From: rfischer{at}sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

stumper   wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> stumper   wrote:
>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>> stumper   wrote:
>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>> stumper   wrote:
>>>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>>>>>>> stumper   wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Geoff wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Do you know what is society?
>>>>>>>>>>> Can you prove its existence?
>>>>>>>>>> The existence of society is
manifest. Once again, proof is for
mathematics
>>>>>>>>>> and moonshiners. Sorry you can't
get that through your dense skull.
You
>>>>>>>>>> probably have difficulty with the
middle three activities I
mentioned above.
>>>>>>>>> Actually you are using a private language.
>>>>>>>> Actually you are in idiot.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You are not writing a private journal here.
>>>>>>>>> You need to figure out the usage other
people are using.
>>>>>>>> YOu need to stop babbling childish nonsense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When in doubt, just Google
"scientific proof."
>>>>>>>>> It gets 828,000 hits.
>>>>>>>> And "alien abduction" gets over a million.
>>>>>>> Are you saying that such phenomena do not exist?
>>>>>> Yep.  There is no evidence that alien abduction
actually exists.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You have lost this argument long time ago.
>>>>>>> Get over it soon.
>>>>>> You really are quite the arrogant idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> proof (SHOWING TRUTH)
>>>>>>> noun [C or U]
>>>>>>> a fact or piece of information which shows
that something exists or is
true:
>>>>>>> http://dictionary.cambridge.org
>>>>>>     "Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     "We publish dictionaries for people
learning English all over the
>>>>>>     world."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you speak English?
>>>>>> Better than you.  I don't need a learner's dictionary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's a better definition.  I'm not going to give
the defintion from
>>>>>> the OED because I don't feel like typing it in, so
this one will have
>>>>>> to suffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Function:    noun
>>>>>>     Etymology:   Middle English prof, prove,
alteration of preve, from
>>>>>>     Anglo-French preove, from Late Latin proba,
from Latin probare to
>>>>>>     prove -- more at PROVE
>>>>>>     1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels
acceptance by the mind
>>>>>>     of a truth or a fact b : the process or an instance of
>>>>>>     establishing the validity of a statement
especially by derivation
>>>>>>     from other statements in accordance with
principles of reasoning
>>>>>>     2 obsolete : EXPERIENCE
>>>>>>     3 : something that induces certainty or
establishes validity
>>>>>>     4 archaic : the quality or state of having
been tested or tried;
>>>>>>     especially : unyielding hardness
>>>>>>     5 : evidence operating to determine the
finding or judgment of a
>>>>>>     tribunal
>>>>>>     6 a plural proofs or proof : a copy (as of
typeset text) made for
>>>>>>     examination or correction b : a test
impression of an engraving,
>>>>>>     etching, or lithograph c : a coin that is
struck from a highly
>>>>>>     polished die on a polished planchet, is not intended for
>>>>>>     circulation, and sometimes differs in metallic
content from coins
>>>>>>     of identical design struck for circulation d :
a test photographic
>>>>>>     print made from a negative
>>>>>>     7 : a test applied to articles or substances
to determine whether
>>>>>>     they are of standard or satisfactory quality
>>>>>>     8 a : the minimum alcoholic strength of proof
spirit b : strength
>>>>>>     with reference to the standard for proof
spirit; specifically :
>>>>>>     alcoholic strength indicated by a number that
is twice the percent
>>>>>>     by volume of alcohol present >>>>>     alcohol>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're trying to apply definition 1b to the fields
of science where it
>>>>>> clearly doesn't apply because science depends upon
EVIDENCE while your
>>>>>> notion of proof depends upon reason.  Not even 1a
applies because
>>>>>> science is always looking for alternate or better
explanations for
>>>>>> observed phenomena.
>>>>> Even though it was decades ago,
>>>>> I majored in the philosophy of science
>>>> Quelle surprise!
>>>>
>>>>> in the best university of the country, dear.
>>>> And I have an BS and and MS, the latter from a better university.
>>>> And still you debate like a college sophomore.
>>>>
>>>>> Your private usage means nothing to me.
>>>> Now you're lying.  I didn't provide a "private" usage.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Can science prove that the earth exists?
>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can science prove that the universe exists?
>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>> Do you believe the universe exists?
>>>> Irrelevant.
>>> Philosophy is not science, dear.
>>
>> It's not as useful and it has the effect of convincing morons that
>> they might have some ability to think.
>
>Philosophy is necessary to put mad scientists
>in their proper position of ignorance.

The usual bluster of the intellectually-challenged.

Meanwhile we all notice that you're using the products of science to show
everybody what a childish wanker you are.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer{at}sonic.net

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag