What are the odds of an ET visitation?

Wizard of Whatever said:
O, I was aware of the concepts, just didn't agree with with a lot of the manifestations and proofs.
Click to expand...
You cannot disagree with a mathematical proof if it's been proven. I cannot prove Deep Purple were the best live band ever, I can't prove the Beatles were the best band ever, I cannot prove anything in science. I can only provide a lot of evidence to support those claims and theories, one CAN prove mathematics though and that is what Cantor did. A lot of the mathematicians at the time did not like the philosophical aspects to his work, some objected and said he had taken mathematics down the wrong road. No one could demonstrate his proof to be wrong though, not Poincaré, Hilbert, Kronecker and later, Von Neumann, Russell. Basically some of the smartest people who have ever graced mathematics.

Do you know something they didn't? A flaw in Cantors work?

Obviously vaccines are much easier to discuss, they work.
 
Wizard of Whatever said:
O, I was aware of the concepts, just didn't agree with with a lot of the manifestations and proofs.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you mean by "manifestations."

Vaccine efficacy, vaccination up take, hesitancy and outbreaks are documented in the scientific literature.

A mathematical proof is proven, no grey areas.
 
Pinball1970 said:
You cannot disagree with a mathematical proof if it's been proven. I cannot prove Deep Purple were the best live band ever, I can't prove the Beatles were the best band ever, I cannot prove anything in science. I can only provide a lot of evidence to support those claims and theories, one CAN prove mathematics though and that is what Cantor did. A lot of the mathematicians at the time did not like the philosophical aspects to his work, some objected and said he had taken mathematics down the wrong road. No one could demonstrate his proof to be wrong though, not Poincaré, Hilbert, Kronecker and later, Von Neumann, Russell. Basically some of the smartest people who have ever graced mathematics.

Do you know something they didn't? A flaw in Cantors work?

Obviously vaccines are much easier to discuss, they work.
Click to expand...

I can disagree with with anything I see is wrong, or incomplete, or wrongly or partially misapplied, or only work or are valid sometimes. This also is science. I may not be always right, but this attitude will advance science more than always adhering to the prevailing paradigm.
 
Last edited:
Pinball1970 said:
I don't know what you mean by "manifestations."
Click to expand...
How they work out in actuality.
Pinball1970 said:
Vaccine efficacy, vaccination up take, hesitancy and outbreaks are documented in the scientific literature.
Click to expand...
And it has been shown that a lot of that literature is wrong, biased, or just lies.
Pinball1970 said:
A mathematical proof is proven, no grey areas.
Click to expand...
A very many grey areas. Proofs often based on wrong application of theoretical principals.
 
Wizard of Whatever said:
O, I was aware of the concepts, just didn't agree with with a lot of the manifestations and proofs.
Click to expand...
Wizard of Whatever said:
I can disagree with with anything I see is wrong, or incomplete, or wrongly or partially misapplied, or only work or are valid sometimes. This also is science. I may not be always right, but this attitude will advance science more than always adhering to the prevailing paradigm.
Click to expand...
Wizard of Whatever said:
A very many grey areas. Proofs often based on wrong application of theoretical principals.
Click to expand...
To disagree with mathematical proofs one first needs to understand the proofs. You showed, and continue to show, nothing of the sort. So, maybe your disagreement is from ignorance. Or personal incredulity. Or any other such fallacious reasoning. But, hey, sure, you can disagree with anything you see as wrong, but please note that your disagreement is as empty and as worthless as anything else you might fart, unless you actually support your disagreement.

And, no, mathematical proofs are not dependent upon opinion, or application, and do not "only work or are valid sometimes". You are confusing maths and science. Maths is not science. Science doesn't work with proofs. Maths does. Maths is based on mathematical principles, not theoretical ones, not scientific ones. Science uses maths as a tool, but maths also develops independently, in the abstract. Non-Euclidean geometry, for example, was developed long before anyone knew it would describe spacetime, long before there was a practical use for it.

But, hey, don't let facts stand in the way of your ignorance.
:rolleyes:
 
Pinball1970 said:
Well disprove it then
Click to expand...
He will not.

He is, to quote Shakespeare, "...full of sound and fury, signifying nothing..."

We waste far too much space in SciFo on engaging with WoW.

A good rule of thumb perhaps is: waste no more words on someone than they offer themselves. For WoW, that's about six at a time.
 
Wizard of Whatever said:
And it has been shown that a lot of that literature is wrong, biased, or just lies.

A very many grey areas. Proofs often based on wrong application of theoretical principals.
Click to expand...
Well then enlighten us to this so called literature that shows accepted science to be wrong, biased or lies. You can't. You are spraying rhetorical nonsense.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Well disprove it then
Click to expand...
I don't have to prove it all to you. You can do that yourself, if you dare to become open to it.

Any one who agrees that all is right in the world is obviously wrong. This applies almost everywhere.

Doubt has done more to advance humanity than faith in a prevailing paradigms.
 
Wizard of Whatever said:
I don't have to prove it all to you. You can do that yourself, if you dare to become open to it.

Any one who agrees that all is right in the world is obviously wrong. This applies almost everywhere.

Doubt has done more to advance humanity than faith in a prevailing paradigms.
Click to expand...
Oh for fuck sake what a load of old shit.

DISPROVE Cantor! Do it.

What is the flaw in his proof?

Illustrate it explicitly, now.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
Since people around here freely throw around personal insults towards anyone arguing for anything UFO/UAP, answer me this:
Click to expand...
Insults generally begin being thrown around, when this forum, a science forum attracts a variety of anti science nuts and conspiracy ratbags, some religiously/God driven, others by ignorance and fraudulent claims.
Ivan Seeking said:
What are the odds of an ET visitation. Prove it.
Click to expand...
That is a silly childish question to be asking. As I have said before, the barriers preventing inter planetary/galactic/Alien contact are time and distance, irrespective of whether "c" can be seen to be breached, and of course, if any Intelligent Alien life does even exist.
Ivan Seeking said:
What does the Fermi "paradox" tell us? Should we expect to see visitations or not?
Click to expand...
The fermi paradox is summed up in the previous answer. In summing it asks (1) Does Intelligent life exist off this Earth? (2) Where is it, if it at all exists? (3) Why hasn't it contact us? (4) Has it destroyed itself or already be extinct. (4) Are we using the right technology in searching for evidence of ETL.
 
So I'm making a point that WOW cannot disprove Cantor.

He also has offered ZERO published literature disputing vaccine efficacy, vaccine technology, herd immunity or anything remotely scientific.

Just idiotic unscientific sound bites.

Great with aliens though right? Because some farmer in Alabama saw a real bright light?

Gullible idiot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top