Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 20, 2024, 4:36 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The origin of biology
#55
RE: The origin of biology
(March 18, 2016 at 3:56 pm)Esquilax Wrote:
(March 17, 2016 at 10:33 pm)truth_seeker Wrote: concepts of mathematics (e.g. the mental concept of a differential equation, etc) exists outside the physical world. It exists even if you remove this entire world. Ergo, its a supernatural concept (as per the above definition).
Math and logic are mental constructs created as labels to apply to physical objects and the interactions between them. They exist within, and are dependent on, human minds to exist, and human minds are part of the physical world. If you wish to disagree, then defend your assertion: without recourse to human-derived identifications and labels, show me a math or a logic. According to you they exist objectively and independently of humans, so you should be able to do that, else your claim really isn't justified by anything, now is it?
I completely disagree.
Here's a very simple thought experiment:
**Before** all human beings made the statement that says: "1 + 1 = 2".
Wasn't it actually true? Ofcourse it was!
The question to you: where did it exist? there was no human mind in which it was contained


(March 18, 2016 at 3:58 pm)Esquilax Wrote:
(March 17, 2016 at 8:23 pm)truth_seeker Wrote: You are making a logical fallacy.

You are (correctly) assuming that the set of possible explanations expand in the presence of new evidence.
But you are ignoring that new evidence can also shrink the set of possible explanations.

Accordingly, its is completely fine to say that two statements:
A     and      NOT A 
are both possible, with non-zero likelihood, until further evidence reduces the likelihood of one of them to exact zero

If either A or not A cannot be established as possible, and are in fact indicated to be impossible or non-present by all available data, then there's no reason at all to assign a positive likelihood to them. You're shifting the burden of proof by expecting us to prove you wrong before you'll take your bald assertion of the supernatural off the table. The fallacy is yours, not mine, and my question stands.

... You know, along with the rest of the post that you clipped out.

if something was "in fact indicated to be impossible", then we wouldn't be having this entire discussion of including both possibilities A and (not A). My entire argument (check the OP) was exactly that because of the absence of fact, we do need to allow for the two possibilities (with varying likelihoods).

Factual evidence absent = two possibilities (A) and (not A) with varying likelihood
Factual evidence present = one known outcome (A)
Its really very simple, I'm not sure why are you making a counter-argument.


(March 18, 2016 at 6:59 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:
(March 17, 2016 at 9:30 pm)truth_seeker Wrote: Can you please show me a peer reviewed replicated experiment that was able to recreate abiogenensis in vitro?
If you can, I retract my statements.

Go ahead. I'll be waiting here Smile

Can you please show a peer reviewed replicated experiment that shows the supernatural to be the explanation for fucking anything?

Exactly my point. There is no peer review experiment supporting the supernatural. Therefore, it stays within the two possibilities (A and not A) as explained above. Exactly my point.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 1:22 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Esquilax - March 17, 2016 at 1:40 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 2:04 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Esquilax - March 17, 2016 at 3:36 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Jackalope - March 17, 2016 at 4:41 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Simon Moon - March 17, 2016 at 5:34 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 8:23 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Esquilax - March 18, 2016 at 3:58 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by brewer - March 17, 2016 at 1:42 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by TheRealJoeFish - March 17, 2016 at 1:55 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by downbeatplumb - March 17, 2016 at 2:15 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Alex K - March 17, 2016 at 2:21 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by TheRealJoeFish - March 17, 2016 at 3:06 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by RozKek - March 17, 2016 at 2:22 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Alex K - March 17, 2016 at 2:23 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Simon Moon - March 17, 2016 at 2:26 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by The Grand Nudger - March 17, 2016 at 2:34 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 8:30 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Simon Moon - March 17, 2016 at 8:47 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 8:54 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Simon Moon - March 17, 2016 at 3:25 pm
The origin of biology - by KUSA - March 17, 2016 at 8:26 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Minimalist - March 17, 2016 at 8:44 pm
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 9:17 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 9:30 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Ravenshire - March 18, 2016 at 6:59 pm
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 9:31 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 9:38 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Simon Moon - March 17, 2016 at 9:43 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Mister Agenda - March 18, 2016 at 12:05 pm
The origin of biology - by KUSA - March 17, 2016 at 9:37 pm
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 9:40 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by ignoramus - March 17, 2016 at 9:44 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 9:47 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Simon Moon - March 17, 2016 at 9:56 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 9:58 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Simon Moon - March 17, 2016 at 10:13 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 10:18 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 10:33 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Mister Agenda - March 18, 2016 at 12:09 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Esquilax - March 18, 2016 at 3:56 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Alex K - March 18, 2016 at 10:24 pm
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 9:48 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 17, 2016 at 9:51 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Mister Agenda - March 18, 2016 at 12:06 pm
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 9:53 pm
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 9:54 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by brewer - March 17, 2016 at 10:00 pm
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 17, 2016 at 10:10 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by The Grand Nudger - March 17, 2016 at 11:18 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Mudhammam - March 18, 2016 at 1:06 am
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 18, 2016 at 10:56 am
The origin of biology - by LadyForCamus - March 18, 2016 at 12:15 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Nay_Sayer - March 18, 2016 at 1:08 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 19, 2016 at 12:00 am
RE: The origin of biology - by Esquilax - March 19, 2016 at 2:16 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by Ravenshire - March 20, 2016 at 12:03 am
RE: The origin of biology - by ignoramus - March 19, 2016 at 12:12 am
RE: The origin of biology - by truth_seeker - March 19, 2016 at 12:24 am
RE: The origin of biology - by RozKek - March 19, 2016 at 7:05 am
RE: The origin of biology - by Ravenshire - March 19, 2016 at 12:14 pm
RE: The origin of biology - by robvalue - March 19, 2016 at 12:36 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Origin ShirkahnW 17 3349 January 23, 2018 at 6:14 am
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)