Sujet : Re: Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?
De : x (at) *nospam* x.org (x)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity sci.physics sci.mathDate : 10. Apr 2025, 23:14:33
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vt9fs9$3up5r$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.0
On 4/10/25 14:06, Ross Finlayson wrote:
On 04/10/2025 01:32 PM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> wrote:
>
On 4/10/25 2:20 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>
>
>
>
The Universe is not an evolved biologcal system.
>
>
>
Jan
>
>
>
How do you know that? How can one state that as fact without having the
means to check it?
>
Ockham told me.
>
Jan
>
>
Neither "Gaia Hypothesis" nor "Dumb Rock" are any more
falsifiable than "Big Bang" or "Steady State", which aren't.
Ockhamites are by no means the prevalent school,
though, it's popular with shallow inconstant sorts.
Do you, uh, believe everything Ockham says?
You know if words do not have meaning than the
words 'true' or 'false' do not have meaning.
Do 'true' ideas have any greater value than
'false' ideas? Well if those words are meaningless
then maybe not.