Can you handle the Truth?

Started by Ordo432 pages
Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Again, I am not here to win anything just to prove my point which I have done. You don't have to admit that I am right.

Pride is a sin.

JIA is a paedophile.

Originally posted by lord xyz
JIA is a paedophile.

By his method of reasoning, this is true until he proves it false.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
No you cannot.

Yes I can. There is a nonzero probability of all subatomic particles in my body simultaneously experiencing quantum entanglement to the same relative locations. AKA, my body existing in two places at once.

I already posted evidence that things beyond the quantum level can exist in two places at once, so you trying to use that as an argument has already been refuted.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
For you it is zero.

Fact: there are absolutely no square circles and there are absolutely no round squares.

This is an absolute statement.


Only because they are being defined that way.

All this proves, is that the only way you can make a statement be absolute is to continually give it narrower definitions until it can have no possible exceptions. A tactic you have used several times in this thread.

First example: You said no life can exist without air, and when it was pointed out this was not true you arbitrarily redefined life to only include cells with nuclei.

Second example: You said gravity was the same throughout the universe, and when it was pointed out this was not true you redefined to only include the earth. And when that was shown as false you redefined a second time to only include the earth's surface.

Third example: You said nothing can exist in two places at once, then redefined it to mean that humans cannot exist in two places at once. Then when that was proven false, you redefined it as saying humans cannot exist in two places at once at will.

Originally posted by King Kandy
A buckyball with 60 carbon atoms and 48 flourine atoms was recently induced into dual states without anything like that occuring.

no shit...

Time for DRINKS 🍺

Originally posted by inimalist
no shit...

Yeah I know, right? Maybe teleportation isn't just a fantasy.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Yeah I know, right? Maybe teleportation isn't just a fantasy.

lol

what chaos that would bring...

Originally posted by inimalist
lol

what chaos that would bring...

Brundle-Fly?

How much of the economy relies on transportation?

Originally posted by Robtard
Brundle-Fly?

bingo

and terrorists

EDIT: fly terrorists

Originally posted by Dr Will Hatch
How much of the economy relies on transportation?

Currently? All of it.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Only because they are being defined that way.

All this proves, is that the only way you can make a statement be absolute is to continually give it narrower definitions until it can have no possible exceptions. A tactic you have used several times in this thread.

First example: You said no life can exist without air, and when it was pointed out this was not true you arbitrarily redefined life to only include cells with nuclei.

Second example: You said gravity was the same throughout the universe, and when it was pointed out this was not true you redefined to only include the earth. And when [B]that was shown as false you redefined a second time to only include the earth's surface.

Third example: You said nothing can exist in two places at once, then redefined it to mean that humans cannot exist in two places at once. Then when that was proven false, you redefined it as saying humans cannot exist in two places at once at will. [/B]

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Absolutes: gravity is universal, air (h2o) is necessary for life, you cannot be in two places at the same time.

Now...do you agree with any of those absolutes?

P.S. a sword's edge is an absolute.

😎

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I meant oxygen not h2o just goes to show that I am human.

Gravity is universal this is an absolute.

Nothing living can continue to live without oxygen is also an absolute.

You cannot be in two places at the same time is also an absolute.

Time is linear and moves as it were in one direction. Hence, you cannot be in the past and in the present simultaneously. This is also an absolute.

I admitted that I was not being scientific when I said that bacteria is not life as you mean it. I admitted that was I speaking on my personal whim that bacteria is a flimsy example of life because I wanted animal or insect examples which I believe are way more compelling. But you couldn't furnish even one.

I never said that gravity was the same throughout the universe. This is a lie (deliberate) or simply a misunderstanding on your part (unintentional).

I said you cannot be in two place at once and you are a human right?

To prove my point I have provided two of my earliest posts on this discussion.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
*Sigh*

Again, quantum mechanics deals with things at the subatomic level. I am not talking about at that level. So your link is not valid.

If you can't be in more than one place in the world at any given time, then why must you exclude quantum mechanics from this world? It must exist in this world along with everything else. 🙄

I don't get it. What is it about a eukaryotic organism that makes it more compelling than a prokaryotic?

He doesn't even comprehend what he is saying.

Children brandishing swords.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive

I admitted that I was not being scientific when I said that bacteria is not life as you mean it. I admitted that was I speaking on my personal whim that bacteria is a flimsy example of life because I wanted animal or insect examples which I believe are way more compelling. But you couldn't furnish even one.

I never said that gravity was the same throughout the universe. This is a lie (deliberate) or simply a misunderstanding on your part (unintentional).

I said you cannot be in two place at once and you are a human right?

To prove my point I have provided two of my earliest posts on this discussion.


Why would I furnish one, when my case has already been proved? You said a statement that was false, no need to continue by asking senselessly for more examples. There is absolutely nothing about bacteria that makes for "flimsy" evidence other than it is convenient to your argument to say so.

You said it was "universal". If it is NOT the same everywhere, then it is NOT universal. That's the very definition of the word.

"You" could have meant anything as it is often used loosely in conversation. Irrelevant anyway as it is possible for a human to be in two places at once.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[COLOR=darkblue]Fact: squares are squares and not circles and circles are circles and not squares. This is an absolute statement...

Let me help you with this:

Let us pretend for a moment that there is a very strange square that is a circle. To us, this strange square would look just like a circle, and we would call it a circle. For all we know, half the circles we see could be these strange imaginary squares, but we would never know it. So, to say "squares are squares and not circles" is to ignore the fact that we are the ones defining what squares or circles are in the first place.

Does that help?

Originally posted by Robtard
By his method of reasoning, this is true until he proves it false.
Wish him look.

He'll need it.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Let me help you with this:

Let us pretend for a moment that there is a very strange square that is a circle. To us, this strange square would look just like a circle, and we would call it a circle. For all we know, half the circles we see could be these strange imaginary squares, but we would never know it. So, to say "squares are squares and not circles" is to ignore the fact that we are the ones defining what squares or circles are in the first place.

Does that help?

What the ****?