LordReed:


Can you quote where I said I want absolute proof that a god exists?

I have said it before and lemme repeat here so that you'll see it, I do hold out a probability that a god exists and that probability is currently at 1%. That is how improbable I think of the possibility.

Meanwhile you have not answered any of the questions I posed to you and also note I did not mention god in any of the questions I asked, you are the one bringing up god. Note it so that when the discussion takes a turn that puts you in an untenable position you don't start laying blame elsewhere. LoL.

If you look at things objectively, it is way more than 1%, more like over 70%.
As for mentioning God, you atheists seem like one person to me. You folks have consistently demanded categorical proof of God’s existence

KnownUnknown:


I know the difference between sci-fi speculation and real life. You seem incapable of that. That’s what I get.

Sci-fi speculations of yesterday are today’s reality. Ask Elon Musk where he got his ideas from

FreeIgboho:


If you look at things objectively, it is way more than 1%, more like over 70%.
As for mentioning God, you atheists seem like one person to me. You folks have consistently demanded categorical proof of God’s existence

There we go, you are now adding bigotry to your repertoire. LoL

It is 1% in my estimation you can estimate it at 70% that is up to you, I on the other hand see no reason to since there isn't any objective proof of any god.

FreeIgboho:


Sci-fi speculations of yesterday are today’s reality. Ask Elon Musk where he got his ideas from

Sci-fi about what man can achieve is different from the metaphysical claims that you are trying hard to conflate with it. Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong with conflating the two (The Matrix; 2001: A Space Odyssey; Aliens: Covenant), but don’t go around behaving as if it isn’t fiction.

Elon Musk is another non-authority your type like to cite. Cite what the man did to support your assertions, don’t just name drop and expect someone who doesn’t place people on a pedestal to acknowledge them.

FreeIgboho:


The problem lies in definition of terms. I don’t think you quite get what is meant by analogy. See below

The problem is YOU don't stop at analogy. You actually believe this is the case, that there is some mindfuck control-from-beyond-space going on with no evidence except the fucking movie you like to talk about. LoL!

FreeIgboho:


Cogito is short for cogito ergo sum, smart ass

You were the one who brought up cogito ergo sum so how is it my problem if you think it is fallacious? LoL!

LordReed:


There we go, you are now adding bigotry to your repertoire. LoL

It is 1% in my estimation you can estimate it at 70% that is up to you, I on the other hand see no reason to since there isn't any objective proof of any god.

People waaay smarter than you have all concluded that it is highly likely we are living in some sort of simulation. Simulation implies simulator(s) (God).

KnownUnknown:


Sci-fi about what man can achieve is different from the metaphysical claims that you are trying hard to conflate with it. Now, there’s nothing inherently wrong with conflating the two (The Matrix; 2001: A Space Odyssey; Aliens: Covenant), but don’t go around behaving as if it isn’t fiction.

Elon Musk is another non-authority your type like to cite. Cite what the man did to support your assertions, don’t just name drop and expect someone who doesn’t place people on a pedestal to acknowledge them.

Here you are, deciding what is possible and what man can achieve, when you don’t even have any objective way of being sure you yourself exist!

LordReed:


The problem is YOU don't stop at analogy. You actually believe this is the case, that there is some mindfuck control-from-beyond-space going on with no evidence except the fucking movie you like to talk about. LoL!

I STOPPED at the analogy. You are the one who keeps talking of Smiths and what Neo can do. All I was illustrating with the movie is that just as Neo had NO WAY of independently knowing he was living in a dream, same COULD be our case. THAT’S ALL.
I don’t understand your obsession with the movie.

KnownUnknown:


Elon Musk is another non-authority your type like to cite. Cite what the man did to support your assertions, don’t just name drop and expect someone who doesn’t place people on a pedestal to acknowledge them.

Well he became the richest man in the world by far by foreseeing that almost all our vehicles will soon be electric and self-driving, and also that man needs to colonize other planets for what we call consciousness to survive. Also merging of AI and humans (Neurolink). He got all this from being a voracious consumer of sci-fi when he was younger.

FreeIgboho:


I STOPPED at the analogy. You are the one who keeps talking of Smiths and what Neo can do. All I was illustrating with the movie is that just as Neo had NO WAY of independently knowing he was living in a dream, same COULD be our case. THAT’S ALL.
I don’t understand your obsession with the movie.

YOU are the one saying there are beings control us not me. LoL!

LordReed:


YOU are the one saying there are beings control us not me. LoL!

You know fully well I never said any such thing. I always said we have NO WAY of being sure what it is we don’t know we don’t know.

LordReed:


You were the one who brought up cogito ergo sum so how is it my problem if you think it is fallacious? LoL!

It would part of the discussion - you have no way of proving that even you yourself exist

FreeIgboho:


People waaay smarter than you have all concluded that it is highly likely we are living in some sort of simulation. Simulation implies simulator(s) (God).

LoL! So have people way smarter than you determined that there is no evidence of your delusions. And I am glad I am one of such people.

FreeIgboho:


Well he became the richest man in the world by far by foreseeing that almost all our vehicles will soon be electric and self-driving, and also that man needs to colonize other planets for what we call consciousness to survive. Also merging of AI and humans (Neurolink). He got all this from being a voracious consumer of sci-fi when he was younger.

Build an altar to him while you’re at it. As usual, all manner of holes in your assertions, but I’m not getting into a conversation about Musk.

FreeIgboho:


Here you are, deciding what is possible and what man can achieve, when you don’t even have any objective way of being sure you yourself exist!

I said stop acting as if your unfounded ideas are nothing more than fiction. I did not say anything about what man can or can’t achieve. Learn the difference between sci-if and metaphysics.
I’m sure I exist. The delusion is yours……

LordReed:


LoL! So have people way smarter than you determined that there is no evidence of your delusions. And I am glad I am one of such people.

All he is doing is calling everything into question and sneaking in the god idea at the end. The silly argument goes thus:

1. We can’t be sure anything exists
2. We are sure consciousness exists because of thinking
3. Thinking is evidence that something exists
4. Everything is a probability including the self
5. Therefore, God exists.

FreeIgboho:


It would part of the discussion - you have no way of proving that even you yourself exist

I am not in a solipsistic trap so why would I have a problem with proving I exist. It is people like you who dwell in a solipsistic dungeon that can't accept simple facts.

KnownUnknown:


All he is doing is calling everything into question and sneaking in the god idea at the end. The silly argument goes thus:

1. We can’t be sure anything exists
2. We are sure consciousness exists because of thinking
3. Thinking is evidence that something exists
4. Everything is a probability including the self
5. Therefore, God exists.

LoL! And you'll see him forming like that's not what he is doing. Using all manner of obfuscations to arrive at god exists.

FreeIgboho:


You know fully well I never said any such thing. I always said we have NO WAY of being sure what it is we don’t know we don’t know.

You're not sure we are in a simulation but you are pretty sure it is most likely that we are in a simulation. LMAO! I dunno why why you think you need to dribble your own shadow. Bwahahahahaha!

Dribble your own shadow

LordReed:


LoL! So have people way smarter than you determined that there is no evidence of your delusions. And I am glad I am one of such people. KnownUnknown

The below is by people who actually build simulated worlds and have insight you don’t have! (See screenshot)

Confirmed! We Live in a Simulation
We must never doubt Elon Musk again
* By Fouad Khan on April 1, 2021

All computing hardware leaves an artifact of its existence within the world of the simulation it is running. This artifact is the processor speed. If for a moment we imagine that we are a software program running on a computing machine, the only and inevitable artifact of the hardware supporting us, within our world, would be the processor speed. All other laws we would experience would be the laws of the simulation or the software we are a part of. If we were a Sim or a Grand Theft Auto character these would be the laws of the game. But anything we do would also be constrained by the processor speed no matter the laws of the game. No matter how complete the simulation is, the processor speed would intervene in the operations of the simulation.

If we live in a simulation, then our universe should also have such an artifact. We can now begin to articulate some properties of this artifact that would help us in our search for such an artifact in our universe.
* The artifact is as an additional component of every operation that is unaffected by the magnitude of the variables being operated upon and is irrelevant within the simulated reality until a maximum variable size is observed.
* The artifact presents itself in the simulated world as an upper limit.
* The artifact cannot be explained by underlying mechanistic laws of the simulated universe. It has to be accepted as an assumption or “given” within the operating laws of the simulated universe.
* The effect of the artifact or the anomaly is absolute. No exceptions.
Now that we have some defining features of the artifact, of course it becomes clear what the artifact manifests itself as within our universe. The artifact is manifested as the speed of light.

LordReed:

LoL! So have people way smarter than you determined that there is no evidence of your delusions. And I am glad I am one of such people. KnownUnknown

The speed of light is such a HUGE tip-off that we are in a simulation that u wonder that it wasn’t better camouflaged.

I mean the damned thing exists outside physics and common sense. No matter your own speed the speed of light stays constant. And nothing in the universe can exceed that speed. Plus other strange properties of the speed of light - just as if it were the speed of the processor running our sumulation

FreeIgboho:


The speed of light is such a HUGE tip-off that we are in a simulation that u wonder that it wasn’t better camouflaged.

I mean the damned thing exists outside physics and common sense. No matter your own speed the speed of light stays constant. And nothing in the universe can exceed that speed. Plus other strange properties of the speed of light - just as if it were the speed of the processor running our sumulation

Do you even understand what they mean by the speed of light is constant. I doubt you do. If you did you would not use it as a yardstick for your simulation fantasy. Light slows down in certain medium like air and water so how can it be evidence for your delusion. LoLz

FreeIgboho:


The below is by people who actually build simulated worlds and have insight you don’t have! (See screenshot)

Confirmed! We Live in a Simulation
We must never doubt Elon Musk again
* By Fouad Khan on April 1, 2021

All computing hardware leaves an artifact of its existence within the world of the simulation it is running. This artifact is the processor speed. If for a moment we imagine that we are a software program running on a computing machine, the only and inevitable artifact of the hardware supporting us, within our world, would be the processor speed. All other laws we would experience would be the laws of the simulation or the software we are a part of. If we were a Sim or a Grand Theft Auto character these would be the laws of the game. But anything we do would also be constrained by the processor speed no matter the laws of the game. No matter how complete the simulation is, the processor speed would intervene in the operations of the simulation.

If we live in a simulation, then our universe should also have such an artifact. We can now begin to articulate some properties of this artifact that would help us in our search for such an artifact in our universe.
* The artifact is as an additional component of every operation that is unaffected by the magnitude of the variables being operated upon and is irrelevant within the simulated reality until a maximum variable size is observed.
* The artifact presents itself in the simulated world as an upper limit.
* The artifact cannot be explained by underlying mechanistic laws of the simulated universe. It has to be accepted as an assumption or “given” within the operating laws of the simulated universe.
* The effect of the artifact or the anomaly is absolute. No exceptions.
Now that we have some defining features of the artifact, of course it becomes clear what the artifact manifests itself as within our universe. The artifact is manifested as the speed of light.

During a 2016 debate at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, Harvard University physicist Lisa Randall said the odds that the simulation hypothesis is correct are “effectively zero.”
https://www.amnh.org/explore/news-blogs/podcasts/2016-isaac-asimov-memorial-debate-is-the-universe-a-simulation

There is an even smarter person telling you to stop being deluded.

FreeIgboho:


The below is by people who actually build simulated worlds and have insight you don’t have! (See screenshot)

Confirmed! We Live in a Simulation
We must never doubt Elon Musk again
* By Fouad Khan on April 1, 2021

All computing hardware leaves an artifact of its existence within the world of the simulation it is running. This artifact is the processor speed. If for a moment we imagine that we are a software program running on a computing machine, the only and inevitable artifact of the hardware supporting us, within our world, would be the processor speed. All other laws we would experience would be the laws of the simulation or the software we are a part of. If we were a Sim or a Grand Theft Auto character these would be the laws of the game. But anything we do would also be constrained by the processor speed no matter the laws of the game. No matter how complete the simulation is, the processor speed would intervene in the operations of the simulation.

If we live in a simulation, then our universe should also have such an artifact. We can now begin to articulate some properties of this artifact that would help us in our search for such an artifact in our universe.
* The artifact is as an additional component of every operation that is unaffected by the magnitude of the variables being operated upon and is irrelevant within the simulated reality until a maximum variable size is observed.
* The artifact presents itself in the simulated world as an upper limit.
* The artifact cannot be explained by underlying mechanistic laws of the simulated universe. It has to be accepted as an assumption or “given” within the operating laws of the simulated universe.
* The effect of the artifact or the anomaly is absolute. No exceptions.
Now that we have some defining features of the artifact, of course it becomes clear what the artifact manifests itself as within our universe. The artifact is manifested as the speed of light.

What we know about computing is that processor speed improves over time. So if the hard limit of the so called processor is manifesting as light then you effectively saying your so called simulators have dead ended their processors and are no longer improving their processor speed. It sounds more like a hard limit on your reasoning faculties.

The other problem is of the energy required to run a simulation. That energy cost would be ginormous for a simulation of this fidelity. So if you link this with the previous point you'll see that there is zero chance this is a simulation. Because if they were expending energy to simulate primates who can feel their rectums distended as feces passes through it with such exquisite detail then they would have expended that energy towards improving their processor speed which in turn would have removed the so called artifact.

What you FreeIgboho need to do is learn how to actually reason instead of relying on articles you barely comprehend.

LordReed:


Do you even understand what they mean by the speed of light is constant. I doubt you do. If you did you would not use it as a yardstick for your simulation fantasy. Light slows down in certain medium like air and water so how can it be evidence for your delusion. LoLz

Sometimes I’m not sure u folks are worth having this discussion with. We, OF COURSE, mean speed of light in a vacuum or close to it as possible!! That goes without saying! If you put a wall to block the light, the speed will be zero!

LordReed:


What we know about computing is that processor speed improves over time. So if the hard limit of the so called processor is manifesting as light then you effectively saying your so called simulators have dead ended their processors and are no longer improving their processor speed. It sounds more like a hard limit on your reasoning faculties.

The other problem is of the energy required to run a simulation. That energy cost would be ginormous for a simulation of this fidelity. So if you link this with the previous point you'll see that there is zero chance this is a simulation. Because if they were expending energy to simulate primates who can feel their rectums distended as feces passes through it with such exquisite detail then they would have expended that energy towards improving their processor speed which in turn would have removed the so called artifact.

What you FreeIgboho need to do is learn how to actually reason instead of relying on articles you barely comprehend.

Like I said, sometimes I’m not sure u folks are worth having this discussion with. This is actually one of the dumber posts I’ve seen. YOU ARE INSIDE THE SYSTEM! You have NO WAY of knowing how things work outside the simulation. Probably beyond anything you can ever imagine. Shouldn’t that be obvious even to an elementary school pupil??

LordReed:


During a 2016 debate at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, Harvard University physicist Lisa Randall said the odds that the simulation hypothesis is correct are “effectively zero.”
https://www.amnh.org/explore/news-blogs/podcasts/2016-isaac-asimov-memorial-debate-is-the-universe-a-simulation

There is an even smarter person telling you to stop being deluded.

Look at him, you are talking of debates. We are talking of people who seem to have info FROM OUTSIDE OUR WORLD and have used that info to amass billions in REAL LIFE. People whom their colleagues are convinced are aliens. People who have insight into the nature of our universe that we mere humans just don’t have!

FreeIgboho:


Like I said, sometimes I’m not sure u folks are worth having this discussion with. This is actually one of the dumber posts I’ve seen. YOU ARE INSIDE THE SYSTEM! You have NO WAY of knowing how things work outside the simulation. Probably beyond anything you can ever imagine. Shouldn’t that be obvious even to an elementary school pupil??

Dummy here is you with a complete failure of cogitative reasoning. You just said you have no way of knowing how things work outside yet you know that this is a simulation working on a processor. How dumb are you really?

FreeIgboho:


Look at him, you are talking of debates. We are talking of people who seem to have info FROM OUTSIDE OUR WORLD and have used that info to amass billions in REAL LIFE. People whom their colleagues are convinced are aliens. People who have insight into the nature of our universe that we mere humans just don’t have!

Kai! This one don kolo. LMFAO!

FreeIgboho:


Sometimes I’m not sure u folks are worth having this discussion with. We, OF COURSE, mean speed of light in a vacuum or close to it as possible!! That goes without saying! If you put a wall to block the light, the speed will be zero!

No you are the one not having the discussion with because you don't seem to use the organ between your ears. You are saying that the speed of light is constant therefore it shows that it's a simulation, what you don't understand is there are not talking about what the speed is but how it is measured. You don't even understand the concepts you are trying to discussion so how are you worth discussing with.

Also when you put a wall the speed of light doesn't turn to zero, instead the light reflects off the wall which is why you can see the wall because the light is come into your eyes from the wall. If it turned to zero then walls will always be black or invisible. You don't understand scientific concepts, it is obvious.