For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
It didn't.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:33 pmThe very simple question of how this universe began. Please...Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:30 pmWhat origin problem?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:28 pm
Please go on. I'm intrigued. How does this solve the origin problem?
You mean 'you' know it, because 1. the Bible says so and 2. you have actual scientific evidence of it which won you the biggest Nobel in the history of physics Nobels.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:50 pmBut we know it did.Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:35 pmIt didn't.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 5:33 pm
The very simple question of how this universe began. Please...
No, that everybody does. Everybody who can do even basic maths and logic, that would be.
Of course he's wrong, he's just bullshitting. Cosmologists have no choice but to extrapolate from the observable universe, but that may have little to no relevance to the universe.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:12 pmNo, that everybody does. Everybody who can do even basic maths and logic, that would be.
And if it's a matter of trusting expert opinion, how about we hear from a theoretical physicist with over 260 peer-reviewed publications, and one of the three contributors to the famous Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theory?
“It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape: they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.”
– Alexander Vilenkin, Many Worlds in One (New York: Hill and Wang, 2006), 176.
Is Vilenkin wrong? I welcome your correction of him.
Ah. So when you're denying their theories, they are just "bullshitters"?Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:15 pmOf course he's wrong, he's just bullshitting. Cosmologists have no choice but to extrapolate from the observable universe, but that may have little to no relevance to the universe.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:12 pmNo, that everybody does. Everybody who can do even basic maths and logic, that would be.
And if it's a matter of trusting expert opinion, how about we hear from a theoretical physicist with over 260 peer-reviewed publications, and one of the three contributors to the famous Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theory?
“It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape: they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.”
– Alexander Vilenkin, Many Worlds in One (New York: Hill and Wang, 2006), 176.
Is Vilenkin wrong? I welcome your correction of him.
You are unusually bad at comprehending your own quotes. That was not a theory, the guy said "there is no escape" which is claiming a fact.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:22 pmAh. So when you're denying their theories, they are just "bullshitters"?Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:15 pmOf course he's wrong, he's just bullshitting. Cosmologists have no choice but to extrapolate from the observable universe, but that may have little to no relevance to the universe.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:12 pm
No, that everybody does. Everybody who can do even basic maths and logic, that would be.
And if it's a matter of trusting expert opinion, how about we hear from a theoretical physicist with over 260 peer-reviewed publications, and one of the three contributors to the famous Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theory?
“It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. With the proof now in place, cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past-eternal universe. There is no escape: they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.”
– Alexander Vilenkin, Many Worlds in One (New York: Hill and Wang, 2006), 176.
Is Vilenkin wrong? I welcome your correction of him.
Do you believe expert physicists, or not? I think you tried to wave Einstein at me, a few messages ago...did you know he was a physicist?
Which only makes it worse for your wish that the universe had been eternal. It's a fact which you would wish to "escape," and he says there's no chance. And that not only a "reasonable man," but even an "unreasonable man," or presumably "woman," would have to concede the problem.Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:26 pmThat was not a theory, the guy said "there is no escape" which is claiming a fact.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:22 pmAh. So when you're denying their theories, they are just "bullshitters"?
Do you believe expert physicists, or not? I think you tried to wave Einstein at me, a few messages ago...did you know he was a physicist?
And he's lying, the proof he refers to doesn't exist. Any good physicist knows that. So what?Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:41 pmWhich only makes it worse for your wish that the universe had been eternal. It's a fact which you would wish to "escape," and he says there's no chance. And that not only a "reasonable man," but even an "unreasonable man," or presumably "woman," would have to concede the problem.Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:26 pmThat was not a theory, the guy said "there is no escape" which is claiming a fact.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:22 pm
Ah. So when you're denying their theories, they are just "bullshitters"?
Do you believe expert physicists, or not? I think you tried to wave Einstein at me, a few messages ago...did you know he was a physicist?
Vilenkin's lying? He's not telling you what he, as an expert physicist, knows? Horrors. We've been betrayed!Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:44 pmAnd he's lying...Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:41 pmWhich only makes it worse for your wish that the universe had been eternal. It's a fact which you would wish to "escape," and he says there's no chance. And that not only a "reasonable man," but even an "unreasonable man," or presumably "woman," would have to concede the problem.
Yes he's lying. Also, Vilenkin is one physicist, not 'expert physicists' in general.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:58 pmVilenkin's lying? He's not telling you what he, as an expert physicist, knows? Horrors. We've been betrayed!Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:44 pmAnd he's lying...Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:41 pm
Which only makes it worse for your wish that the universe had been eternal. It's a fact which you would wish to "escape," and he says there's no chance. And that not only a "reasonable man," but even an "unreasonable man," or presumably "woman," would have to concede the problem.
Do tell. What dark machinations lurk in the hearts of expert physicists these days, particularly secular ones? How did they come to be so evil? Was Einstein like that, too?
What's your evidence he's not saying what he actually believes to be true?Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:00 pmYes he's lying.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:58 pmVilenkin's lying? He's not telling you what he, as an expert physicist, knows? Horrors. We've been betrayed!
Do tell. What dark machinations lurk in the hearts of expert physicists these days, particularly secular ones? How did they come to be so evil? Was Einstein like that, too?
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:05 pmWhat's your evidence he's not saying what he actually believes to be true?Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:00 pmYes he's lying.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 6:58 pm
Vilenkin's lying? He's not telling you what he, as an expert physicist, knows? Horrors. We've been betrayed!
Do tell. What dark machinations lurk in the hearts of expert physicists these days, particularly secular ones? How did they come to be so evil? Was Einstein like that, too?
And should I ask -- how did you become qualified to know Vilenkin is wrong...or lying...whichever it is you're accusing him of being...grossly incompetent or mendacious?
We're not done. We're still figuring out how you managed to take one of the world's most prominent physicists, and show he's lying.Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:09 pmImmanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:05 pmWhat's your evidence he's not saying what he actually believes to be true?
And should I ask -- how did you become qualified to know Vilenkin is wrong...or lying...whichever it is you're accusing him of being...grossly incompetent or mendacious?
Then present the proof, that will show that he wasn't lying.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:24 pmWe're not done. We're still figuring out how you managed to take one of the world's most prominent physicists, and show he's lying.Atla wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:09 pmImmanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2024 7:05 pm
What's your evidence he's not saying what he actually believes to be true?
And should I ask -- how did you become qualified to know Vilenkin is wrong...or lying...whichever it is you're accusing him of being...grossly incompetent or mendacious?
I'm really starting to worry about Einstein now.
In all seriousness: you were bluffing. You are caught. You'll never admit it, but you know it, and I know it. So nobody who matters in this particular conversation doesn't know it.
On we go.
