(March 11, 2017 at 8:46 pm)Jesster Wrote:(March 11, 2017 at 8:40 pm)comet Wrote: na, you are avoiding now. Your opinion is meaningless without some type of measurement. look up the definition of measurement. Thats neil's point.
You won't make the comparison because you have a personal opinion to protect. Science is not concerned with how you feel about its descriptions of how the universe works.
science is not concerned with what you believe.
You are the one asserting a belief here, so you have it backwards. You believe that the universe is alive. That opinion is meaningless until you back it up. I am withholding an opinion on this until science can show that it even possibly a fact, and that hasn't happened yet.
This is exactly what Neil is saying about falsifiability. Are you sure you watched this video?
yes, you are flat out avoiding now. I would even say running away at this point. Neils point is measure first. Hopefully you understand the measurement, but if you don't, thats your problem.
First: compare the biosphere's interactions to the interactions we call non life, viruses, and life. What does its interactions line up best with?
second: Record your measurement?
third: we will compare your reading to my reading.
fourth: what is the most valid claim off of that measurement?
what we believe is irrelevant.
thats neils point.
anti-logical Fallacies of Ambiguity
