Recent content by Mr Tansill

Die Hard. The Matrix. Saving Private Ryan.

Nothing about the above is succinct. I read that, and I placed in bold text, your statements that I think could actually be turned into propositions, and think that distills your argument to the basic points you're making. Can you say if that's what you're getting at? In any case, here's what I...

Yes, you did (more like 5-10 times), and I will continue to harp on that as long as you state the opposite. Here is a link to the post where I placed no less than five of your claims that improbability rules out a theory (i.e. improbable = impossible). Post. And yes, the statement "forget...

Yep. And here we are. That is the point that so many people just don't seem to capture. Nothing subtle about it. Our "surprise" at certain outcomes, means nothing, absolutely nothing, This is a form of begging the question. Rather, it is the case that life as we know it is very well suited...

If you're curious about monkey's and improbable events, check out this site: https://libraryofbabel.info/ Browse to Hexagon...

Chubby Belgian?

Absolutely not. The central lesson from Calculus, is that you can add up an infinite number of things, but still get a finite result. Do you care to assign a numeric value to your claim that because a number is too small it's not possible? A game with two outcomes = 50/50. A game with three...

Have we abandoned the argument of improbable = impossible?

Yeah, I could see that. Estimating 2000 roulette wheels around the world, each being spun 20 times per hour, 24 hours per day for the last 74 years gives ~26 Billion spins - I would expect that to happen.

No, you lost me. I think I've made my point. If probability is not part of your justification for dismissing a theory, then my point has been made. Ok, sure. I think another relevant point, is that no matter how finite (small) each and every possible outcome is, when taken in their totality...

Word. I generally omit certain parts of responses that are less substantive...helps other readers. Yep. And my point (and Sonny's) was that fantastically improbable things happen all the time - in fact, EVERYTHING that happens is fantastically improbable when you compare it with the immense...

That is true - of course, the tone of my posts communicates a sub-text, and have a quality all their own.

Here's my bottom line for you: I feel like my post (#74 above) specifically addressed your usage of low-probability as justification to rule out a scientific theory. You can deny, deny, deny, but the bold words above are yours, not mine. That's what I'm basically hung up on, and am not really...

Ehhh, my answer stands. You're seeking to elevate your literal "story", with those "stories" told by science in an effort of self-justification. Then you can massage two separate concepts together, use the same word (story) to describe them, and convince yourself that they are the same. You like...

Words...my words were there simply to point out you denied using probability in your argument. That response didn't warrant so many words back. Merely put mine there to demonstrate to others you were being disingenuous.