Archaeology of the New Testament

[IBDaMann]

dumbest shit ever.

That's your position. You might want to offer up an answer or your gibberish is summarily dismissed.

As Cypress would say, the universe doesn't care that you didn't think through your argument very well.

every nail being confirmed hammered in is doable.

But why should we get rid of any tools? Your complaint is that tools, e.g. hammers, AI, squeegees, etc., aren't 100 reliable. So?

 

[Melchizedek=Tecumseh]

Therefore, it's neither unorganized, random, nor arbitrary.

Intelligent design?

 

[Jerry Mathers]

That's your position. You might want to offer up an answer or your gibberish is summarily dismissed.

As Cypress would say, the universe doesn't care that you didn't think through your argument very well.


But why should we get rid of any tools? Your complaint is that tools, e.g. hammers, AI, squeegees, etc., aren't 100 reliable. So?

no.

my complaint is that AI's ou put will always be flawed as Per GODEL's paper, and as illustrated in reality, and there is too much to try to verify from outside the system.

you fucking ignorant monkey's ass.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

we will accept more Zionism if you fucking Zionists quit trying to replace us in our country through immigrant elections.

bank on it.

the art of the deal, ladies and goons, the art of the deal.......

 

[IBDaMann]

no. my complaint is that AI's ou put will always be flawed

Let's see, ...
... a hammer's output will always be flawed, so we should abolish hammers.
... a squeegee's output will always be flawed, so we should abolish squeegees.
... a paint-sprayer's output will always be flawed, so we should abolish paint-sprayers.

... or we could just keep all of our tools and use them as intended without any regard for incidental flaws that we know will occur.

as Per GODEL's paper,

It's not Godel's theorem that makes inevitable flaws in the output of tools.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Let's see, ...
... a hammer's output will always be flawed, so we should abolish hammers.
... a squeegee's output will always be flawed, so we should abolish squeegees.
... a paint-sprayer's output will always be flawed, so we should abolish paint-sprayers.

... or we could just keep all of our tools and use them as intended without any regard for incidental flaws that we know will occur.


It's not Godel's theorem that makes inevitable flaws in the output of tools.

it describes it.

I'm not a Scientism freak like cypress.

and AI output is impossible to monitor fully.

you're defeated, ignorant fascist fuckhound.

 

[IBDaMann]

Intelligent design?

If you assume "design" then the "intelligent" comes along for the ride.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

Intelligent design?

no, Babylonian Talmud theocrat.

 

[IBDaMann]

it describes it.

I'm afraid to ask, but what is "it"?

I'm not a Scientism freak like cypress.

Let's just classify you as an ordinary, vanilla, run-of-the-mill hater of tools. I'm trying to imagine a world without SDKs.

... and AI output is impossible to monitor fully.

... just as it is impossible to fully monitor an industrial twin-screw extruder, but we can manage.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

I'm afraid to ask, but what is "it"?


Let's just classify you as an ordinary, vanilla, run-of-the-mill hater of tools. I'm trying to imagine a world without SDKs.


... just as it is impossible to fully monitor an industrial twin-screw extruder, but we can manage.

reread. I'm not babysitting your dumb ass.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

I'm afraid to ask, but what is "it"?


Let's just classify you as an ordinary, vanilla, run-of-the-mill hater of tools. I'm trying to imagine a world without SDKs.


... just as it is impossible to fully monitor an industrial twin-screw extruder, but we can manage.

you're an idiotic AI cuck.

 

[Jerry Mathers]

I'm afraid to ask, but what is "it"?


Let's just classify you as an ordinary, vanilla, run-of-the-mill hater of tools. I'm trying to imagine a world without SDKs.


... just as it is impossible to fully monitor an industrial twin-screw extruder, but we can manage.

lets give you another chance.

Is AI over-leveraged?

can you admit that, captain of lies?

 

[Cypress]

Electricity? ... or did you mean electromagnetic energy?

That's Maxwell's equations. I would have said Maxwell's equations if I wanted to write about that.​

The inverse square law I had in mind when writing that is Columbs law for charged electrostatic particles. That is one on the classic inverse square laws of physics.

If you map a route, the route will be perfectly mapped. You don't get it, do you?

You're contradicting yourself. If the universe is mapped out in precise mathematical relationships, then that defies your claim that the universe is unorganized, random, arbitrary.

These lawful relationships already existed in the universe billions of years before homo sapiens appeared. It took the rational minds of humans to discover the mathematical harmony of the cosmos.
.

 

[Cypress]

Yes YOU do, because you subjectively portray the universe as organized

It's not an opinion. The universe is mathematical and lawful. Not arbitrary and random. The most famous physicists in history note that order is the overall impression one gets when one studies it scientifically.

If your worldview were actually true (universe is unorganized, random, arbitrary) we wouldn't even be able to so science. Science is predicated on the assumption that the universe is rationally intelligible and lawful.

Christians: "God created the universe and all mankind."
Me: "Can you prove it?"
Christians: "No."
Me: "Then I don't believe it."

For about the tenth time, you keep indulging your anger at Christianity and keep coming back to it. What happened to traumatize you at the fundy church your parents dragged you to?

I haven't mentioned Christianity in this cosmological context. Einstein's Pantheism, Universalism, or Taoism could just as well be the framework for my cosmological arguments.

God of the Gaps is a cute phrase to describe what man has done for all time. When man didn't understand viral infections, it was god doing it. When man didn't understand mental disorder - it was demonic possession. When man didn't understand the sun and what it was, the sun became a god. When man didn't understand weather patterns, he created a god of weather to sacrifice animals to.

This is one of the oldest stories of man.

God of the gaps is a subjective term not rooted in anything real.

Science does not explain anything. Science describes. Teleological explanations has not been a concern of science. Therefore, there aren't any gaps that are rapidly closing. We do increase our knowledge of process using the scientific method.

 

[Melchizedek=Tecumseh]

If you assume "design" then the "intelligent" comes along for the ride.

The point is ,someone is the engineer of the Physical universe!
Now the Question, is that Engineer YHWH? AKA Allah? AKA Jesus?
All of the Above,none of the Above ,any one of All of the Above!?

 

[Melchizedek=Tecumseh]

That's Maxwell's equations. I would have said Maxwell's equations if I wanted to write about that.​

The inverse square law I had in mind when writing that is Columbs law for charged electrostatic particles. That is one on the classic inverse square laws of physics.

You're contradicting yourself. If the universe is mapped out in precise mathematical relationships, then that defies your claim that the universe is unorganized, random, arbitrary.

These lawful relationships already existed in the universe billions of years before homo sapiens appeared. It took the rational minds of humans to discover the mathematical harmony of the cosmos.
.

Is YHWH math teacher? Allah? Jesus? None of the Above, all of the Above, None of the Above? I Don't know?

 

[Cypress]

Is YHWH math teacher? Allah? Jesus? None of the Above, all of the Above, None of the Above? I Don't know?

The preeminent 20th century theoretical physicist Paul Dirac famously said: "God is a mathematician of a very high order, and He used very advanced mathematics in constructing the universe".

Dirac was an atheist, but he was using God as a metaphor for how unexpected and incomprehensible the order and rational intelligibility of the universe is.

 

[Melchizedek=Tecumseh]

The preeminent 20th century theoretical physicist Paul Dirac famously said: "God is a mathematician of a very high order, and He used very advanced mathematics in constructing the universe".

Dirac was an atheist, but he was using God as a metaphor for how unexpected and incomprehensible the order and rational intelligibility of the universe is.

I sent the post to Cypress,not Dirac! Kind of a Cop out deflecting to Dirac! What's so hard of admitting the Universe has an Engineer,and that Organized Religion has mind fucked you from seeing that Engineer in the big Equation in the Sky?

 

[Cypress]

I sent the post to Cypress,not Dirac! Kind of a Cop out deflecting to Dirac! What's so hard of admitting the Universe has an Engineer,and that Organized Religion has mind fucked you from seeing that Engineer in the big Equation in the Sky?

I've already said about 26 times on this thread that a mathematically rational and fine-tuned universe logically requires a rational cause. I've thought that for most of my life.

 

[IBDaMann]

lets give you another chance.

You're such a softie.

Is AI over-leveraged?

Are hammers over-leveraged?