Whateverman
Well-known member
Not rocks, or breathable atmosphere. Your failed logic isn't "belief based".
What's reality?
- Thread starter Tercon
- Start date
How do you know what's "rocks, or breathable atmosphere" silly?
Do you believe that logic exists silly? Maybe you should try using it sometime.
Whateverman
Well-known member
English, please.
Logic is an abstraction of effective language. If language exists, then logic exists.
YOUR logic doesn't exist, because it's based on a refusal to use language the way it's been defined.
These are English words: 'How do you know what's "rocks, or breathable atmosphere" silly? Can you know what "rocks, or breathable atmosphere" are without your believing mind?
Logic is a attribute of the truth and reality, it indicates its non-contradictory nature.
Whateverman
Well-known member
Assembled together like a toddler with alphabetic fridge magnets
Prove it.
So funny. I've been banned twice for this drivel. You're a name-caller and just won't answer a question, "Tercon."
I'm being nice now.
Can you show me (just cut and paste how you have) how you've answered anyone's questions?
Amazing how you've united me with Atheists. They're right about you, as I've been saying this whole time.
Why were you banned? Telling people they are being silly is pretty lite. Don't get angry, that's what gets you banned. And if this place makes you angry, then this probably isn't for you.
I have not seen it.
Because you use some of the same tactics. And I don't know what you believe, because you are too busy scoffing at me rather than debating atheists.
And this is my answer. It doesn't matter if you don't like it or disagree with it, you asked me for my first principle, so deal with what's being said to you rather than pretending I have not answered your question. That's how atheists argue.
My answer: Everything is belief based. And if it isn't in the form of a belief, then it has nothing to do with the truth or reality. God tells us to believe for a reason, because He uses belief to do everything He does. God doesn't do things to us, rather He does it with us; He believes with us and that makes us a part of His truth and reality = His Kingdom.
I have to talk to you like a toddler, because you wouldn't understand me if I didn't. You're so far behind in your delusion that you think you're first.
If all truth and reality is logical, then logicality must be a part of and attribute of the truth and reality. Also, all three can only be known and occur in a with a believing mind, don't forget that. Now deal with what's being said to you instead of running away from it, because atheism is so darn boring. Atheism cannot get you beyond your ignorance to a place of knowledge.
Whateverman
Well-known member
And yet you are answering all my posts and disagreeing with them, as if they were not understandable, then what are you disagreeing with silly?
Yes I understand how and why the truth and reality works. It is you who struggles with this. QM requires and entails a believing mind in order for WFC and entanglement to occur. And no-one as shown otherwise.
That's not what the actual physicists say. They say you're wrong.
That's not a first principle.
It's mine and your opinion as to what my first principle matters not, because it is mine and not yours. Understand? Now deal what has been said to you instead of pretending it hasn't been said. Like I said, you seem to have pick up some of the atheist discussion tactics.
Last edited:
I have not seen any physicist including show that "observation", "measurement" or a believing mind isn't necessary and entailed in order for WFC and entanglement to occur. As far as I know all present QM models include as a apart of their methodology "observation" and "measurement" to this day. And you haven't shown otherwise.
Then you haven't been paying attention. Also, that which is required for scientific methodology has no bearing on what is required for QM events to occur. QM events occur all the time, regardless of whether or not there is any scientist observing or measuring them.
I have seen lots of silly people including you pretending that a believing mind isn't necessary in order for events to be known to occur, but I have never seen anyone including you that can actually demonstrate this in reality.
Why don't you tell us about the "QM events" that "occur all the time" silly?
No you haven't. No-one here has ever told you that.
Here's an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_compass
Here's another: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
Sure you have, you and Carroll are doing just that when you pretend that there is no need of "consciousness" or a believing mind to know anything to exist or occur. The truth, reality and all its occurrence is the product of "consciousness" and you can't show otherwise. You are even silly enough to pretend you aren't trying to do just that by diminishing belief's role in the truth and reality, when all you are doing is projecting your silly atheism (unbelief) onto everything.
All I seen was things made possible by a conscious mind and nothing that didn't require or entail consciousness in order to be known to occur silly.
You're strawmanning. No-one has ever told you that a believing mind is not needed for knowledge. We are rather telling you that a mind is not required for QM events to occur. And I just gave you examples of quantum events that occur without any mind having to observe them. Quantum technologies like the quantum compass would not work without quantum events occurring, yet these technologies do still work without anyone having to actually observe those events as they occur, just as your computer works even when you're not observing the transfer of electrons through the CPU.
And it's already failing. Do you even know what you're talking about?
Nope.
You just bloviate and ignore. It's called "pulling a Tercon" now.
Not an opinion. You don't understand philosophy 101, dude. Are you even old enough to have taken this course??? Nope.
MY TOYS! MINE!!!!
Nope. Truly, you have a dizzying intellect...
Wow. That was a HUGE whine.
Just answer my question from eons ago, deflector and awful debator.