My alien abduction.

reply to post by Squiddypuff


Hi squiddy,

I sent a reply the u2u you sent me. Could you just check that it arrived as it said 'flood control, wait before sending another u2u'. Not sure if that was before it sent the message or after. If it hasn't arrived let me know and I'll re-send it.

Woody

Originally posted by skept!cal
reply to post by elendal

 

I was simply saying " I LIKE PROOF"...lol nothing more...

But, I GAVE YOU THE PROOF for one thing that you, as a skeptic, can't possibly believe in.

Or are you trying to tell me you believe people can see the future?

Don't you see that I'm not speaking about aliens, or even about this thread. I am showing you flaws in your resoning. It makes no difference if aliens are out there or not. Your reasoning will still be flawed. That is what you have to correct first before you can learn anyhing new.

... nothing more...

Originally posted by elendal

Originally posted by skept!cal
reply to post by elendal

 

I was simply saying " I LIKE PROOF"...lol nothing more...

But, I GAVE YOU THE PROOF for one thing that you, as a skeptic, can't possibly believe in.

Or are you trying to tell me you believe people can see the future?

Don't you see that I'm not speaking about aliens, or even about this thread. I am showing you flaws in your resoning. It makes no difference if aliens are out there or not. Your reasoning will still be flawed. That is what you have to correct first before you can learn anyhing new.

... nothing more...

And im talking in generalites my self...I think you think im arguing w/ you, but thats not it at all...All im simply saying is ill listen to ANYTHING w/ an open ear...But the minute you starting sayin this is an acutality then I (and when i say I im not refering to you or anyone else simply what I personally need) need some sort of trace evidence to support your claim..I dont think im completely unreasonable for asking for such a request?

Thanks for listening
Skept!cal

[edit on 5-3-2008 by skept!cal]

[edit on 5-3-2008 by skept!cal]

Originally posted by skept!cal
But the minute you starting sayin this is an acutality then I (and when i say I im not refering to you or anyone else simply what I personally need) need some sort of trace evidence to support your claim..I dont think im completely unreasonable for asking for such a request?

No, there's nothing unreasonable about asking for a proof, but your comment on saying something is an actuality is an indication that you still don't get my point.

Try telling a quantum physicist electron is a particle... He'll just look at you strangely, like you're demented or something, and then either walk away or laugh.

Now imagine you are living 100 years ago. You are telling another physicist (a classical one, QM came later) the same thing. He would probably say that you are one smart student of physics who understands all the intricacies of the subject. Special relativity was published in 1905, and by 1908 there was "nothing essentially new to be discovered in physics".

Then came QM, and it blew up people's minds. You wouldn't believe how passionately classical/relativistic physicists tried to disprove QM. Even Einstein himself believed there was something wrong with QM, that it can't possibly be true, and he tried for the rest of his life to prove it wrong and formulate his own Theory of Everything. Here's one of Einstein's famous blunders regarding QM:

"I, at any rate, am convinced that He [God] does not throw dice." (Einstein, published in 1969)

Einstein's correspondence with Niels Bohr is a famous one. Look it up. You can start here:
en.wikipedia.org...

But QM is really nothing compared to what reality really looks like. That is going to blow up people's minds for sure... once again .

What I'm telling you is that your reasoning is just like classical one. You have reality, you have "something" there which you can define as one thing or another, and which can be proven to exist or not to exist.

QM says that whatever that "something" is, it exists and it doesn't exist at the same time. That "something" you can't even begin to imagine, let alone define... except by a name to let others know what-the-heck you're talking about.

Do you see the difference between your reasoning and mine?

What will come after QM is that that "something" exists and doesn't exist at the same time in all places and all times at once. Everything is possible, but not everything is probable (having a probability greater than 0). So you can have a thing that can possibly exist, but has the probability of existence equal to 0.

And that's just this physical Universe we live in. What about what's outside of this Universe? What "laws of nature" "rule" over there? Don't even try to go there with your logic. You'll lose your mind in a second.

But, since none of this is in any way related to this thread, I'll drop the subject here and now.

It's been and interesting discussion, though. I hope you got something from it. I certainly have - a better understanding of skeptics.

[edit on 6-3-2008 by elendal]

Originally posted by elendal

Originally posted by skept!cal

It's been and interesting discussion, though. I hope you got something from it. I certainly have - a better understanding of skeptics.

[edit on 6-3-2008 by elendal]

I sure am hoping its a good understanding than a bad one...were not against you... were with u actually ( well at least the skepitcal believers) just a lil more stubborn than you

...nice talking w/ ya interesting disscusion indeed

Thanks for listening
Skept!cal

Cool Story, a lot of people wouldn’t have the guts to share it.