On the Necessity of Proving Things

[warpspeedpetey]

I am not bragging, i am pointing out to you that i am qualified in science, and you clearly are not. This mean you do not understand scientific evidence and i do. This is also blatantly obvious in your posts.

this is laughable. only you understand science and when you cant defend your arguments you simply claim they dont understand science!

 

[R_Daneel]

this is laughable. only you understand science and when you cant defend your arguments you simply claim they dont understand science!

Your cognitive dissonance is showing again. He did not claim that “only” he understands science. Simple, plain English language. How hard is it to understand?

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I just can’t deal with this level of scientific illiteracy.

what illiteracy? science says nothing about the occurence of the moonlanding.

Your who case boils down to you believing ignorance is a defense.

no, it boils down to your double standard of evidence, a hypocrisy you refuse to recognize no matter how many times its pointed out.

If you had ANY sort of understanding of the scientific method you would understand why i can trust peer reviewed journals.

if you had any understanding of the science of philosophy, you would know why you cant. ever heard of pons and fleischman, the piltdown man, the recent global warming confirmationism, the problem of induction, etc?

at least now you are admitting that it is a matter of trust.

I might as well be arguing with a 4 year old, that has never studied any maths, over if 2+2 = 4.

im not a mathematician. yet, though thats next for me i think.

how can you guarantee these artifacts are genuine? don’t dodge the question

Because of the applications derived from them? Not that hard to understand is it?

i dont see how an application derived from say a spacesuit or someother prop, indicates that the moonlanding actually happened, are you saying they could only be invent in the specific environment of the moon?

so what? that doesn’t mean it actually happened

LAMO! NO!!! But it SUPPORTS IT!!!

which doesnt mean anything. i could say a rock supports the idea of time travel because that iss the exact kind of rock needed. but it wouldnt mean anything.

which isn’t evidence as i have repeatedly pointed out, you have no reason other than trust to say it is genuine evidence.

LOL no you have claimed, but that claim is based on nothing but ignorance. It constitutes evidence in every university and every modern court of law in the world. If is good enough for them its good enough for me, but hey by all mean continue to revel in your ignorance

no court accepts evidence you cant show is genuine. and you cant show these things are genuine. all this would be thrown out after the prosecutor asked how you knew it was genuine.

12 people were on the moon, there were 12 apostles. double standard.

There were A LOT more than 12 eye witnesses,

12 people on the moon, 27 in lunar orbit. thousands witnessed Jesus’ miracles

and the bible does not contain one eye witness account. Its all hearsay.

thats false, do you have any proof?

we have the same thing of ‘megatron’ in the transformers movies. the moonhoax theorists say it was shot on a soundstage in houston. .

LOL, more ignorance. You are comparing a 2010 fiction movie made with modern cgi, to a film shot in the 1960s which has been verified as genuine and all the conspiracy theories have been debunked. AND YOU THINK YOU HAVE A CASE, you really really need to go to school or something.

im pointing out that we dont know that they werent shot on a soundsatage in houston, or faked in some other way.

ive been to school

and there are 2 other sources for those than the moon landing.

I can’t even be bother discussing contamination with you.

feel free to tell me that cant be faked

and how does that support the moon landing happened?

You can’t be serious, you don’t think future technologies derived from specific technologies support the validity of the initial technology?

no. i think it doesnt show that the moonlanding happened.

**you keep saying you have all this evidence, but you don’t, you cant show that any piece of it means the moon landing actually happened, there are always alternatives

this is your double standard of evidence. because you say that our evidence has alternative explanations but yours doesn’t.**

Like i said evidence that would be accepted in ANY UNIVERSITY and ANY COURT OF LAW.

and as ive pointed out no court of law would accept evidence of questionable providence.

do they not teach critical thinking skills at ‘degree level’? btw what is that? how many years of university does it take?

Its 4 years of uni for a good degree.

how many do you have?

And yes they do teach critical thinking skills, skills that you clearly have NOT BEEN taught. It is laughable that you want to argue over scientific evidence with someone who is studying science past degree level, when you clearly have never opened a science book in your life. That shows a level of arrogance and ignorance i had not encountered up until i met you.

actually i have opened a science book or two. yet somehow, i know that science has nothing to do with proving the moonlanding happened. why dont you?

i think you know that too, but just like bragging about your education, as though that makes you right by dint of authority.

Hmm i think i might run on over to a French forum, a language that i speak about 10 words or, and start correcting them all on their grammatical errors LAMO. - Inside the brain of WSP

you only speak 1 language? i thought most Europeans spoke several to one degree or another.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Your cognitive dissonance is showing again.

how so? could you be specific? or is this the third of your arguments i will have to explain to you today?

He did not claim that “only” he understands science. Simple, plain English language. How hard is it to understand?

pretty hard, he has repeatedly said he understands science and whoever he happens to be disagreeing with doesnt.

so, yeah he is saying that only he understands science, maybe you could make the argument that he thinks only people who agree with him understand science, but i dont see how that makes much of a difference.

its all a logically fallacious appeal to authority. not something you would expect from someon who keeps claiming to be better educated then hsi opponents.

 

[tonyrey]

There would have been no hostilities and no bloodshed if the participants had followed the teaching of Christ.

If my grandmother would have had “you know what” she would have been my grandfather. The Irish on both sides followed Christ according to their interpretation, and there was ample bloodshed there… if you know what I am talking about.
You obviously cannot distinguish the behaviour of so-called Christians with the teaching of Christ…

You must be ignorant of the political situation in the Middle East and of the nuclear capabilities of Iran and Israel…

No response!

Nor is it farfetched to attribute your selfish, cynical, unrealistic, outdated attitude to your philosophy that we all exist by chance - which dispenses you of any responsibility or obligations to anyone but yourself…

I feel responsibility for myself and my loved ones. I fulfill that responsibility, too. I do not have responsibility to the people who love to hate each other, and keep on killing each other.
None whatsoever? Do you regard them as totally unamenable to reasoning?

You may believe that we are here not by a netural process (which you mistakenly call: “chance”), but you have no evidence for that, except your wishful thinking.

chance = fortuitous (origin of life) + absence of purpose
matter > mind = wishful thinking

It is highly significant that you think of an event that could occur to you rather than anyone else. A beautiful example of selfishness!

And conversely, I do not ask others to feed me, and stick to the concept of live and let live.
If you were in need it would be a different story… A more appropriate slogan would be “live and let die”!

They are also adults, they take care of themselves.

By maiming and killing one another!
I

If they ask for help, and I am in the position to help, then I will help.

You always have to wait until you are asked…

After all this nonsense, you should posit your own solution, which you evaded so far.

Evasion! > You are posing a false dilemma. You are forgetting that Gandhi neither limited himself to suggestion nor forced a peaceful solution yet he succeeded where you would have failed miserably…
It is not my solution but the solution given by Christ - which you contemptuously dismiss as stupid in spite of your inability to offer a better alternative…

Or does not care about those questions which do not belong to the thread.

A person who evades questions in a rational discussion - and makes the excuse that those questions do not belong to the thread even though they are clearly related to the nature of evidence and proof - demonstrates his inability to give an adequate response.

Are you suggesting that the deduction of your selfishness from your statements is unrelated to the necessity of proving things?! It is a concrete example of how your disregard of intuition leads you to false conclusions. “Why do the intellect and intuition have to be separate in our search for Truth?” There is absolutely no reason why they should! And if they are, all the unnecessary suffering and bloodshed in the world is overwhelming evidence of the disastrous consequences.

Ah, at last something related to the thread. “Intuition” as an epistemological tool, indeed. Guess what, the overwhelmig majority of all the bloodshed since the dawn of time is the direct consequence of following “intuition”, not checked by rationality and intelligence. Don’t throw rocks in your glass house…

False! There is ample proof and evidence that the millions of murders committed in the name of monsters like Caligula, Hitler and Stalin were a direct consequence of misapplied rationality and intelligence. Criminals have no use for intuition; they use their intelligence to rob, rape and kill. So much for secular morality… Those who believe in a Godless universe determine for themselves what is right or wrong. Like you they have no time or respect for intuition. The Reign of Terror in France under the auspices of the Goddess of Reason enthroned on the altar of Notre Dame Cathedral is an irrefutable example… They claimed to advocate the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity! And that was the climax of the Age of Enlightenment! The Age of Secular Insanity would be more appropriate…

 

[R_Daneel]

You obviously cannot distinguish the behaviour of so-called Christians with the teaching of Christ…

I can, maybe those Christians cannot. And how do you separate the so-called Christians from the “real” Christians? Appealing to the no-true-Scotsman fallacy?

chance = fortuitous (origin of life) + absence of purpose
matter > mind = wishful thinking

Only in your dreams.

If you were in need it would be a different story…

I was. And I did not ask for help. But, of course that is neither here nor there. It is at best an anecdotal evidence, which carries no weight.

A more appropriate slogan would be “live and let die”!

Distortion is your game.

By maiming and killing one another!

Yes, too bad. But solution must come from the inside.

It is not my solution but the solution given by Christ - which you contemptuously dismiss as stupid in spite of your inability to offer a better alternative…

Did that work? Nope.

False! There is ample proof and evidence that the millions of murders committed in the name of monsters like Caligula, Hitler and Stalin were a direct consequence of misapplied rationality and intelligence. Criminals have no use for intuition; they use their intelligence to rob, rape and kill. So much for secular morality… Those who believe in a Godless universe determine for themselves what is right or wrong. Like you they have no time or respect for intuition. The Reign of Terror in France under the auspices of the Goddess of Reason enthroned on the altar of Notre Dame Cathedral is an irrefutable example… They claimed to advocate the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity! And that was the climax of the Age of Enlightenment! The Age of Secular Insanity would be more appropriate…

Don’t throw bricks if you live in a glass house. Secular morality cannot be blamed for the atrocities of some tyrants any more than Catholicism can be blamed for the atrocities by the Inquisition. Why do you hold this double standard? Try to be rational - sometimes.

Besides I do have respect for intuition, as the first step on the road toward obtaining knowledge. It is simply indispensable. But it is only the first step. After the intuition one must submit to the proof / verification principle to separate the correct intuition from the false one.

 

[R_Daneel]

You obviously cannot distinguish the behaviour of so-called Christians with the teaching of Christ…

Jesus (supposedly) said many things.

Read Luke 19:27 (New International Version)
But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

Or read Mark 16:17-18 (New International Version)
And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.

Or read Matthew 17:20 (New International Version)
He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.

Or read John 14:12-14 (New International Version)
I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.

Don’t engage in cherry picking. There are many “strange” passages in the Bible.

 

[AlbertBall]

which doesnt mean anything. i could say a rock supports the idea of time travel because that iss the exact kind of rock needed. but it wouldnt mean anything.

I can’t be bothered replying to the rest of your post, some people are not academically gifted, some are academically illiterate. There is a good reason why one must have at least a degree in a subject before the are taken seriously within the academic arena.

However i had to reply to this. THIS IS PRICELESS, what on earth are you babbling about? I think i might have to make this my new sig!

 

[AlbertBall]

pretty hard, he has repeatedly said he understands science and whoever he happens to be disagreeing with doesnt.

so, yeah he is saying that only he understands science, maybe you could make the argument that he thinks only people who agree with him understand science, but i dont see how that makes much of a difference.

its all a logically fallacious appeal to authority. not something you would expect from someon who keeps claiming to be better educated then hsi opponents.

No i didn’t i said you are scientifically illiterate, which you clearly are. This renders your opinion meaningless. Your absurdity has now stretched to claiming that that all the equipment used in the moon landings would be thrown out of a court of law. When in actual fact it would probably be one of the most key pieces of evidence presented by a forensic scientist.

 

[Image_of_God]

Well if you would care to read the last few pages you would see that is EXACTLY what WSP is claiming.

I do recall, if I do not fail yet, that WSP is *providing *you with supposed evidence. You, however, are the one asking for it. I answered that such evidence is unnecessary. As I have tried to express, evidence is unnecessary for the intrinsic truth of a thing. Evidence only helps us.

You have in past posts rejected the notion of absolute certainty. Nonetheless, you seem so absolutely certain that the moonlanding occurred. How is that?

 

[Image_of_God]

I can’t be bothered replying to the rest of your post, some people are not academically gifted, some are academically illiterate. There is a good reason why one must have at least a degree in a subject before the are taken seriously within the academic arena.

However i had to reply to this. THIS IS PRICELESS, what on earth are you babbling about? I think i might have to make this my new sig!

What WSP is saying isn’t silly, if you put it into its context of a *philosophical *discussion. If you look at it scientifically, then of course it would sound silly.

 

[Image_of_God]

No i didn’t i said you are scientifically illiterate, which you clearly are. This renders your opinion meaningless. Your absurdity has now stretched to claiming that that all the equipment used in the moon landings would be thrown out of a court of law. When in actual fact it would probably be one of the most key pieces of evidence presented by a forensic scientist.

I may recall that this is a philosophical discussion as well and so you should show good offices to your brother WSP.

He only appears scientifically illiterate because he is looking at the situation philosophically and metaphysically. This might be the reason why you don’t understand what both he and I are talking about. You continue to look at things from a “purely” scientific perspective (though you are actually taking a philosophical position as well). Both he and I have considered the philosophical perspective of the topic at hand.

 

[tonyrey]

Jesus (supposedly) said many things.

Read Luke 19:27 (New International Version)
But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

Or read Mark 16:17-18 (New International Version)
And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.

Or read Matthew 17:20 (New International Version)
He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.

Or read John 14:12-14 (New International Version)
I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.

Don’t engage in cherry picking. There are many “strange” passages in the Bible.

You are forgetting one little fact. Anyone can cook up a version of “Christianity” by taking snippets from the Bible… That’s why there are thousands of different Christian sects. But one thing is certain. Jesus chose to let Himself be executed rather than resort to violence and become caught up in the spiral of violence and evil. Anyone who advocates violent revolution and bloodshed is not a true follower of Christ. He came to bring peace into the world and many of his followers have chosen to become martyrs and die in the war against injustice and oppression of the poor - like Archbishop Romero in El Salvador in 1980. Shortly before he was murdered he told a reporter

"You can tell the people that if they succeed in killing me, that I forgive and bless those who do it. Hopefully, they will realize they are wasting their time. A bishop will die, but the church of God, which is the people, will never perish… The church would betray its own love for God and its fidelity to the gospel if it stopped being a defender of the rights of the poor . . . a humanizer of every legitimate struggle to achieve a more just society . . . that prepares the way for the true reign of God in history.

'While it is clear that our Church has been the victim of persecution during the last three years, it is even more important to observe the reason for the persecution. The persecution comes about because of the Church’s defense of the poor, for assuming the destiny of the poor."

This is in stark contrast to your “I am not my brother’s keeper”…“I feel responsibility for myself and my loved ones”.

It is significant that you do not write:

“I feel responsibility for my loved ones and myself”!

The devil is in the details…

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Jesus (supposedly) said many things.

Read Luke 19:27 (New International Version)
But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.

Or read Mark 16:17-18 (New International Version)
And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.

Or read Matthew 17:20 (New International Version)
He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.

Or read John 14:12-14 (New International Version)
I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.

Don’t engage in cherry picking. There are many “strange” passages in the Bible.

thats exactly what you just did, and you did it out of a non-Catholic Bible.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I can’t be bothered replying to the rest of your post,

yes, better not to answer than to be shown wrong?

some people are not academically gifted, some are academically illiterate.

true. but im not academically illiterate.

There is a good reason why one must have at least a degree in a subject before the are taken seriously within the academic arena.

like i asked, how many degrees do you have? what are they in? how many years or semester credit hours do you have?

However i had to reply to this. THIS IS PRICELESS, what on earth are you babbling about? I think i might have to make this my new sig!

simply pointing to a piece of material and claiming it is evidence without even knowing if it is genuine is silly.

 

[R_Daneel]

Anyone who advocates violent revolution and bloodshed is not a true follower of Christ.

Unless he follows Luke 19:27…

 

[warpspeedpetey]

No i didn’t i said you are scientifically illiterate, which you clearly are.

ok, then please. point to a staement that is scientifically illiterate?

you seem to think this is about actual scientific practice and not the philosophy of science and epitemology.

so please demonstrate an actual scientific principle that i seem to be illiterate in?

This renders your opinion meaningless.

please, tell me how many degress you have? how many credit hours or years have you gone to university?

what is your ‘science’ degree in? and how does that change the epistemological status of the argument?

Your absurdity has now stretched to claiming that that all the equipment used in the moon landings would be thrown out of a court of law. When in actual fact it would probably be one of the most key pieces of evidence presented by a forensic scientist.

first, we arent talking about proof by juris prudence.

but that said, courts dont allow evidence without provenance. the prosecutor will want proof that your evidence is actual evidence of the moonlanding occuring. which you havent yet been able to provide.

imagine that im the prosecutor. im simply pointing out th the only basis you have for saying that these things are evidence is ** trust** which you have repeatedly denied.

just as we trust ours for the Bibical events

see, you keep trying to deny a double standard, and we keep demonstrating that you are using one.

when you say or imply that people you assume are less educated than you are wrong simply because you assume they are less educated than you. you have lost the argument. you cant support it from facts or logic, but only by a fallacious appeal to authority. which if you are educated at all, you should know is a huge problem.

 

[tonyrey]

And how do you separate the so-called Christians from the “real” Christians?

By whether they are prepared to suffer and die like Archbishop Romero…

chance = fortuitous (origin of life) + absence of purpose
matter > mind = wishful thinking

Only in your dreams.

Are you denying that you believe life originated for no reason or purpose due to a fortuitous combination of molecules? And that the mind is powerful than inanimate matter?

If you were in need it would be a different story…

I was. And I did not ask for help. .

If you were too proud to ask for help it shows you don’t believe in the principle of fraternity. It is the logical consequence of not being prepared to help others…

A more appropriate slogan would be “live and let die”!

Distortion is your game.

How can it be a distortion when you have stated that “I’m not my brother’s keeper”?

By maiming and killing one another!

Yes, too bad. But solution must come from the inside.

“too bad” really shows you in your true light. It is a view that would not be accepted by any civilised person, implying as it does complete indifference to the suffering of others.

It is not my solution but the solution given by Christ - which you contemptuously dismiss as stupid in spite of your inability to offer a better alternative…

Did that work? Nope.

It has worked when it has been put into practice - as in India.

There is ample proof and evidence that the millions of murders committed in the name of monsters like Caligula, Hitler and Stalin were a direct consequence of misapplied rationality and intelligence. Criminals have no use for intuition; they use their intelligence to rob, rape and kill. So much for secular morality… Those who believe in a Godless universe determine for themselves what is right or wrong. Like you they have no time or respect for intuition. The Reign of Terror in France under the auspices of the Goddess of Reason enthroned on the altar of Notre Dame Cathedral is an irrefutable example… They claimed to advocate the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity! And that was the climax of the Age of Enlightenment! The Age of Secular Insanity would be more appropriate…

Secular morality cannot be blamed for the atrocities of some tyrants any more than Catholicism can be blamed for the atrocities by the Inquisition.

The Reign of Terror in France was based on **secular **morality which advocated violent revolution and the execution of priests, nuns and aristocrats. The Inquisition was based on a distortion of Christ’s teaching which has never been a doctrine of the Church. Jesus forgave the woman caught in the act of adultery and denounced the hypocrites who exploited the poor but He did not advocate their execution.

Besides I do have respect for intuition, as the first step on the road toward obtaining knowledge. It is simply indispensable. But it is only the first step. After the intuition one must submit to the proof / verification principle to separate the correct intuition from the false one.

How do you verify the right to life and the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity?

 

[warpspeedpetey]

You have in past posts rejected the notion of absolute certainty. Nonetheless, you seem so absolutely certain that the moonlanding occurred. How is that?

it certainly cant be trust, then it would be no differrent than our acceptance of the ev idence for the Biblical events.

and he is adamant, the evidences are so very different

if he had admitted that all evidence one doesnt witness is based on trust, hundreds of posts ago, the conversation would have been over long ago.

 

[AlbertBall]

What WSP is saying isn’t silly, if you put it into its context of a *philosophical *discussion. If you look at it scientifically, then of course it would sound silly.

Well that is the context. I am saying that artifacts that have specific characteristics that demonstrate the feasibility of the moon landings support the moon landings.

WSP replied with then i say a rock supports time travel. What specific characteristics do rocks have that can demonstrate the feasibility of time travel?