Search results

Don't be so sour. Making up flowery meaningless concepts like "meta-level" explains nothing. Why stop there. You might as well produce a "super meta level" . "How about an "ultra-super meta-level". Determinations arrived at logically following empirical evidence , the scientific...

You've been given plenty of specific logical, rather obvious reasons why Russell's Teapot and God are equally implausible and why they are therefore, as unfalsifiable as each other. You haven't been able to refute them. Apparently immature response is all you have.

Not when they’re based on the scientific method as observable phenomena . The words for that are rational and objective. The description for an unknown indescribable level of absolute all knowing is, I’m told, "meta". But then as they say, it takes all sorts.:)

To be honest, I am not grateful to that guy, or the megalomaniac judge who's supposed to be that guy's dad, for the trumped up charge. I don't accept that sort of immorality in the first place. So no, I wouldn't want to even trust let alone keep any laws set up under such psychotic an...

What is it with you ET's angry religious brigade that you can only repeat the same argument after a full explanation has already been given for why you're wrong. "What can be said with certainty about God and falsifiability is: if God does exist it can't be proven God doesn't exist and...

You repeat quote mine the same stuff over and over. Each time you're given good reason why your claims for them are unsound. So what do you do.... You repeat quote mine the same stuff over and over. That's why it's old and lame.

Worshiping something because you're shit scared of it is known as losing your integrity.

The whole point about Russell’s Teapot is / was / still is, that it is unfalsifiable. It can never been found or proven. Can it ?!!! Exactly. He specifically meant his Teapot to be a metaphor for an unfalsifiable concept. God also, meant as an analogy for something unknowable, may only...

...wanna bet.

There is not one bit of science or a specific scientific statement amongst any of that cut&paste quote mining. Can't you help yourself from just repeating the same nonsense over and over. It's old and it's lame. Apart from being fundamentally dishonest of you.

Russell's Teapot is Celestial. It an analogy. It's a mythological concept to illustrate a philosophical point. Of course it isn't falsifiable, with the most powerful telescopes modern or not. You're making very immature comparisons to assert petty ridiculous arguments and missing the...

Well said. This designer has to come itself and show itself to us. ..as it has. It's called nature. But Jem like some other over religious people on ET, just wants to call it something else and pray to it , for some weird primitive reason.

I suppose calling a subjective choice to favor conclusions made devoid of fact as - "meta", in place of conjecture, supposition, wishful thinking, make-believe, fantasy or religion, is at least different. But still , it’s only hippy talk. I suggest you don't subscribe to any "meta...

You're not being serious. Are you? I hope for your own sake you're not. Unknown composition and unknown location does not mean something must in essence be unfalsifiable. Russell's Celestial Teapot is described as " too small to be revealed ". That's just as unfalsifiable as unknown...

That would be more of a dead start, than a dead end. God came from a dead start? Somehow dead and the God idea might sound about right to many, but I don't think religious followers are going to go for that.

Come on Ricter, don't be that ridiculous. Are you really trying to argue there is no objective compulsion to choose what you call the scientific worldview over others when you want to produce medicine, or send a communications satellite into space. Do you really have to produce those kind...

ok so now we have God ... was it random or was it designed? Strange how naturalistic explanations don't throw up such dead ends. Is that why you don't like them and try not to understand what they mean so much?

"meta level". Now you're arguing from wishful thinking.

which just goes to show how unreliable feelings can really be.

Superstition IS a..very strong... feeling.