C, D.
A & B were pointing out your article was false. You ignored those points and haven't contested that the article was false.
You just want to whine whether "false" => "lie".

Comment C was comments involving you.
THIS you are trying to focus on.
YOU are focusing on that.
You're ignoring A & B to focus on C.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Shoe View Post
'False' and 'lie' are two very different things. The article gives the impression it is more of an ontological issue, when it's more of a computer science demonstration. There is no evidence anyone was out to "lie".
Your reply demonstrates you are either trying to obfuscate the truth or you are oblivious to it. "Ontological" is irrelevant to the reason why the article is false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
As headlines go, it's certainly an eye-catching one. "Scientists Prove Existence of God," German daily Die Welt wrote last week.

But unsurprisingly, there is a rather significant caveat to that claim. In fact, what the researchers in question say they have actually proven is a theorem put forward by renowned Austrian mathematician Kurt Gödel -- and the real news isn't about a Supreme Being, but rather what can now be achieved in scientific fields using superior technology.

When Gödel died in 1978, he left behind a tantalizing theory based on principles of modal logic -- that a higher being must exist. The details of the mathematics involved in Gödel's ontological proof are complicated, but in essence the Austrian was arguing that, by definition, God is that for which no greater can be conceived. And while God exists in the understanding of the concept, we could conceive of him as greater if he existed in reality. Therefore, he must exist.

Even at the time, the argument was not exactly a new one. For centuries, many have tried to use this kind of abstract reasoning to prove the possibility or necessity of the existence of God. But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea. Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.
Computer Scientists 'Prove' God Exists - ABC News
Most criticism of Gödel's proof is aimed at its axioms: As with any proof in any logical system, if the axioms the proof depends on are doubted, then the conclusions can be doubted. This is particularly applicable to Gödel's proof, because it rests on five axioms that are all questionable. The proof does not say that the conclusion has to be correct, but rather that if you accept the axioms, then the conclusion is correct.

Many philosophers have questioned the axioms. The first layer of attack is simply that there are no arguments presented that give reasons why the axioms are true. A second layer is that these particular axioms lead to unwelcome conclusions. This line of thought was argued by Jordan Howard Sobel,[9] showing that if the axioms are accepted, they lead to a "modal collapse" where every statement that is true is necessarily true, i.e. the sets of necessary, of contingent, and of possible truths all coincide (provided there are accessible worlds at all).[note 5] According to Koons,[10]:9 Sobel suggested that Gödel might have welcomed modal collapse.[11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B...ological_proof
So we're back at one of your previous meaningless tricks of trying to whine about whether an egregious falsehood is the result of a Blatant Lie or (my term) Willful Ignorance.
Remember when I had to create the term BLOWI (Blatant Lie Or Willful Ignorance) to help cut through you whining over the nature of the falsehood when the fact that it was a falsehood was the important part?


I guess we're back to that with you.
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
calculations, cientists, existence, god, mathematical, prove, the, use

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0