The problem with it all starts very early. "a consistent (as we assume) set of repeated events we use as a reference (e.g. clock ticks, radiation, moon cycle, etc."
I would imagine the whole thing runs into problems when you realise these "reference" points are relative and not consistent throughout the whole universe simultaneously.
I would also imagine that the OP would sooner reinterpret the argument to take things like this into account than to admit the conclusion is faulty.
I would imagine the whole thing runs into problems when you realise these "reference" points are relative and not consistent throughout the whole universe simultaneously.
I would also imagine that the OP would sooner reinterpret the argument to take things like this into account than to admit the conclusion is faulty.
Self-authenticating private evidence is useless, because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. ― Kel, Kelosophy Blog
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm