Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,829 Year: 4,086/9,624 Month: 957/974 Week: 284/286 Day: 5/40 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Life on other Planets?
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 65 of 160 (594567)
12-03-2010 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Bolder-dash
12-03-2010 9:55 PM


Re: Huh?????
Bolder-dash writes:
Physical life is evidence for meta-physical life! get outta here! Life on Earth is evidence for life on other planets..get the fuck...wait, what?!
The logic is quite simple.
1) Is there evidence of physical life? Yes.
2) Is there evidence of physical life on a planet? Yes - Earth.
3) Is there evidence of other planets? Yes.
4) Could physical life exist on those other planets? It is possible.
or
1) Is there evidence of meta-physical life? No.
It is not too difficult to understand.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-03-2010 9:55 PM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-03-2010 10:36 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(1)
Message 88 of 160 (594642)
12-04-2010 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Bolder-dash
12-03-2010 10:36 PM


Re: Huh?????
BD writes:
The universe is either chaos or ordered.
The universe should be described as both ordered and chaotic, as they are not mutually exclusive in scientific parlance.
BD writes:
Chaos could be described as a lack of a plan, a lack of consistency, a lack of form, a lack of structure of organization or of meaning.
But that would be incorrect.
I think that you are knowingly conflating the common definition of chaos with the scientific definition of chaos which is:
quote:
Chaotic systems consequently appear disordered and random. However, they are actually deterministic systems governed by physical or mathematical laws, and so are completely predictable given perfect knowledge of the initial conditions.
BD writes:
Order could be described as structure, as consistency, as form, as organization, as observable, verifiable forms of meaning.
It could be described as "verifiable forms of meaning" but that would be incorrect.
But I suspect that you are intentionally mis-using the word 'order', when you actually want to use the word 'design'.
BD writes:
From our observable experience we know that order is more likely when something is intelligently crafted, whereas chaos is more likely when there is no intelligence at work.
From my 'observable experience' I know that order is not reliant on intelligence.
But again I suspect that you are intentionally mis-using the word 'order', when you actually want to use the word 'design'.
BD writes:
Our universe appears to have order based on our observations, therefore it is more likely to be derived from an intelligent source.
This conclusion is completely undermined by its false premises.
BD writes:
God is the name people give to an intelligent source, therefore a God is likely.
quote:
Allah is the name people give to an intelligent source, therefore Allah is likely.
Thor is the name people give to an intelligent source, therefore Thor is likely.
Human is the name people give to an intelligent source, therefore a human is likely.
Lassie is the name people give to an intelligent source, therefore Lassie is likely.
You have ended up doing nothing more than reason that intelligence possibly exists.
BD writes:
Thank you for showing me the way Panda! You are indeed enlightened.
That is a non-sequitur.
Even your insults are illogical.
Edited by Panda, : typos

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-03-2010 10:36 PM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-04-2010 1:26 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 99 of 160 (594677)
12-04-2010 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Bolder-dash
12-04-2010 1:26 PM


Re: Huh?????
Thanks for the link.
BD writes:
chaos

—noun
4.
(initial capital letter) the personification of this in any of several ancient Greek myths.
5.
Obsolete. a chasm or abyss.
The behavior of systems that follow deterministic laws but appear random and unpredictable. Chaotic systems very are sensitive to initial conditions; small changes in those conditions can lead to quite different outcomes. One example of chaotic behavior is the flow of air in conditions of turbulence.
A new branch of science that deals with systems whose evolution depends very sensitively upon the initial conditions. Turbulent flows of fluids (such as white water in a river) and the prediction of the weather are two areas where chaos theory has been applied with some success.
A property of some non-linear dynamic systems which exhibit sensitive dependence on initial conditions. This means that there are initial states which evolve within some finite time to states whose separation in one or more dimensions of state space depends, in an average sense, exponentially on their initial separation.
You intentionally didn't list the other meanings as that would have undermined your point.
If you have to lie to make a point, then that point is invalid.
BD writes:
When it me choosing the words I get to decide what their meanings are. In most cases I will use the actual meaning of the word!
Which makes it easy for everyone as words only have one meaning.
Oh no, they don't - but at least we can read your mind to find out which meaning you are using.
Oh no, we can't - but at least we can use the context to identify which meaning you are using.
Oh no, we can't - as you use which ever meaning you feel like, regardless of the context.
BD writes:
So which does the world appear more like to you-order or chaos?
I addressed all of the points you raised in your original message, but you think you can ignore my replies and start asking more facile questions.
If you do not have the decency to address my responses then you are again being intentionally dishonest when debating.
If only Christianity had some requirement for honesty or maybe some kind of moral guide.
But it would seem not, judging by your behaviour.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-04-2010 1:26 PM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3740 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 127 of 160 (594866)
12-05-2010 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Bolder-dash
12-05-2010 5:00 AM


Edited by Panda, : Hidden
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Bolder-dash, posted 12-05-2010 5:00 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024