Proof of Immortality, VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thermal said:
Jabba:

Yes, I caught that 'if my SSA didn't exist, then it would be as nothing ever existed' argument. That would assume that you don't accept reality existing outside your senses. I, on the other hand, do. We could call that a Presumption Of One Perception (POOP). The world exists regardless of your POOP.

I also caught your poker hand analogy. I would not be suspicious of the deal because I do not think the universe is pulling a fast one on me. We could call that rationale the Cards' Arrangement Conspiratorially Assigned (CACA). This POOP and CACA really don't answer my questions.

Seriously, please answer the questions of others who have been patiently waiting for responses before returning to me.
Click to expand...
Thermal,
- No.
- I've been trying to respond to their questions for 6 years. I suspect that I've actually responded to all of them at one time or another -- my opponents (100 or so) just don't accept my answers. It probably is time for me to move on, and see if I can find any statisticians that actually agree with me...
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
Dave,
- I think that I will give up here as soon as I've listed all your objections to your satisfaction. After that, I'll take my argument elsewhere (again).
Click to expand...

Sure you will.

It's just sad that you can't, instead, admit that your arguments and debate methods just aren't working, and that you are, quite simply, wrong. That's what rational people do.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
Thermal,
- No.
- I've been trying to respond to their questions for 6 years. I suspect that I've actually responded to all of them at one time or another -- my opponents (100 or so) just don't accept my answers. It probably is time for me to move on, and see if I can find any statisticians that actually agree with me...
Click to expand...

So...it really is Bayesian Inference Analytical Support (BIAS) you seek?
 
Jabba said:
I've been trying to respond to their questions for 6 years.
Click to expand...

Hogwash.

For six years you've been assiduously avoiding practically everyone else in this thread, making up all kinds of excuses why you don't have to pay attention to them, accusing them of not being right-minded thinkers, and generally blaming them for everything you do wrong.

I suspect that I've actually responded to all of them at one time or another -- my opponents (100 or so) just don't accept my answers.
Click to expand...

There you go again blaming your critics for your abject failure. You don't address rebuttals. You don't answer questions. You simply state and restate your original claims without giving the slightest indication you've even read what others have said. In fact, you cheerfully admit you don't read most of the posts addressed to you. Why should anyone accept that dictatorial screed as a satisfactory answer? You haven't done anything but foist your personal "because I say so's" and then lie about what people say to you in return.

It probably is time for me to move on, and see if I can find any statisticians that actually agree with me...
Click to expand...

You already know what statisticians think of your argument. For once be honest and just say you're looking for uncritical approval.
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- I think that I will give up here as soon as I've listed all your objections to your satisfaction. After that, I'll take my argument elsewhere (again).
Click to expand...

Let us know where you're going so we can give them a "heads up" regarding your dishonesty, if you would be so kind?
 
Jabba said:
- I've been trying to respond to their questions for 6 years.
Click to expand...

That should tell you something.

I suspect that I've actually responded to all of them at one time or another -- my opponents (100 or so) just don't accept my answers.
Click to expand...

You have it the other way around.

It probably is time for me to move on, and see if I can find any statisticians that actually agree with me...
Click to expand...

And what if you do? Finding people who agree with you might feel good, but it doesn't make you right.
 
Are the Rapture Ready lot still going? Japan's rammel might get some leverage there and rational voices will soon be booted
 
Jabba said:
- I've been trying to respond to their questions for 6 years.
Click to expand...


No, you've been trying to avoid responding to the questions.

Even if you don't remember this, you should be aware that it is a simple matter for Thermal to look back through the threads and see all your evasions.
 
Mojo said:
No, you've been trying to avoid responding to the questions.

Even if you don't remember this, you should be aware that it is a simple matter for Thermal to look back through the threads and see all your evasions.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I have been backtracking the thread, which is why I feel guilty about shoving to the front of the line. Lots of well-thought questions and comments in the queue. Seems like a poster interested in discussion would have hit the gold mine for solid feedback
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- Sounds like I'll have to leave it there.
- So, this illustrates two basic disagreements between us:
1. Whether or not Bayesian statistics actually applies to my usage.
2. Whether or not my numbers should be taken seriously.

- I'll be reviewing our past conversation for other unresolved disagreements between us, but you can probably provide your remaining reservations faster than can I. I doubt that I can be much more convincing than I already have without allowing for another year or two of debate -- and, probably not then either...
- Once I feel like I've given my best shots to your other reservations, I'll take what's left of my syllogism (assuming that I still think I'm right) to at least one statistics site, and see what happens.
Click to expand...


Oh please do, and be sure to give us links so that we can watch the fun!
 
I have this great idea about the perfect breakfast, but I'm unsure on the specific quantities needed. I think I know them but I want to run it past you skeptics first just to test how rigorous my idea is.

Uh, ok I guess we can help.

Great! So first I think you need eggs, bacon and sausage.

Right...

I suggest using pig eggs because that will give the best flavour, so we use three of those and two slices of bacon..

Wait, what eggs now?

Which gives the perfect ratio of eggs to bacon, then you cook the sausages with your cold fusion reactor cooker and..

Cook it with what sorry?

That gives you the perfect breakfast! I've done it!

Hang on, first of all pigs don't lay eggs, second cold fusion hasn't been invented and thirdly, what is your justification for those ratios?

You think my numbers are off? Well what if I said 6 eggs to 4 pieces of bacon? Would you agree it works now?

But you are still claiming pigs lay eggs and that you've got a cold fusion cooker. Your unsubstantiated numbers for the ratio of eggs to bacon is the least of your problems.

What if I said you needed one and a half times the eggs to bits of bacon?

All you're doing is rephrasing the same made up ratio!

What about if I said it should be two parts bacon to three parts eggs?

You've not even tried to answer our questions to you, you just keep rephrasing one small part we object to without even mentioning the two biggest problems with your claim!

So my claim is I know how to make the perfect breakfast...
 
Jabba said:
Thermal,
- No.
- I've been trying to respond to their questions for 6 years.
Click to expand...
Lie #1. You've been running away from answering the criticisms to your lack of logic for six years.

I suspect that I've actually responded to all of them at one time or another
Click to expand...
Lie #2. You've studiously avoided answering the questions which point out the fatal flaws in your lack of logic.

-- my opponents (100 or so) just don't accept my answers.
Click to expand...
Very dishonest of you. Your opponents don't simply lack acceptance, they point out exactly where your logic falls. And then you avoid answering. See numbers 1 and 2.

It probably is time for me to move on, and see if I can find any statisticians that actually agree with me...
Click to expand...
I think you're going to just try finding a new audience to try your lies out on, hoping they won't catch you so easily.
 
Jabba said:
Dave,
- I think that I will give up here as soon as I've listed all your objections to your satisfaction. After that, I'll take my argument elsewhere (again).
Click to expand...

You do agree that you aren't capable of salvaging any of your argument with all of its attendant fatal flaws.

Yes, do list all of the objections that have been given. Let's see how selectively you acknowledge them.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
I have this great idea about the perfect breakfast, but I'm unsure on the specific quantities needed. I think I know them but I want to run it past you skeptics first just to test how rigorous my idea is.

Uh, ok I guess we can help.

Great! So first I think you need eggs, bacon and sausage.

Right...

I suggest using pig eggs because that will give the best flavour, so we use three of those and two slices of bacon..

Wait, what eggs now?

Which gives the perfect ratio of eggs to bacon, then you cook the sausages with your cold fusion reactor cooker and..

Cook it with what sorry?

That gives you the perfect breakfast! I've done it!

Hang on, first of all pigs don't lay eggs, second cold fusion hasn't been invented and thirdly, what is your justification for those ratios?

You think my numbers are off? Well what if I said 6 eggs to 4 pieces of bacon? Would you agree it works now?

But you are still claiming pigs lay eggs and that you've got a cold fusion cooker. Your unsubstantiated numbers for the ratio of eggs to bacon is the least of your problems.

What if I said you needed one and a half times the eggs to bits of bacon?

All you're doing is rephrasing the same made up ratio!

What about if I said it should be two parts bacon to three parts eggs?

You've not even tried to answer our questions to you, you just keep rephrasing one small part we object to without even mentioning the two biggest problems with your claim!

So my claim is I know how to make the perfect breakfast...
Click to expand...

Brilliant!
 
MarkCorrigan said:
I have this great idea about the perfect breakfast, but I'm unsure on the specific quantities needed. I think I know them but I want to run it past you skeptics first just to test how rigorous my idea is.

Uh, ok I guess we can help.

Great! So first I think you need eggs, bacon and sausage.

Right...

I suggest using pig eggs because that will give the best flavour, so we use three of those and two slices of bacon..

Wait, what eggs now?

Which gives the perfect ratio of eggs to bacon, then you cook the sausages with your cold fusion reactor cooker and..

Cook it with what sorry?

That gives you the perfect breakfast! I've done it!

Hang on, first of all pigs don't lay eggs, second cold fusion hasn't been invented and thirdly, what is your justification for those ratios?

I will only respond to one sub-issue at a time. My claim is that I know how to make the perfect breakfast. I just need pig eggs, sausage and bacon.

Fine, fine. What is your justification for the number of eggs and slices?

You think my numbers are off? Well what if I said 6 eggs to 4 pieces of bacon? Would you agree it works now?

But you are still claiming pigs lay eggs and that you've got a cold fusion cooker. Your unsubstantiated numbers for the ratio of eggs to bacon is the least of your problems.

What if I said you needed one and a half times the eggs to bits of bacon?

All you're doing is rephrasing the same made up ratio!

What about if I said it should be two parts bacon to three parts eggs?

You've not even tried to answer our questions to you, you just keep rephrasing one small part we object to without even mentioning the two biggest problems with your claim!

So my claim is I know how to make the perfect breakfast...
Click to expand...

Suggested addition in green.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom