Philosophy Now Forum

Blaggard wrote: WL I still recommend you learn from people who are in the field of science, not people who think the field of science is shit and full of time wasting morons, but meh you get the point.

You should also ask experts, and I don't think I or Greyhorn El qualifies as one. Which seems to me like common sense. You have access to experts now who are experimental and theoretical phsycists, I will say though the rigour on science forums is much greater you will need to be careful about expounding philosophy on a science forum, if you choose to do so, or you might find your first several posts are your last.

I have indeed looked at many scientists, and I will continue to do so. However, let me say to you though that I mainly rely on my own thinking skills to decide what is true and what is false, instead of just accepting what an "expert" believes just because he has some titles at some universities.

Nevertheless, I'll still check out the forum. I have looked at some of the posts on that forum, though, and it doesn't seem to be any more professional than this one.

WanderingLands wrote: Sorry for the misconception; it was Blaggard who mentioned that, about dropping out of Physics. I will also look at that video you've shown me, and I will hope to explore more of your information. Thank you.

WL,
Misconception understood. B. has taken a dislike to me, and invents lies to justify his dislike. He seems to have a bit of a reading comprehension problem, has not perused any of my material. and in my experience seems to prefer vituperation to critical conversation. He will be unable to reference any post from me that supports his lies, because no such posts exist. I believe that his credentials, such as they are, come from his own invention. I broke off communications with him because I find him as dogmatic as a Jehovah's Witness, but who reacts to the rejection of his beliefs like an angry Muslim militant.

There is enough mindless dogma and compulsive anger at its rejection in the world already, and that's not what I'm here for. I wish him the best, and hope that he will someday find a mirror within which he can truly see himself.

Greylorn

Greylorn Ell wrote:

WanderingLands wrote: Sorry for the misconception; it was Blaggard who mentioned that, about dropping out of Physics. I will also look at that video you've shown me, and I will hope to explore more of your information. Thank you.

WL,
Misconception understood. B. has taken a dislike to me, and invents lies to justify his dislike. He seems to have a bit of a reading comprehension problem, has not perused any of my material. and in my experience seems to prefer vituperation to critical conversation. He will be unable to reference any post from me that supports his lies, because no such posts exist. I believe that his credentials, such as they are, come from his own invention. I broke off communications with him because I find him as dogmatic as a Jehovah's Witness, but who reacts to the rejection of his beliefs like an angry Muslim militant.

There is enough mindless dogma and compulsive anger at its rejection in the world already, and that's not what I'm here for. I wish him the best, and hope that he will someday find a mirror within which he can truly see himself.

Greylorn

I've taken a dislike you for one reason only you never answer anything you can't answer, and just put people on ignore who ask you questions you can't answer, who utterly destroy your argument. I am still waiting for an argument on your nonsense genetics maths, which you know full well was complete ass gravy, but didn't answer because you knew full well by doing so it would show you don't understand what you are talking about. You wont answer and it's not because you are pissed off and it's not because something I said was hard to comprehend, or you didn't like the way I wrote it, or you are a grammarian, or whatever shit you want to make up next as an excuse to be wrong, and not be able to answer peoples point. It's simply because you were wrong and you know it and to admit that is hard. Sometimes you are wrong. Admit it, in life you can't be riight all the time. To actually say I am wrong for you is like saying I am dead and nothing I ever do or say again will ever matter. Although let's face it nothing you ever do or say will ever matter for preciesely that reason. You wont engage me, you wont enage anyone, you wont even engage science, because as you must know you are a numpty and really have not the education to criticise it at all.

I have a degree in biology you don't to acknowledge someone knows more about a subject than you, and can destroy your argument is the living end to you. I presume you have spent your life dealing with people in the same way (they don't agree ignore, never speak to them no agian no matter how adroit their argument is) and that of course explains your nonsense pseudo scientific drivel; here's a little advice, people whp never listen to anyone but themselves never learn. Ok your odd little meh meh meh I am not listening to 80% of the forum fest that you indulge in is ok by me, it is fine but you ever dare to criticise me for anything again, when you can't even be bothered to deal with 80% of the questions people ask you, and it's not me 70% of those are people you are just unable to answer. Well if you ever dare to write one word of criticism about my style, beam from your own eye and mote from mine. People know what you are by now: a running forum joke, don't make out that somehow by magic spending a year being a running forum joke somehow makes you the all singing dancing crap of the world, because it aint going to past muster.

Grey your a fake and you know it, it's not that you have ideas, it's just that anyone who asks a question you can't answer is ignored. This is of course how you spend your time posting, this is of course your prerogative, but don't expect people to see you as anything other than a charlitain because of it.

Don't mention my name, don't even mention me, because you can't handle the truth.

WanderingLands wrote:

Blaggard wrote: WL I still recommend you learn from people who are in the field of science, not people who think the field of science is shit and full of time wasting morons, but meh you get the point.

You should also ask experts, and I don't think I or Greyhorn El qualifies as one. Which seems to me like common sense. You have access to experts now who are experimental and theoretical phsycists, I will say though the rigour on science forums is much greater you will need to be careful about expounding philosophy on a science forum, if you choose to do so, or you might find your first several posts are your last.

I have indeed looked at many scientists, and I will continue to do so. However, let me say to you though that I mainly rely on my own thinking skills to decide what is true and what is false, instead of just accepting what an "expert" believes just because he has some titles at some universities.

Nevertheless, I'll still check out the forum. I have looked at some of the posts on that forum, though, and it doesn't seem to be any more professional than this one.

Good you are in the right "ball park", I only suggested that because it is good to know where the ballpark is on what street and hence what it is that you are driving towards.

No one in science thinks anyone has it right, Greyhorn el if you read "his thread" does, but then he is not a scientist, but a snake oil salesman trying to plug a self published bible no one will buy. By default he knows he is right, the faith is fine, the way he demeans anyone who posts really irks me. There's no way that guy is over 30, I am sorry no one who has lived that long and been that much of a patronising dick to everyone he meets could be over 30, I think he's a troll now, knows he wont sell any of his books and so is just trolling, because all publicity for spamming advertising on his book is good publicity but that is by the by. Why the mods allow him to basically sell a book and proselytise his faith is anyone's guess, but don't let him sucker you in. Next thing you know you will be paying out $15 for a book that is rated badly on Amazon, that he published out of his own money and that has not a shred of philosophy or science in any of it.

Blaggard wrote:... I am still waiting for an argument on your nonsense genetics maths ...

You and me both. Not sure what you pointed out but I just asked him how his genetic probabilities would come out if he factored in the sieve of natural selection. Still awaiting his calculations.

Blaggard wrote:... Next thing you know you will be paying out $15 for a book that is rated badly on Amazon, that he published out of his own money and that has not a shred of philosophy or science in any of it.

You wanna hear something funny, took a look at the reviews and he's actually posted his own favourable one under another pseudonym.

Arising_uk wrote:

Blaggard wrote:... I am still waiting for an argument on your nonsense genetics maths ...

You and me both. Not sure what you pointed out but I just asked him how his genetic probabilities would come out if he factored in the sieve of natural selection. Still awaiting his calculations.

Pretty much the same question, you won't get an answer, you wouldn't expect one would you?

It's a question he can't answer and so will not. He knows he's wrong so you might as well expect hell to freeze over. Posted science papers that did what he claimed was impossible from reputable journals, posted my own maths explanation in my own words because he claimed I was just quoting from google, posted a long and well worded criticism afterwards because he claimed I was well whatever to be honest, what did I get on ignore the first time and some vacuous excuse about how I can't write English, second time, silence, and the abject silence the second time was bad enough, he asked for an explanation he wouldn't reply to, the third time; well that was really sad, because he asked a third time, why even ask questions if you aren't prepared to answer them. If you want a converstation grey by all means have one, if you don't by all means don't, but don't pretend and make excuses, when you ask a question you haven't even the first idea how to answer, because it's obvious you have no idea, so to then make the same specious arguments later, really only shows that what you are up to is nothing but fradulent.

He's a card, I will admit, and he certainly knows how to sell snake oil, the card he is isn't even the joker, it's worse than that he is the dead mans hand in poker, drawing from the deck a high 5 card mess.

Arising_uk wrote:

Blaggard wrote:... Next thing you know you will be paying out $15 for a book that is rated badly on Amazon, that he published out of his own money and that has not a shred of philosophy or science in any of it.

You wanna hear something funny, took a look at the reviews and he's actually posted his own favourable one under another pseudonym.

You, AUK, are a lying asshole.

Is that right redhawk? If so my apologies as it looks like you have a doppleganger or at least that your readers have weak minds that are easily programmed.
p.s.
Going to be producing those recalculated genetic probabilities any time soon?

Greylorn Ell wrote:

Arising_uk wrote:

Blaggard wrote:... Next thing you know you will be paying out $15 for a book that is rated badly on Amazon, that he published out of his own money and that has not a shred of philosophy or science in any of it.

You wanna hear something funny, took a look at the reviews and he's actually posted his own favourable one under another pseudonym.

You, AUK, are a lying asshole.

Physician heal thyself, the day you come to the discussion table with one half the integrity most people have in any of these discussions, and answer their questions like anyone else does who wants a debate- and you don't have to answer my questions, and you don't have to answer UKs questions. But the sheer number of people you have ignored is bewildering for someone who is claiming to enter into discussion. You have no means at all, and no right at all to call people liars, even if they were, and even if they weren't. You have to earn the right to be honest and to judge others veracity, by using intelectual honesty, so far all you have done is earn people's criticism. Only you can change that deal, and it wont be by throwing out ad homs at people you can't answer and have no means to, or calling them liars. I am sure UK believes what he says, that doesn't make him a liar, but if he was wrong the first thing anyone would would do would be to prove it, what you did was to resort to a personal attack, which means I think you are unable to prove him wrong.

I sincerely hope you get some success in your life, but all this whining about science, means it will not be in science, philosophy or anywhere but in your mind. No hard feelings but you are going downhill fast with your arguments, and no one is buying it, and that's not their fault, it's yours. Discuss with people, stop making excuses why you can't, and if it is possible and more importantly answer peoples questions; could post a list of at least 4 dozen peoples questions you did not answer, and that begs the question why? Why is it so hard to enter into discussion with people who challenge you. I think you know that answer, as does anyone else.

Dude you do it to yourself, you do, if you won't approach discussion with a mind and a will to actually have one who the hell should care?

Greylorn Ell wrote:[]I suggest that you stop eating and drinking until you get them. As I explained, NS and the probability of genetic changes are not related, not causally, not mathematically. NS would apply even if God or Monsanto programmed the DNA for every critter. But then, you do not appear sufficiently intelligent to have understood that explanation. Sorry that I wasted my time on a 15-yo kid struggling to make it through high-school.

Greylorn

No you didn't you never replied to my posts not once, in fact if you can quote where you did, I would like to see it, please show me where you did, suffice to say it's too late now to claim something you didn't do for the third time by mincing making excusses and then wasting all our time.

And stop making ad homs as well in lieu of argument it just makes you sound even more like you can't tackle the subject.

We've got your number Grey we know you are a fake, your arguments prove it. Give it up, go find a forum that likes your style is my advice.

Tell you what why don't you insult people some more, that's going to explain why you can't answer peoples well phrased questions isn't it? Grey your really not doing anything but avoiding answering questions, and I am sure that works in some forums you hang around on, but answer the questions, or by your own rope hang yourself. No one cares about how stupid you think they are, not one person cares, not ever, that's just boring trolling/flaming, we can assume those who can answer questions are able to do so. If they are so stupid and remedial and dumb and idiotic and puerle, well your job should be all the easier, no? So why is it so hard to answer questions from morons..?

Kant has argued that fundamental substance has two inherent forces - attractive and repulsive. My work is along the same lines as WSM:

https://www.academia.edu/7347240/Our_Co ... _Dialectic

volatileworld wrote:Kant has argued that fundamental substance has two inherent forces - attractive and repulsive. My work is along the same lines as WSM:

https://www.academia.edu/7347240/Our_Co ... _Dialectic

Looks interesting - I'll look at it.

Incidentaly Kant was someone both Niels Bohr and Einstein read and indeed utilised in their more philosophical aspects of science, such as interpretation issues. One was anti quantum mechanics the other practically gave it wings, see if you can guess which was which, it's not as easy as it sounds, here's a clue though Einstein is one of the fathers of quantum mechanics, Bohr was often skeptical... Scientists like cats in a sack.

Kant and post-Kantian German Idealism will come back in the context of modern physics. This 200 year old philosophy has a lot to teach modern scientists! Especially Hegel's ''Science of Logic'' in the context of quantum physics. I think Hegel is the culmination of continental philosophy.

I've been reading Wave Structure of Matter a couple of years ago. As far as I remember the author of this theory makes a mistake by regarding original transcendentally ideal space as 3D (correct me if I am wrong).
Transcendentally ideal space is static and 2D Euclidian. In my project I argue that original transcendentally ideal space is 2D holographic framework of 6D cells and the 3D non-Euclidian empirically real space appears after the synthesis of productive imagination.

volatileworld wrote:Kant and post-Kantian German Idealism will come back in the context of modern physics. This 200 year old philosophy has a lot to teach modern scientists! Especially Hegel's ''Science of Logic'' in the context of quantum physics. I think Hegel is the culmination of continental philosophy.

I've been reading Wave Structure of Matter a couple of years ago. As far as I remember the author of this theory makes a mistake by regarding original transcendentally ideal space as 3D (correct me if I am wrong).
Transcendentally ideal space is static and 2D Euclidian. In my project I argue that original transcendentally ideal space is 2D holographic framework of 6D cells and the 3D non-Euclidian empirically real space appears after the synthesis of productive imagination.

A "dimension" means a measurement or a quantity, which is Length, Width, and Height, which is what all objects contain. Thus, there cannot be more than three dimensions, that is, unless if there's any other actual quantity that can be measured.

How do you, though, define a "dimension"? How can there be such things as 6D?