Post #274,962
12/6/06 11:02:28 AM
|
Therefore, your PHILOSOPHY
is that if it doesn't withstand rigorous scientific testing, it doesn't exist, right? Right?
And insofar as your 'fraud or chance' thing goes, 'chance' can encompass almost ANY observed phenomena if extended far enough, so it sure makes for a convenient way to dismiss inconvenient observations, don't it? Fraud? Yeah, it happens with things not understood or not well understood.
It is a matter of FAITH however, that all things must fit into a scientific framework to be 'real'. It is a matter of philosophy. You can't prove otherwise from within the scientific framework.
Whether YOU like that fact or not.
And as for understanding scientific method? ROFL. ROFLMAO.
Tell me, just what do you think 'my position' is? What do you think I'm trying to say here? That 'quantum mind' is scientific and needs to be treated on the same level as ST and DE? (well, maybe so, since ST is designed to be unprovable and DE occupies about the same position that epicycles did in the 14th century).
No.
What I don't like is the assumption that science is all, and all is science trotted out as factual.
Taint so, Peter. Can't be proved.
To claim it is is itself unscientific.
All science is, is a way of looking at the world and it's phenomena. Is it practical and useful? Sure! Is it a good way of looking at the world? Yup!
Is it the One, True Way™? I dunno about THAT.
Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
| |
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #274,966
12/6/06 12:03:32 PM
|
Please don't misrepresent what I said.
And I never said that anything HAS to fit into ANY particular framework.
That straw man is of your own making.
My point is, quite simply this:
Quantum Mind (and other woowoo/flimflam guffinations) are not scientific, and it's wrong to present them as such. Further, the woowooflimflam stuff has no credible evidence at all, your weaselling on chance and fraud notwithstanding.
If an event happens, and the two possible explanations are "chance" and "new phenomena that transcend all known laws of physics, but which mysteriously don't have much of an effect the rest of the time", you're damn right I'm going to call it chance, because the second answer requires extraordinary evidence, which quite simply never turns up.
All the other stuff about faith is irrelevant to my point.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[link|http://darwinia.co.uk/|[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]]
|
Post #274,974
12/6/06 12:59:47 PM
|
Horse-
crap. You have routinely mocked - in many posts in this thread - even the idea of the existance of anything paranormal because of the lack of scientific evidence. And now you never said that to be real it has to fit into a scientific framework? Well, I suppose that's almost sort of true. You never EXPLICITLY said that. Quantum Mind (and other woowoo/flimflam guffinations) are not scientific, and it's wrong to present them as such. Further, the woowooflimflam stuff has no credible evidence at all Which is why I brought up ST. ST is ALSO not scientific (at least in it's present form), and is DESIGNED to be untestable. It's just pretty math. DE is just another word for comostatic repulsion, and the only 'evidence' for it is as a bookkeeping trick to prop up current scientismic cosmological ideas. But both of those ideas are fashionable. They fit current scientismic dogma. The idea that you consider Quantum Mind to be a 'woowoo/flimflam guffination' for the same reasons that I disbelieve/dismiss ST & DE amuses me mightily.
Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
| |
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #274,979
12/6/06 1:16:04 PM
|
Whatever.
You're wagging my dog with its tail.
The very concept of "quantum mind" - those very words - implies that the proponents of this woowoo idea want it to be taken seriously as a scientific concept. Why not just call it, oh, I dunno, "gestalt microbrainism" or "feng shite", or some such? Don't wheel out the maths unless you're going to play according to the scientific rules.
You're very excited about dark energy and string theory. That's good.
I particularly like the way you use two very hard concepts with oceans of ugly, difficult mathematics describing them to justify the woowoo-ism of quantum mind.
They might well be total bollocks. The bollockosity quotient of dark energy and string theory is in no way related to the bollockosity quotient of quantum mind.
It might well be that all three concepts are complete toss.
At the moment, however, it's much clearer that one of these three is much, much tossier than the others.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[link|http://darwinia.co.uk/|[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]]
|
Post #274,981
12/6/06 1:24:16 PM
|
*chuckle* Justify Quantum Mind?
Hardly. When did I even attempt that?
And I really like that term: "bollockosity quotient".
Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
| |
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #275,044
12/7/06 12:00:05 AM
|
ICLRPD (new thread)
Created as new thread #275043 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=275043|ICLRPD]
===
Kip Hawley is still an idiot.
===
Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
|
Post #274,980
12/6/06 1:16:08 PM
12/6/06 1:17:36 PM
|
Dupe, ignore
Weird dupe, at that. Same post 4 minutes apart. I only hit save the once.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[link|http://darwinia.co.uk/|[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]]
Edited by pwhysall
Dec. 6, 2006, 01:17:36 PM EST
|
Post #274,972
12/6/06 12:40:02 PM
12/6/06 12:41:01 PM
|
I'm reminded of Willard Van Orman Quine
It is reputed that at one point someone quoted to him the line from Hamlet -- "there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamed of in your philosophy" -- and that Quine said, "I'm trying to ensure that there are not more things in my philosophy than in heaven and earth". --\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
|
Post #275,010
12/6/06 6:33:01 PM
|
omigawd___ the tragedy of psoriasis^h^h_ ab != ba
|
