Basis of Immortality?

Dancing David said:
So, does that mean an invisible pink unicorn exists?
Or a burrito so hot god could not eta it?
Maybe Russel's teapot?
Click to expand...
If you go on talking about them, yes they exist otherwise they will die in themselves if fake ín A&F.
 
Mojo said:
I asked who, apart from you, had demanded that anything should be "A&F". Please answer the question.

And please provide links to the posts where they did it.
Click to expand...
Most of you. Partly, you attribúte to cherry pick, not fully studies, studied by self etc etd. Remember or search links yourself, You arw expert íñ ot.
 
Kumar said:
Most of you. Partly, you attribúte to cherry pick, not fully studies, studied by self etc etd. Remember or search links yourself, You arw expert íñ ot.
Click to expand...


Who, other than you, has demanded that anything should be "A&F"? Please answer the question, with links to the posts where they did it.
 
Kumar said:
Most of you. Partly, you attribúte to cherry pick, not fully studies, studied by self etc etd. Remember or search links yourself, You arw expert íñ ot.
Click to expand...

The best I can make of that is it contradicts itself. Aside from the straw man, special pleading, moving goal posts, eternally repeated generalities without support, etc.
 
Kumar said:
Always íñdíreçtly,
Click to expand...

That's beautiful, that. Should get it framed.

Code: 
╔══════════════════════════╗
║ ┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┃  Always íñdíreçtly,  ┃ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┃                      ┃ ║
║ ┗━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┛ ║
╚══════════════════════════╝
 
Kumar said:
Yes, they demand A&F type evidences from me. Whén given partly, they throw those in dustbin by this and that excuse...cherry pick, not absolute study, study by íntrested people, no stimuli presence, no dose effect relatión etc etc. All these suggest they ask for A&F evidence in their egoistic /irratiónal skepticism.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, how hard for you! You have my sympathy. ... Wait, I tell a lie. Actually, I think you are silly. All evidence you have ever presented is ... "mass since long" and such. And no, that is not considered scientific evidence, so sorry. You see, even though not "A&F", science has VERY strict demands for evidence.

You have the choice of living with it, of refrain from discussing science.

Hans
 
Kumar said:
If you go on talking about them, yes they exist otherwise they will die in themselves if fake ín A&F.
Click to expand...
All ideas exist as ideas when they are voiced, but the reality of a fiction does not change as a result of how often or how long it is repeated. Russell's teapot has been spoken of for years as an example of the ridiculousness of pretending that the inability to prove something makes it reasonable to believe it might exist. That it is such a good example, and thus spoken of for many years by many people, does not make it exist. It is quite reasonable to assume that there is not a teapot orbiting the sun undetected. It is quite silly to believe that there might be.

There is also no wizard of Oz, nor Wonderland, nor planet Tralfamadore. Fiction is not made real by persistence.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Oh dear, how hard for you! You have my sympathy. ... Wait, I tell a lie. Actually, I think you are silly. All evidence you have ever presented is ... "mass since long" and such. And no, that is not considered scientific evidence, so sorry. You see, even though not "A&F", science has VERY strict demands for evidence.

You have the choice of living with it, of refrain from discussing science.

Hans
Click to expand...

No, silly will be when you call non A&F evidence as strict evidence, Common people can be misguided and suffer due to it.
 
bruto said:
All ideas exist as ideas when they are voiced, but the reality of a fiction does not change as a result of how often or how long it is repeated. Russell's teapot has been spoken of for years as an example of the ridiculousness of pretending that the inability to prove something makes it reasonable to believe it might exist. That it is such a good example, and thus spoken of for many years by many people, does not make it exist. It is quite reasonable to assume that there is not a teapot orbiting the sun undetected. It is quite silly to believe that there might be.

There is also no wizard of Oz, nor Wonderland, nor planet Tralfamadore. Fiction is not made real by persistence.
Click to expand...

Non A&F is the basis of all uncertainties, curiosity n confusions. If A&F, things will either live without doubt forevermore of will die forever. Whatever is persisting can come both way.
 
Kumar, who, other than you, has demanded that anything should be "A&F"? Please answer the question, with links to the posts where they did it.
 
Kumar said:
No, silly will be when you call non A&F evidence as strict evidence, Common people can be misguided and suffer due to it.
Click to expand...

No one whose thinking is carefully structured & honestly presented will make any such claim as "strict evidence" by which I take you to once again confuse A&F with reality. Reality just does not allow one to take such a high-handed stance. (Pardon the mixed metaphor.) In mathematics and logic there can be statements that are considered unarguably true or false; the rest of life is a crap shoot.
 
Kumar said:
Non A&F is the basis of all uncertainties, curiosity n confusions. If A&F, things will either live without doubt forevermore of will die forever. Whatever is persisting can come both way.
Click to expand...
Your ideal of "A&F" cannot exist because it denies the possibility of anything actually happening. When all is absolute and final, all movement, all change, all growth, is complete. The moment of A&F is the moment when the universe is dead. There can be no moment after. "A&F" is a foolish and childish idea which defies rational thought. Do not seek it. It lies at the bottom of the bottomless hole.
 
bruto said:
Your ideal of "A&F" cannot exist because it denies the possibility of anything actually happening. When all is absolute and final, all movement, all change, all growth, is complete. The moment of A&F is the moment when the universe is dead. There can be no moment after. "A&F" is a foolish and childish idea which defies rational thought. Do not seek it. It lies at the bottom of the bottomless hole.
Click to expand...

Why specífic understandings can not be A&F. So that all doctotors can gíve sàme opinion, same treatmdnts and same outsome? Without it, people can be misguíded ànd get odd treatments. On non med side, you may get everchangíng laws and theories causing lot of confúsions. Actually, potential odds iñ these affect it much. So till odds will be there that will not be A&F and there will be consistent efforts to remove those odds, csusing non consistency. Probaby, this process ultimate bring same A&F level which exist today. You can not remove toxicity but can resist its effectiveness for the time being. This çan be well understood by sécondary natural/évolved products which can not remove side affects even though millions years passed eg cookíng, milk etc.
 
Peregrinus said:
No one whose thinking is carefully structured & honestly presented will make any such claim as "strict evidence" by which I take you to once again confuse A&F with reality. Reality just does not allow one to take such a high-handed stance. (Pardon the mixed metaphor.) In mathematics and logic there can be statements that are considered unarguably true or false; the rest of life is a crap shoot.
Click to expand...

Why you want to continue with non A&F? Yes, one attribute of nature is destruction but it does not mean, wé should prefer it to keep on processing. The way, you anticipate suggest, you do not want ultimate levels. Is it so?
 
Mojo said:
Kumar, who, other than you, has demanded that anything should be "A&F"? Please answer the question, with links to the posts where they did it.
Click to expand...
All índirectly. As I indicated. I have very good rémberance,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom