Human consciousness = RAM memory

[Cassie]

Use the force!

 

[The Harlot]

My panties and bra always match, thanks.

 

[Toxicdistortion]

What argument? Better check the Flux Capacitor of your Death Star, it might need more Dilithium Crystals.

Er, Every argument. And nice try with the joke.

I think it was the existence of an "argument" that was in question. And yeah, I gotta sharpen up the jokes. I probably should've stopped after the Flux Capacitor and left the Treky shit out. I was gonna try to work in a bit about the rat thingies that Luke hunted back on Tatoonie (sp?), but I didn't feel like doing the legwork.

ANYWAY...I think Miss Tanner's boobs is a much more interesting subject anyway.

 

[Dark Jedi]

Don't you? Why go through that many contortions trying to validate your unsupportably broad definition if you don't care whether that definition works?


I didn't say it was wrong, I said it's useless and therefore worthless.

Ok, i'll try to make it simple for you, this is the definition i was using, if you are unable to comprehend its meaning in the context that i was using it in, then that's your problem.

The word theory has a number of distinct meanings in different fields of knowledge, depending on their methodologies and the context of discussion.

In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality.

I've said before, to other idiots, that it's possible to be insulting and still be right. 1+1=2, you snivelling fuck. See? I insulted you and I was still right.

I'm an idiot? OMG have you read what you've actualy posted in this thread? I Suppose it's easier for you to just insult me now than it is to try and dig yourself out of the hole you've backed yourself in to.

 

[Dark Jedi]

Well, we'll have to put this on hold folks till tomorrow. duty calls.

 

[The Question]

Ok, i'll try to make it simple for you, this is the definition i was using, if you are unable to comprehend its meaning in the context that i was using it in, then that's your problem.

No, what I comprehend is that your overly broad application of the word strips it of all meaning or context. And that, my friend, is your problem.

I'm an idiot?

Yes -- and here comes proof:

OMG have you read what you've actualy posted in this thread?

OMGLOL since I wrote it, I guess I would have had to, huh?

I Suppose it's easier for you to just insult me now than it is to try and dig yourself out of the hole you've backed yourself in to.

Can't dig myself out of a hole I'm not in, son.

 

[Toxicdistortion]

mythical holes will get you every time. thank god you can't impregnate one.

i think.

 

[Toxicdistortion]

Shouldn't there be an offshoot or something to Godwin's Law? Something along the lines of

"Once one combatant requests that a fellow combatant extricate himself from an alleged inferior position, the first combatant shall be pwned."

 

[Dark Jedi]

No, what I comprehend is that your overly broad application of the word strips it of all meaning or context. And that, my friend, is your problem.

No, the problem is that you falsely assumed (and still seem to, even after I was kind enough to enlighten you) that a theory is something that only exists in the exact scientific sense of the word.

But even in the scientific sense of the word, a theory doesn’t have to have made testable predictions to be called a theory.

I'm an idiot?

Yes -- and here comes proof:

...have you read what you've actualy posted in this thread?

OMGLOL since I wrote it, I guess I would have had to, huh?

No, I’m sorry professor Logic, I assumed that you hadn’t read them. They’re so random in nature that I assumed that they must have been copied and pasted from some unknown place on the Internet. -exactly where though, I’d hate to even speculate-

And if that is your idea of what constitutes proof, then maybe it’s not suppressing that you’re struggling so much in this thread.

*Wipes tear away from his eye*

PWNED!!!!!!!!!!!

Can't dig myself out of a hole I'm not in, son.

That hole you’re in son is your grave, and you’re bout to get buried!

 

[Cassie]

random access memory?

 

[Cranky Bastard]

Really Assinine Maunderings

 

[The Question]

No, the problem is that you falsely assumed (and still seem to, even after I was kind enough to enlighten you) that a theory is something that only exists in the exact scientific sense of the word.

Well, yes, because -- gosh darn it! -- that's what a theory is. A scientific explanation. Thus, if it isn't explaining something, it's not a theory. Your zany "we only exist in a computer!" babble doesn't explain anything. Hence, not a theory.

But even in the scientific sense of the word, a theory doesn’t have to have made testable predictions to be called a theory.

Oh, yes -- it does. Know why? If you set forth an explanation for a phenomenon, the test of your explanation is whether or not the phenomenon in question will behave according to your explanation in the future. If it doesn't, then your explanation doesn't work.

No, I’m sorry professor Logic, I assumed that you hadn’t read them. They’re so random in nature that I assumed that they must have been...

Okay, just stop. You're obviously retarded.

And if that is your idea of what constitutes proof, then maybe it’s not suppressing that you’re struggling so much in this thread.

And if the word 'suppressing' is your idea of the word 'surprising', then it's no wonder you also can't use the word 'theory' in its proper context. You have the language comprehension of an autistic four year old.

*Wipes tear away from his eye*

Don't cry, you obviously can't help being a moron.

PWNED!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, you could've avoided being pwnd if only you'd quit while you were somewhat less behind.

That hole you’re in son is your grave, and you’re bout to get buried!

By what, the bullshit pouring through your keyboard?

 

[Dark Jedi]

Here's another "theory" which is similarly stupid, and for similar reasons:

All disease in humans has already been cured; in fact, the key to human immortality has been unlocked -- by one brilliant scientist. This scientist lives in a high-rise condo in a city which exists on a single atom of a Planter's Peanut. Go ahead and try to disprove that. Better yet, since it's pointless to try to disprove it or even think about it, don't bother.

Ok, I’ll disprove that., disease in humans can’t have been cured because there are still sick people in the world.

And you’re calling me retarded?

 

[The Question]

Ok, I’ll disprove that., disease in humans can’t have been cured because there are still sick people in the world.

And you’re calling me retarded?

That doesn't prove anything; there are no sick humans on the peanut atom where the genius scientist lives.

 

[Dark Jedi]

Well, yes, because -- gosh darn it! -- that's what a theory is. A scientific explanation. Thus, if it isn't explaining something, it's not a theory. Your zany "we only exist in a computer!" babble doesn't explain anything. Hence, not a theory.

This theory which you don't understand in the slightest, actually does have it's roots in logic and mathematics. and is taken seriously by many top scientists.

But even in the scientific sense of the word, a theory doesn’t have to have made testable predictions to be called a theory.

Oh, yes -- it does. Know why? If you set forth an explanation for a phenomenon, the test of your explanation is whether or not the phenomenon in question will behave according to your explanation in the future. If it doesn't, then your explanation doesn't work.

If you knew the first thing about science (which obviously you don't) then you would understand that a theory may only exist in the realm of logic or mathamatics. Example: Super string Theory has been around for ages and has
only recently come close to making a testable prediction. so that just proves that you don't know what you are talking about.

And if the word 'suppressing' is your idea of the word 'surprising', then it's no wonder you also can't use the word 'theory' in its proper context. You have the language comprehension of an autistic four year old.

bitching about one typo That's what people do when they are getting desperate. and compared to your earlier blunder it was nothing.

Well, you could've avoided being pwnd if only you'd quit while you were somewhat less behind.

That's the spirit!

 

[Dark Jedi]

That doesn't prove anything; there are no sick humans on the peanut atom where the genius scientist lives.

But you didn’t say that in your post. You said all disease in humans. You didn’t qualify it to any praticular group of humans. It’s there for all to see

How many fuck up's is that now? i've lost count!

 

[The Question]

This theory which you don't understand in the slightest, actually does have it's roots in logic and mathematics. and is taken seriously by many top scientists.

"The existence of the Tooth Fairy is accepted by dozens of top dentists."

See why that doesn't work? Actually, I'm betting you don't.

If you knew the first thing about science (which obviously you don't) then you would understand that a theory may only exist in the realm of logic or mathamatics.

Overly broad or overly narrow; pick one.

Example: Super string Theory has been around for ages and has
only recently come close to making a testable prediction.

(Source.)

Superstring theory is an attempt to explain all of the particles and fundamental forces of nature in one theory by modeling them as vibrations of tiny supersymmetric strings. It is considered one of the most promising candidate theories of quantum gravity[citation needed]. Superstring theory is a shorthand for "supersymmetric string theory" because unlike bosonic string theory, it is the version of string theory that incorporates fermions and supersymmetry.
The deepest problem in theoretical physics is harmonizing the theory of general relativity, which describes gravitation and applies to large-scale structures (stars, galaxies, super clusters), with quantum mechanics which describes the other three fundamental forces acting on the microscopic scale.
The development of a quantum field theory of a force invariably results in infinite (and therefore useless) probabilities. Physicists have developed mathematical techniques (renormalization) to eliminate these infinities which work for the electromagnetic, strong nuclear and weak nuclear forces, but not gravity. Thus the development of a quantum theory of gravity must come about by different means than were used for the other forces.

Let's review that first line once again, for the slow:

Superstring theory is an attempt to explain all of the particles and fundamental forces of nature in one theory by modeling them as vibrations of tiny supersymmetric strings.

That's what every accepted theory does, and what every candidate theory must do: explain something.

The claim (not theory) that we exist within a computer simulation explains nothing. Because it explains nothing, it can predict nothing. Because it neither explains nor predicts anything, it is unsuitable for consideration as a theory.

so that just proves that you don't know what you are talking about.

Keep posting this crap, you're endlessly amusing.

bitching about one typo That's what people do when they are getting desperate. and compared to your earlier blunder it was nothing.

'Suppressing' in place of 'surprising' is not a typo. A typographical error would result in a misspelled word, not a word which is correctly spelled but incorrectly used. That kind of error most commonly arises when the party in error is simply a fucking idiot.

 

[The Question]

But you didn’t say that in your post. You said all disease in humans.

I certainly did. Did you know that there are cures for some diseases among us humans not living on the peanut? Guess what -- people still get those diseases every now and then. That doesn't mean the cures for them don't exist.

You didn’t qualify it to any praticular group of humans. It’s there for all to see

Do you have some sort of issue with punctuation? Have commas and periods offended you in some way?

How many fuck up's is that now? i've lost count!

I don't know, how many siblings have you got? And why change the subject?

 

[Toxicdistortion]

 

[Cranky Bastard]

Do you have some sort of issue with punctuation? Have commas and periods offended you in some way?