EvC Forum: Why "Immaterial Pink Unicorns" are not a logical argument

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Why "Immaterial Pink Unicorns" are not a logical argument

cavediver

Member (Idle past 3672 days)

Posts: 4129

From: UK

Joined: 06-16-2005

Normal Thread Display

Message 24 of 304 (499918)
02-21-2009 10:49 AM

Reply to: Message 19 by RAZD
02-21-2009 9:53 AM

Re: More side issues

Except that I am not trying to prove anything on this thread other than that

C is an example of A
D is an example of A
Therefore C = D

Is a logically flawed argument. I believe this has been done.

Only an idiot would disagree. Why do we need an entire thread for this?

We now have

C is an example of A
D is an (intentionally absurd unbelievable) example of A
E is a (believable) example of A

But you have no example of E to offer. Thos that you have offered have already been shown by variou smembers to not be example of E. Considerations of alien life and dark matter, in their scientific study, have always been evidence based and never faith based. [ABE]I'm not convinced that E exists...

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 19 by RAZD, posted 02-21-2009 9:53 AM		RAZD has seen this message but not replied

cavediver

Member (Idle past 3672 days)

Posts: 4129

From: UK

Joined: 06-16-2005

Normal Thread Display

Message 50 of 304 (499987)
02-21-2009 6:43 PM

Reply to: Message 47 by mark24
02-21-2009 6:12 PM

Re: Practical Example - Your Logical Argument is Inadequate

As far as we are aware, life could be so unlikely that if we rerun the universe a million times they all could be sterile.

Hmmm, if that is the case, life arose suspiciously quickly on Earth. Given our best guesses regarding abiogenesis, the early Earth's chemical abundancies, its gelogical activity, stellar populations and associated planet distributions - I would say we are in a reasonable position to make tentative claims regarding the likelihood of unicellular life arising. I'm not sure you would find many astro-biologists who would support your statement.

ABE: Sorry, OT here, but a good thread topic...

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 47 by mark24, posted 02-21-2009 6:12 PM		mark24 has not replied

cavediver

Member (Idle past 3672 days)

Posts: 4129

From: UK

Joined: 06-16-2005

Normal Thread Display

Message 205 of 304 (503178)
03-16-2009 4:49 PM

Reply to: Message 204 by RAZD
03-16-2009 4:35 PM

Re: Disappointing ~~BZZZZZZTTT - IPU and Deities ARE Logically Equivalent~~

Curiously you still have not answered whether people that claim to have seen alien visitations can be interpreted as validation for the probability of alien visitations.

I'll just jump in with an answer - no, it cannot. Not in any scientific sense anyway, which is all that matters to us. Who cares what is and is not admissible in a court...

If increasing the number of planets increases the probability of life on other planets, does not increasing the numbers of people who have had similar experiences increase the probability of what they are claiming as true?

I trust you are asking this rhetorically with the obvious negative connotation? If not, then I'm afraid I will have to call for the yellow van...

This message is a reply to:
	Message 204 by RAZD, posted 03-16-2009 4:35 PM		RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

1 online now:	Taq
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,900 Year: 4,157/9,624 Month: 1,028/974 Week: 355/286 Day: 11/65 Hour: 0/2