Scientific evidence of God by an atheist (Where mankind is one likely type of God)

[Excited Penguin]

[ProgrammingGodJordan]

You are so delusional. If you want to remain free you should probably fly under the radar of your society authorities.

('A')

Such are the statistics; [it is highly unlikely that one shall recognize the aforesaid likelihoods/viable scientific observed/observable phenomena, absent research in some profound scientific study/profession]



('B')


Examples:


[i] Suzanne Gildert, a former Quantum Physicist, resigned from DWAVE [builders of the world's first commercial Quantum Computers]. She has started her own Artificial Intelligence firm, Kindred Ai. Kindred's goal is the creation of sentient Ai.

[ii] Sam Harris, a Neuroscientist [perhaps on my account] recently spoke of the likelihood creation of Ai bound Gods.

[iii] Max Tegmark, a Cosmologist, recently released deep neural learning research [deep and cheap learning works so well]. He spoke of the likelihood of sentient AI.

...

[brewer]

Go tell it to a priest or a cop.

[I_am_not_mafia]

[I_am_not_mafia]

Suzanne Gildert, a former Quantum Physicist

Sam Harris, a Neuroscientist

Max Tegmark, a Cosmologist

None of which work are trained in AI.

[Excited Penguin]

He continues to, yes. His main focus isn't it right now, though. 

So what job in Neuroscience has he had since his PhD?

How the fuck should I know ?

How is this question relevant ?

[Excited Penguin]

Suzanne Gildert, a former Quantum Physicist

Sam Harris, a Neuroscientist

Max Tegmark, a Cosmologist

None of which work are trained in AI.

Read Bostrom's book, or even waitbutwhy's blog post(s)  in A. I. There you will find polling done on plenty of A. I. researchers that agree with Harris and Boston on all but the pessimistic bent with which they perceive an eventual emergence of A. I. 

In other words , do some homework on what experts in your own purported field think. Stop pointing out this shit like it matters. One's job or area of expertise is irrelevant of their arguments are sound and the relevant experts agree with their conclusions in large numbers. 

You are being obtuse on purpose , it seems to me.

[I_am_not_mafia]

So what job in Neuroscience has he had since his PhD?

How the fuck should I know ?

How is this question relevant ?

It shows that you were talking out of your arse when you said that he has had a job in Neuroscience since his PhD.

How do you know that he continues to work in Neuroscience if you can't say what job he has had in this field?

Has he actually ever had a post-doctoral job in Neuroscience? Is he continuing to do research in Neuroscience?

He continues to, yes. His main focus isn't it right now, though.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Read Bostrom's book, or even waitbutwhy's blog post(s)  in A. I. There you will find polling done on plenty of A. I. researchers that agree with Harris and Boston on all but the pessimistic bent with which they perceive an eventual emergence of A. I. 

No I am not going to read fucking Bostrom's book on AI. Obviously this is the only book you have ever read on the subject which is why you keep bringing it up. And don't you think that you know, just maybe, perchance, perhaps, he might have carefully selected which scientists he decided to quote in order to make his point and sell pop science books to people like you?

Oh sorry, am I ruining your little fantasy again?

Am I questioning your religious leader's credentials? (I'm referring to Sam Harris btw)

In other words , do some homework on what experts in your own purported field think. Stop pointing out this shit like it matters. One's job or area of expertise is irrelevant of their arguments are sound and the relevant experts agree with their conclusions in large numbers.

The arguments are not sound.

Experience does matter.

Reading a sensationalist pop-science book doesn't.

If experience didn't matter then we wouldn't try to reproduce scientific experiments, we'd just accept the literature at face value.

That's not how science works boy.

[Excited Penguin]

How the fuck should I know ?

How is this question relevant ?

It shows that you were talking out of your arse when you said that he has had a job in Neuroscience since his PhD.

How do you know that he continues to work in Neuroscience if you can't say what job he has had in this field?

He continues to, yes. His main focus isn't it right now, though.

I never said he had a job. I said he continued to do research. How do I know this. . .  His own words. His own links to his published scientific papers. These two taken together , I don't need much more evidence than that. Go look for it yourself, as it is.

I'm done here. Go take your medicine.