• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Proof of Immortality, the IV league

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
It seems to me that you and Hans have often diverged somewhat from the group, and I was hoping that you guys might have something to share in my favor...
Click to expand...


How sad it is that, finding your argument immovably stuck, you shop for a less critical debate partner.

It is not a matter of personal disagreement between us. It is a matter of you not having evidence. You won't magically gain evidence by talking to other posters.
 
JoeBentley said:
No what you need to do is man up and actually make a point without playing stupid games.



No you and LL are not having a "basic disagreement." She is explaining why you are wrong.
Click to expand...


Okay, I realize I sometimes like to dress up all fancy and pretend I'm princess Marrgaret, but I still consider myself a guy.

This is falsifiably testable.
 
Jabba said:
- It would appear that I'm the only one on this thread that thinks that anecdotes can support a scientific hypothesis (and thereby serve as evidence (albeit weak) for the hypothesis). Dave, Hans?
Click to expand...

Good Morning, Mr. Savage!

I must say that you do, in fact, appear to be the only person posting on this thread with so deeply mistaken an idea of what constitutes (or may be taken to constitute) evidence.

However, it is not the weight of numbers that makes your position wrong--it is, in fact, the nature of science itself; the very mechanics of the Baconian Endeavour. It would not matter if you had an hundred hundred posters, each as mistaken as you, clamouring for the same dilution of the scientific process; the facts are against you, and would stand unaffected by mistaken myriads.

I have said before: you do not have multiple opponents. You have only one--reality.

I remain unpersuadedly yours, &ct.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
as far as I can tell, I'm the only one on this thread that agrees with my side of this argument.
Click to expand...
What argument? You haven't made an argument, you have made an assertion. Others have given rebuttal arguments against your assertion. Instead of creating an argument for it, or against the rebuttals, you have ignored them all and instead pleaded for someone - anyone - to agree with an argument you have yet to make.
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- I'm suggesting that there is a difference between strictly "scientific evidence" and information that has an effect upon the probability of a scientific hypothesis. My claim is that while anecdotes are not, strictly speaking, "scientific evidence," they can still have an effect upon the probability of a scientific hypothesis.
Click to expand...

The only thing that effects the probability of a hypothesis is evidence.
 
Loss Leader said:
But let's approach this in a different way: Give me one example where untestable anecdotes have ever sufficed as generally accepted evidence in the study of anything since, let's say, 1900. That's 116 years of human history.
Click to expand...

Great. You just gift wrapped him another sub-argument for him to not argue for month.

I can't wait for "So do you agree that anything I've said in any way supports my 34rd hair split argument about why an anecdote is some kind of evience? I'll be back."
 
JoeBentley said:
Great. You just gift wrapped him another sub-argument for him to not argue for month.

I can't wait for "So do you agree that anything I've said in any way supports my 34rd hair split argument about why an anecdote is some kind of evience? I'll be back."
Click to expand...
You're right.
 
Jabba said:
My claim is that while anecdotes are not, strictly speaking, "scientific evidence," they can still have an effect upon the probability of a scientific hypothesis.
Click to expand...

It has been explained to you why they cannot. Simply begging for it to be otherwise does not fix your problem.
 
Loss Leader said:
Jabba,

This is gibberish. You are wrong. I don't know why you're trying to quantify your degree of wrong-ness. I have explained with examples the evidence you need. You don't have it.

But let's approach this in a different way: Give me one example where untestable anecdotes have ever sufficed as generally accepted evidence in the study of anything since, let's say, 1900. That's 116 years of human history.

Simply claiming that anecdotes are evidence, as you are, is not acceptable.
Click to expand...
LL,
- Would it be 'legal' for me to go to the science forum and ask if anecdotes can be evidence for or against a scientific hypothesis?
 
If by "legal" you mean is it permissible within the MA to ask in SMMT whether anecdotes can be evidence, then yes, it is.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
 
Jabba said:
Dave,

- In general, I need to squelch my urge to address more than one sub-sub-etc-issue at a time, and responding to one person re one branch seems to be the best I can do in that regard.

- Here, LL and I have come to what I called a "basic" disagreement, and as far as I can tell, I'm the only one on this thread that agrees with my side of this argumnt. It seems to me that you and Hans have often diverged somewhat from the group, and I was hoping that you guys might have something to share in my favor...
Click to expand...

Nope.

Hans
 
Jabba said:
LL,
- Would it be 'legal' for me to go to the science forum and ask if anecdotes can be evidence for or against a scientific hypothesis?
Click to expand...

Why not ask your posse of shroud believers to sign in and give your campaign a boost?
 
Jabba said:
Would it be 'legal' for me to go to the science forum and ask if anecdotes can be evidence for or against a scientific hypothesis?
Click to expand...

Maarten100 already beat you to it. Let's say you go over to the Science forum and ask whether NDE or OBE anecdotes qualify as scientific evidence for life after death. Who do you think is going to answer you there and with what answers? Will it be any different than the people addressing it here and now? Will the answers be any different?
 
abaddon said:
Attempting to maintain multiple threads in the past has not worked out well for you.
Click to expand...

Indeed, especially since he can't keep the general question separate from the specific reason he's asking it. Just as he couldn't keep the Shroud debate out of his "circumstantial evidence" thread.
 
Jabba, what about using Bayesian statistics to contrast the two hypotheses? If H1 is the model where each of us has an immaterial self connected to our physical body and H2 is the model where our selves our solely our physical bodies, you could estimate P(E|H1) and P(E|H2) and see which is more likely.
 
Agatha said:
If by "legal" you mean is it permissible within the MA to ask in SMMT whether anecdotes can be evidence, then yes, it is.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha
Click to expand...
Agatha,
- Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom