Prometheus98876

Yeah, forums where the staff are allowed to blatently break their own rules without consequences, while trying to rationalize punishing others that *do not * even do so : Pretty stupid.

Do you want to know why the idea of a "multiverse" is popular? I can tell you. It is because modern cosmology / physics is so riddled with stupid/irratioanlity theories that cannot be rationally tied to anything in reality. So what is their "solution"? To try to appeal to solutions that are *outside of reality*, in some "other existence", which we can never know. They are simply trying to say "reality does not seem to have any connection to my theory, so I am going ot try appeal to something...

One has to be careful when discussing "natural laws". The laws themselves are "manmade", in that the "laws" are conceptual/mathematical statements of real [ or alleged] relationships between entities ( or other facts). The facts which they identify are not manmade however.

Patch Adams has got to be one of the most disgusting smear jobs ever made into a movie. I do not know much about the seemingly dubious methods of the real Patch Adams, but the movie is a gross distortion. The character in the movie is an insane , irresponsible, fraudalent whack job that thinks acting like a retard somehow helps people. He proceeds to run a clinic without a license ( while still a med student), refuse to take medical histories ( which gets his co-worker and girlfriend murdere...

From the Questions Any Honest Person Should Be Able to Answer Themselves Vault, comes this ( from someone the Objectivism Online Forum ) : "What is your support for the claim that radical faith-based Christianity is more faithful to the "basic nature" of the Bible than reason-based Christians, or that radical Muslims are more faithful to the "basic nature" of Islam than those that also support Western values? Both belief systems have self-contradictory elements, and yet you seem to hold the...

If scientists cannot know reality, only abstract rules, as they claim : Why do we give them research grants. We should just give them writing fellowships so that they can make up stuff as they go along. It would be a lot cheaper.....

"What happens if time can be bent into a pretezel? What happens if space can have holes in it?" I would stop taking so many drugs and come back to freaking reality! These questions are moronic and meaningless gibberish. Yet modern physicists take them seriously. *sigh* And they wonder why mystic cults routinely steal their ideas in order to justify their mysticism.

I hate when lecturers ask me to visualize 9-D, or 11-D space etc. There is a word which applies here : Rationalism.

I just finished reading the draft essay written by a bright, young student of Objectivism. It was really good actually and reminded me that not all young minds are poisoned by taint of modern philosophy. There is hope yet. Sometimes I need to see more work like of my friend Ashna Sharan , so that I might be reminded of that. Thank you Ashna, for a gift of such value.

I am really sick of people that are chronically unable to grasp important issues, no matter how many times the truth is hammered into their skulls with a railway spike. Failure to grasp an important issue is fine up to a point and for a little while perhaps, but eventually in many cases it becomes completely absurd and unexcusable.

I want to compile a short list of movies that are guilty of what I call "complexity-worship". By which I mean, when a movie is pointlessy complicated, far so beyond any objective reasons to do with the plot and or theme. Three good examples are Inception ( see my previous comments on this on my Wall ) and the last two Matrix films ( Reloaded and Revolutions). Anyone care to give me some examples?

A little bit of proof of the actual motives of environmentalists : Over here in NZ, the owners of a mine were prevented from taking certain reasonable steps required to make their mine safe for humans. By laws as it happens. Why? To prevent moving snails. Yeap, snails > human lives. You figure out the rest....

*Sigh* look you Quantum Morons : If reality does not exist seperate from conscioussness, as you beleive : How come humans were able to come into being without conscioussness existing first? Or did they just popup into existence with the rest of reality and biology is wrong? Of course, I realize that it would be futile to ask them this, as they have alredy abandoned the notion that contradictions cannot exist.

"Contrary to what most beleive, science is not about determining the truth ; strictly speaking there is no such thing as truth in science" Keith Devlin "There is no quantum world, only an abstract quantum description" - Neils Bohr. These are the voices of "science" in the modern world. Yet "physics" is nearly complete? Obviously this is an absurd assertion that makes as much sense as me claiming that I am a penquin with roller skates for feet.

Just a quick reminder : Having an advanced academic "qualification" ( such as PhD) does not necessarily indicate that one is highly intelligent, a good thinker or even worth paying attention to. Not when academic standards are set so low as to be almost / literally harmful to intelligence and any valid body of knowledge/expertise.

There are a lot of blogs out there written by people that lack the expertise / knowledge required to make meaningful posts about the issues they tackle. I have a blog, and I do not post to it often. Why not? Because before I would even *dream* of posting and making my thoughts public on any issue on a blog, I want to make damn sure that I have thought the issue through at depth and that I truly understand the issue at hand well enough to make meaningful and and useful comments. Granted...

Sometimes when I watch modern intellectuals at work, I am reminded of the last Batman movie, specifically the Joker. A villian with a simple motive, pure unbridled hatred of the good for being good. Someone that lusts for nothing but to destroy the best of men and reduce everyone else to his level. Except these people have far more potential power than the Joker. No amount of bombs, gasoline or knives are as powerful as ideas.

Computer simulations do not qualify as evidence, expect for the fact that someone can make software to try demonstrate what they think will happen under certain circumstances. They do not prove anything else and they certainly do not prove anything [else ] about reality , nor do they validate scientific theories. Simuations of this type are just toys, they tell us what will happen if reality was to work as the simulation was programmed to operate. Reality however is not a computer program...

Context dropping is not something a conscientious thinker engages in. Neither do they insert their own context in where it has no business being. A conscientious thinker evaulates what others say by a strict process of logic : By listening to what they say, keeping the context provided in mind ( *the context includes any relevant statements / implications made by the same speaker* ) and not making up their own interpreation of what the person said/meant, in contradiction with logic. They d...