Damn, damn, damn.
Um, oblivion, oblivion, oblivion.
That was a question, and should have a question mark. Obviously the electrons carrying the ASCII code to the SDMB quantum-tunneled.
[quantum tunneling directly to Libertarian, hidden from Mr. O’Hair]Ok, you’ve officially redeemed the thread as far as the humor vein goes. I don’t even KNOW what came flying out of my giggling nose when I read this (which means that, whatever it was, it can’t have existed).[/quantum tunneling]
Unfortunately, I usually shout, “Oh, Madalyn!” And that generally gets me slapped.
Yes, and if my grandmother had balls, she’d be my grandfather.
Don’t forget Occam’s Razor: “The simplest explanation is usually the best.”
Which is simpler, that something caused the universe to exist? Or that there has eternally existed a manifold M-brane of 10-dimensional strings suspended in an 11-dimensional quantum supergravity field, and that our universe is a spontaneous, anomolous, and uncaused fluctuation from within a zero-dimensional worldvolume?
Listen to me very carefully. You are extremely mentally ill. Neurosurgeons have made much progress of late in understanding how these fantasies about imaginary beings are produced in the brain. Consider the comments from V. S. Ramachandran, MD, PhD, in his seminal book, Phantoms in the Brain. He wrote:
“Why is the revealed truth of such transcendent experience in any way “inferior” to the more mundane truth that we scientists dabble in? Indeed, if you are ever tempted to jump to this conclusion, just bear in mind that one could use exactly the same evidence — the involvement of the temporal lobes in religion — to argue for, rather than against, the existence of [nonsense reference deleted].”
Clearly, what he means by that is that people who are hopelessly delusional, like yourself, might attempt to rationalize the actual existence of something that their brains have only conceived. Please seek professional help at once.
Clearly “something” is simpler, because it’s unidentified. Not explaining anything is always simpler than explaining something, but “something” isn’t explanatory, it’s just a clever restatement of “It happened, but I don’t know how or why.”
Exactly. And well said, Apos.
As Professor Edna E. Kramer writes in The Nature and Growth of Modern Mathematics, page 43:
Since cosmology is not mathematics, we may use circular propositions and terms that are recursively defined.
Maudlin, my faith in reason and logic is currently being question. I’m worried that after critically examining it, I shall turn to nonsense to explain things. Can you help me prevent this eventuality?
Yes, Netbrian, we can help you.
For only $1,500.00, you can have a lifetime membership in American Atheists. When your check or credit card clears, you will:[ul]
[li]be entitled to attend our meetings[/li][li]receive a certificate[/li][li]be able chat with us online[/li][li]get 10% discounts on purchases from our online store[/li][li]receive our newsletter[/li][li]and so much more![/li][/ul][sub]All funds are in U.S. Dollars[/sub]
:rolleyes:
You just HAVE to be kidding. A being creating the universe is MUCH simpler than a manifold M-brane of 10-dimensional strings suspended in an 11-dimensional quantum supergravity field, and that our universe is a spontaneous, anomolous, and uncaused fluctuation from within a zero-dimensional worldvolume.
How exactly is a manifold M-brane of 10-dimensional strings suspended in an 11-dimensional quantum supergravity field, and that our universe is a spontaneous, anomolous, and uncaused fluctuation from within a zero-dimensional worldvolume simpler than a being creating the univers?e