Comments by decius

Comment #256738 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Comment #256731 by al-rawandi

Whether I agree or disagree with Laurie is irrelevant, and the analogy doesn't hold water.

Even the Allied had to sit at the same table with the Nazi to sign the surrender and peace agreements. They actually went much further than that, going to bed in the following years with people like Von Braun or Speer.
Where there is conflict you have to negotiate with your enemy. It seems that Hamas (that I firmly despise) is in control of Palestine, whom else do you want to make a deal with?

Secondly, I haven't seen Laurie posting on a site that incites the destruction of Israel.

602. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256726 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 12:37 pm

Comment #256716 by al-rawandi

Actually, I have been defending Fanusi until he said something patently false (e.g. 'that site is not supremacist'), basing my judgement solely on the content of his posts.

I invited all others to do the same. And I am way to the left of, say, Titania, with whom you just had a heated argument over this.

I am pretty tired of herd rhetoric, lumping people together for their political leanings in a disparaging way, something you seem to excel at, in perfect Fox News style.

Finally, the issue was discussed with great calm and attempts at objectivity from all sides.

603. Why There Almost Certainly Is a God, By Keith Ward

Comment #256719 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 12:22 pm

Comment #256708 by Dianelos Georgoudis

Sorry, but QM does not posit a problem to naturalism, nor does it falsify it. Ward can say what he wants, but his assumption is idiotically wrong.

Quantum mechanics is thought, even by many physicists, to be suffused with mysteries and paradoxes. Mystics seize upon these to support their views. The source of most of these claims can be traced to the so-called wave-particle duality of quantum physics: Physical objects, at the quantum level, seem to possess both local, reductionist particle and nonlocal, holistic wave properties that become manifest depending on whether the position or wavelength of the object is measured.

The two types of properties, wave and particle, are said to be incompatible. Measurement of one quantity will in general affect the value the other quantity will have in a future measurement. Furthermore, the value to be obtained in the future measurement is undetermined; that is, it is unpredictable-although the statistical distribution of an ensemble of similar measurements remains predictable. In this way, quantum mechanics obtains its indeterministic quality, usually expressed in terms of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. In general, the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics can only predict statistical distributions.5

Despite wave-particle duality, the particle picture is maintained in most quantum mechanical applications. Atoms, nuclei, electrons, and quarks are all regarded as particles at some level. At the same time, classical "waves" such as those of light and sound are replaced by localized photons and phonons, respectively, when quantum effects must be considered.

In conventional quantum mechanics, the wave properties of particles are formally represented by a mathematical quantity called the wave function, used to compute the probability that the particle will be found at a particular position. When a measurement is made, and its position is then known with greater accuracy, the wave function is said to "collapse,"

Einstein never liked the notion of wave function collapse, calling it a "spooky action at a distance." In Figure 1, a signal would appear to propagate with infinite speed from A to B to tell the wave function to collapse to zero at B once the particle has been detected at A. Indeed, this signal must propagate at infinite speed throughout the universe since, prior to detection, the electron could in principle have been detected anywhere.

This surely violates Einstein's assertion that no signals can move faster than the speed of light.

Although they are usually not so explicit, quantum mystics seem to interpret the wave function as some kind of vibration of a holistic ether that pervades the universe, as "real" as the vibration in air we call a sound wave. Wave function collapse, in their view, happens instantaneously throughout the universe by a willful act of cosmic consciousness.

The conventional interpretation of quantum mechanics, promulgated by Bohr and still held by most physicists, says nothing about consciousness. It concerns only what can be measured and what predictions can be made about the statistical distributions of ensembles of future measurements. As noted, the wave function is simply a mathematical object used to calculate probabilities. Mathematical constructs can be as magical as any other figment of the human imagination-like the Starship Enterprise or a Roadrunner cartoon. Nowhere does quantum mechanics imply that real matter or signals travel faster than light. In fact, superluminal signal propagation has been proven to be impossible in any theory consistent with conventional relativity and quantum mechanics (Eberhard and Ross 1989)

Admittedly, the quantum world is different from the world of everyday experience that obeys the rules of classical Newtonian mechanics. Something beyond normal common sense and classical physics is necessary to describe the fundamental processes inside atoms and nuclei. In particular, an explanation must be given for the apparent nonlocality, the instantaneous "quantum leap," that typifies the non-commonsensical nature of quantum phenomena.

Despite the oft-heard statement that quantum particles do not follow well-defined paths in space-time, elementary-particle physicists have been utilizing just such a picture for fifty years.....

Modern physics, including quantum mechanics, remains completely materialistic and reductionistic while being consistent with all scientific observations.

The apparent holistic, nonlocal behavior of quantum phenomena, as exemplified by a particle's appearing to be in two places at once, can be understood without discarding the commonsense notion of particles following definite paths in space and time or requiring that signals travel faster than the speed of light.

No superluminal motion or signalling has ever been observed, in agreement with the limit set by the theory of relativity. Furthermore, interpretations of quantum effects need not so uproot classical physics, or common sense, as to render them inoperable on all scales-especially the macroscopic scale on which humans function. Newtonian physics, which successfully describes virtually all macroscopic phenomena, follows smoothly as the many-particle limit of quantum mechanics. And common sense continues to apply on the human scale.

For the full article by Victor Stenger, complete with illustrations, go here.

604. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256703 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 11:49 am

Comment #256695 by al-rawandi

So I get suspicious when the lefties here fire those out with such speed to preserve their failed notions.

What a preposterous statement, considered how the issue unfolded and what was said.

605. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256699 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 11:36 am

Fanusi,

Since the definition of supremacism seems to elude you, here it is.

Supremacism is the belief that a particular race, religion, gender, belief system or culture is superior to others and entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control or rule those who do not. Examples include supremacism based on ethnic or anthropological origins (white supremacy, black supremacy, ethnocentrism), sexuality (male supremacy, female supremacy) and religion.

Beliefs and ideas

If someone believes something is true whilst someone else believes it is false, each will probably regard the evidence and reasoning for his or her belief to be superior (more informed, more considered) than that of the other. For instance, if person X believes the Earth is flat whilst person Y believes it isn't, X would probably consider the evidence and reasoning for his or her belief to be superior to that of Y.

Supremacism, however, goes much further. A supremacist not only holds that any evidence and reasoning for his or her beliefs is superior to any other, but that those holding such beliefs have rights over those who do not. For example: "American leadership is good both for America and for the world" - New American Century Project.

606. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256693 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 11:14 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/7642665.stm

607. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256667 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 10:06 am

Comment #256658 by Fanusi Khiyal

Look, Fanusi, I give up.

Feel free to dig your own grave.

608. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256659 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 10:00 am

Comment #256655 by Steve Zara

I agree.

I am really asking him to take a step back and reboot. If he doesn't get it, naivety will be too nice a diagnosis.

609. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256650 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 9:53 am

Comment #256635 by Fanusi Khiyal

Thanks, but I have to warn you in the interest of the same fairness that you just recognised me.

You are terribly wrong. That site is not a rant site, by any stretch of imagination.
If you continue to use this defence, I will be left in no doubt that you are being less than honest, or incredibly stupid.

Frankly, your comparison between Misha and Dawkins, and what is being promoted on either site is beneath contempt.

610. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256623 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 9:30 am

Comment #256609 by Fanusi Khiyal

decius, supremacist of what exactly?

Of Judeo-Christian ideologies and groups. It is made abundantly clear already by the main graphics, and even more so by the content of the posts. I honestly cannot believe that this fact could elude you, or anybody else.

Don't play dumb, bro.

611. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256607 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 9:20 am

Attention, please.

Fanusi,

that isn't a 'rant site', it's a supremacist site and you know it well.

Everybody else,

I have now read many of Fanusi's posts, there.
In all fairness, so far, he isn't saying anything different from what he says here. Rather, he seems to act as a moderating force, rejecting idea of fascist governments and indiscriminate use of force, criticising religious ideas etc.

Here are all his posts, I think we should read them carefully, before passing judgement.

My personal impression is that Fanusi is incredibly naive - to the point of stupidity, frankly - if he thinks that he can moderate the imbeciles that post there, while promoting his views of Islam, or looking for common ground.

612. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256555 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 8:27 am

. Comment #256546 by Steve Zara

I am just inviting cautiousness. One could go to those meetings to express dissent. It seems fair to me to actually read first what he wrote, there. It isn't much, for what I can see.

Edit - I know it's unlikely, but I prefer to see with my own eyes than reacting emotionally to association.

613. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256544 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 8:19 am

Titania, Nairb, Steve

I have been perusing a few of Fanusi's posts at nicedoggies.net, so far I ve come across a strenuous defence of evolution against a bunch of creotards, and other rants, free of racist content. If anything, he actually seems to challenge some of the popular views over there.
Perhaps you should suspend judgement until all facts are in.

614. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256529 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 7:58 am

GoatBoy36

That may be interesting, but my impression is that philosophy hasn't really been able to advance our understanding of consciousness to an appreciable degree, except for those philosophers - like Dennett - who base their research on the available science. Therefore, I would go for the real thing.

615. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256520 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 7:49 am

Comment #256506 by GoatBoy36

OK, if you don't mind a few videos, a good introduction to the field are the lectures and series by VS Ramachandran, who is a leading neuroscientist responsible for great recent discoveries.

Here is the first episode of a series. I am sure that you can find your way around for the second episode.

Here are a few of his lectures.

Then there is Neurologica blog, where related topics are discussed with great competence by Steven Novella. Specifically, there is an interesting debate between him and Egnor, a moronic dualist from the Disco Tute. You may have to skip those posts which aren't directly relevant, but you will find enough references to further readings that will keep you busy for a while.
http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php?cat=8

I'll give you another batch later.

616. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256503 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 7:26 am

al rawandi

I must remind you that not always ad homs are fallacious - they are totally relevant when they illuminate conflicts of interest, ideological commitments, incompetence etc.

617. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256499 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 7:23 am

Comment #256489 by GoatBoy36

Yes, consciousness is an exciting topic. However, if I may, I would suggest that you investigate it from a scientific POV, rather than a philosophical one.

Neuroscience has been doubling its accumulated knowledge every five years, during the past decades.
If it's the monism vs dualism diatribe that you are interested in, then be reassured that the issue is pretty much settled.
I will be glad to share a few interesting links, if that helps.

618. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256494 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 7:18 am

Comment by LC Fanusi Khiyal UNITED KINGDOM

Thanks for the prayers and condolences.

LOL

619. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256484 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 7:07 am

So, is Fanusi posting on a Giudeo-Christian supremacist site, too?

That's very interesting.

620. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256474 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 7:01 am

Comment #256470 by GoatBoy36

The point I was making is that for all this talk about "human rights" it's remarkably difficult to define the term

That may well be. Also 'consciousness' is very difficult to define, yet we have no reason to doubt its existence.

621. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256467 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 6:55 am

Comment #256463 by Titania

You have encountered a common bug of this site. Epeeist knew how to fix it, but I am not sure if I remember it correctly. I think you have to close all your browser instances, flush the cache and delete the cookies of this site, then close again before logging in.

622. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256460 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 6:48 am

Comment #256456 by GoatBoy36

Can you describe one

No need, since you enjoy many of them on a daily basis. I am sure that if someone attempted to forcibly deprive you of any one of them, you would react and defend it. Even if you now pretend to not knowing what it is.

Excuse me if I don't follow you in this exercise in futility.

623. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256451 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 6:35 am

Comment #256446 by GoatBoy36

What is a "human right"? ...

Tell me where I can find one. Under the bed maybe? In the boot of the car? Maybe if I take a walk down to the beach later and look under a stone?

You can find one in that repository that we like to call 'civilisation' in the 'enlightenment' session - where we keep justice, education, equality, secularism and a great variety of such precious, yet immaterial items.

624. Brunswick school board to consider creationism teaching

Comment #256417 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 5:51 am

Comment #256338 by InfuriatedSciTeacher

This is not at all surprising of a Board who made us sit through a gospel choir and sermon at the beginning of a compulsory in-service for all district teachers.

Compulsory or not, I simply wouldn't attend. Did you?

625. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256409 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 5:40 am

Comment #256407 by Laurie Fraser

Caught!

It's actually barbera I had with lunch, but very perceptive of you. :)

626. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256395 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 5:28 am

People drag their bodies around in motor vehicles so they can get at gay weddings.

In the post-Peak Oil world, instead of physically transporting people to gay weddings, we must redesign our processes to transport gay marriage to people, thereby chaining human progress and value generation to the exponentiating goodness of Moore's law.

627. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #256340 by decius on September 29, 2008 at 4:40 am

Dear evolins,

you come from worm. That is what makes evolins happy to come from worm.

Mister Dawkins,

my students want answer from you before you go back to pet your worms.
If you see Mona Lisa on the beach, why you think she comes from worms?

628. Debate: Would We Be Better Off Without Religion?

Comment #255874 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 1:25 pm

Comment #255864 by beanson

Vic is ageing, it seems. He may have been a bit hesitant in his delivery, but his arguments are as powerful as ever. His conclusion was very good, too.

629. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255873 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 1:18 pm

GoatBoy36

Could you please explain what "assault to injury" meant in your case, and why you wear it as a badge of honour?

630. Debate: Would We Be Better Off Without Religion?

Comment #255856 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 12:28 pm

Has Iam Plimer gone mad?

He went from this to claiming that there is geological evidence for a global flood.

Edited for mistaken link.

631. Debate: Would We Be Better Off Without Religion?

Comment #255849 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 12:11 pm

Comment #255844 by PeterMcKellar

Thank you

632. Debate: Would We Be Better Off Without Religion?

Comment #255841 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 11:29 am

Who is this Richard Ackland fellow?

He seemed to me a rather brilliant orator, who managed to demolish Plimer's opening string of nonsense with witty improvisation, before delivering his delightful speech.

633. Why There Almost Certainly Is a God, By Keith Ward

Comment #255794 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 8:27 am

There really is quantum mystery, I believe.

Unfortunately, "mystery" is often misinterpreted as meaning "room for a spiritual dimension" or something equally silly.

http://spiritlibrary.com/gillian-macbeth-louthan/888-quantum-christ-portal

634. Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space

Comment #255781 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 8:01 am

Steve, Oystein

Thanks, you are both very kind.

Comment #255780 by the great teapot

I saw "On the buses" on tv last month.
How do you explain that?

Your computer broke down and the library was closed?

635. Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space

Comment #255777 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 7:41 am

Comment #255776 by Steve Zara

you can't use time to talk about time

But I can use a position on one dimension of the manifold.

636. Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space

Comment #255774 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 7:29 am

Comment #255772 by Steve Zara

Whether it flows, stretches, or simply is a scalar quantity, it has dynamic properties, otherwise present past and future would be meaningless concepts.

In any case, why is it not affected by expansion? Unless it runs on its own independent axis, but then why speaking of continuum?

637. Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space

Comment #255765 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 6:57 am

Comment #255759 by Oystein Elgaroy

Thanks, that helped a lot to understand what Peacock is saying.

I'll try to make my point about 'expanding time' better.
If the universe were not expanding there would be no redshift, yet I gather that time will still flow as it does now, in one direction and at the current pace.
So, in an expanding universe with redshifted distant objects, why don't we observe a 'timeshift' (bleurgh), too, if space and time are part of the same continuum?
Empirically speaking, shouldn't we expect the period of variability of the cepheids appear to increase proportiionally to their distance, as the continuum stretches? Or even better, given the relatively low luminosity of a cepheid, let's take gamma ray bursts duration as unit, even though the latter is variable.

Edited for clarity

638. Mysterious New 'Dark Flow' Discovered in Space

Comment #255748 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 5:41 am

Comment #255744 by Oystein Elgaroy

I find it all very confusing. If expansion is empirically measured, how can it be a 'misleading notion'.
I don't understand the math contained in the papers, so I should as well give up.

One dumb question to you, sir, if you indulge me. Why isn't time expanding too, if space and time are a single continuum? And if it is, could its expansion be detected? Shouldn't we expect time to dilate and appear to slow down at large distances?

I'll get me coat.

Edit- I don't mean the relativistic gravitational time dilation, but an hypothetical dilation due to expansion, just to be clear.

639. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255735 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 4:52 am

Comment #255730 by Steve Zara

My mind is one of my few assets.

Anyone who attempts to deny that is simply dishonest, and I don't care if this sounds sycophantic.
Apart from your eclectic knowledge, I have seen time and again how easily evidence can change your mind, regardless of who presents it. Plasticity is the very fabric of cleverness and the very opposite of ideological dogmatism.

I bet you have a nice arse, too. :)

640. The world according to Hitchens

Comment #255720 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 4:02 am

Comment #255717 by Fanusi Khiyal

The moon is made of gorgonzola.
They are virtually identical in physical aspect.

No, don't ask me to back up my claim, for I am the only beholder of this final truth - the rest of the world, including the cream of lunar scientists, is too stupid to notice.

641. The world according to Hitchens

Comment #255716 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 3:54 am

Comment #255714 by Fanusi Khiyal

Please, provide scholarly reference to one or more reputable source backing up your view that national-socialism is a left-wing ideology.

642. Why There Almost Certainly Is a God, By Keith Ward

Comment #255709 by decius on September 28, 2008 at 3:41 am

Rather neatly, Ward uses one of science's finest achievements the discovery of the bizarre quantum world �" as a weapon with which to undermine the materialist world-view

Really, and how would this weapon work?

"What is the point of being a materialist when we are not sure exactly what matter is?"

Ah, through a ludicrous argument from ignorance. I am humbled by the power of such weapon.

Ward only needs you to concede that his "God hypothesis" is simpler

Yeah, let's all pretend that divine infinite complexity equals simplicity.

Neat, indeed.

Who is this clown?

643. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255408 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 1:12 pm

Comment #255387 by hawt4dawk

Thank you.

644. Palin: average isn't good enough

Comment #255376 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 11:58 am

Comment #255362 by hawt4dawk

just 'cause I'm in a bad mood

Scary. Meerkats are notorious for their ferocity.

645. Mathematics and faith explain altruism

Comment #255348 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 10:58 am

Comment #255344 by Oystein Elgaroy

Fantastic.

646. Mathematics and faith explain altruism

Comment #255328 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 10:15 am

Yet as a ~~Catholic~~ deluded fool, he rejects Dawkins's notion that believing in evolution precludes belief in a God who included altruism in evolution's bequest to us.

Fixed.

Why doesn't this idiot apply his math to virgin's birth, miraculous healing, ghostly apparitions, stigmata and resurrections and test how much logical sense they make.

647. Zehirli Yilanlar, Kaygan Yilanbaliklari ve Harun Yahya

Comment #255270 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 7:13 am

Comment #255266 by Laurie Fraser

Why, Laurie, one should always assume good faith. He is a genuine illiterate dotard, I say.

Edited for uncharitable mood.

648. Zehirli Yilanlar, Kaygan Yilanbaliklari ve Harun Yahya

Comment #255263 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 6:56 am

Comment #255251 by Richard Dawkins

Isthatclear's veiled admission can be found in this page, comment 52, second from the top.

649. Zehirli Yilanlar, Kaygan Yilanbaliklari ve Harun Yahya

Comment #255252 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 6:35 am

Comment #255251 by Richard Dawkins

By the way, I have long wondered at the identity of "IsThatClear". Many people here assume that he is also Wooter. Could it be that he is also Adnan Oktar?

He is Wooter. Not only does his writing style reveal as much, he himself admitted it, too.

I doubt he is Oktar, though. He never trumpeted about your 'refusal' to engage Oktar in a debate, as all islamo-cretinists tend to do, here. If he were Oktar, he probably wouldn't miss the opportunity to smear.

Edit - I'll try to dig up his admission.

650. Ministers to Defy I.R.S. by Endorsing Candidates

Comment #255209 by decius on September 27, 2008 at 3:33 am

Comment #255138 by Jesus86