Nice bait and switch. I see what you did there. How can it be defeated but not terminated? And can you provide critically robust evidence of its defeat? Some of the world's top physicists disagree with you.Ninjasocks wrote:I said it had been destroyed many times, Monseir Le Clown. Obviously the implication was that it had been defeated but not terminated. Now can you take your repetative [sic] buffoonary [sic] to someone who gives a fuck.
Philosophical terms? In what respect can a mathematical construct be philosophically flawed?In philosophical terms it had been shown to be flawed,so it merely restated its objectives.
Except, of course, that M-Theory is not an argument. Nor is it a faith-based statement. It's a mathematical construct rooted in empirical axioms. It's a line of enquiry, and no more. That's what a hypothesis is.And [sic] argument can be won or lost but an opinion or faith based statement can never be so defeated without evidence, that is the fucking point.
The reality which cannot be defined out of existence. Let me explain this in simple terms.the probability of life existing elsewhere in the Universe is not 1? What reality do you live in?
In every single instance so far discovered of a planet with conditions conducive to the arisal of life, life has arisen. This renders a probability of 1 that, given the right conditions, life will arise. Elementary probability calculation, this.
