T:___is a thing. |-(∃!{})⇒({}≡{})⇒({}={})⇒({}⇒{})⇒({}:{}⇒{})⇒(∃{} ⇒∃{} )⇒({}>>{})⇒({}∈{

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

Btw. You just defined the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

"The Texas sharpshooter fallacy is an informal fallacy which is committed when differences in data are ignored, but similarities are stressed. From this reasoning a false conclusion is inferred."

what differences in data am I ignoring?

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

I talk to atheists to become more powerful

thesis antithesis synthesis

you guys hold the antithesis with all your might, and I collect up all the synthesis

resistence is futile

That’s not how the hegelian dialectic works, dumbass.

You are getting dumber by the moment.

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

That’s not how the hegelian dialectic works, dumbass.

You are getting dumber by the moment.

my system works

or better yet I am a possessed typist and the angels possess you too to teach me things

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

my system works

or better yet I am a possessed typist and the angels possess you too to teach me things

Well you’re obviously not learning. Are the angels made of infinite pantheistic energy too? Which exists outside of finitely bounded energy equations you proffer forth? oh wait. That’s the data you’re ignoring! Even though this is the fourth time it’s been brought to your attention. You’re still drawing the target around your own arrow. Sloppily. Another fact you’re ignoring: god and angels don’t exist.

Type, monkey, type.

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

Well you’re obviously not learning. Are the angels made of infinite pantheistic energy too? Which exists outside of finitely bounded energy equations you proffer forth? oh wait. That’s the data you’re ignoring! Even though this is the fourth time it’s been brought to your attention. You’re still drawing the target around your own arrow. Sloppily. Another fact you’re ignoring: god and angels don’t exist.

Type, monkey, type.

zero-point energy implies that any volume of space contains infinite energy

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

zero-point energy implies that any volume of space contains infinite energy

Prove it.

[HumbleBeauty]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

Prove it.

look up "renormalization" where they remove the infinities to come up with finite answers

for example if you quantize the space in your hand, it gives more energy than the entire observable universe of matter

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

look up "renormalization" where they remove the infinities to come up with finite answers

for example if you quantize the space in your hand, it gives more energy than the entire observable universe of matter

More energy than the entire observable universe of matter is less than infinite.

Try again.

[Hobotronic2037]

HumbleBeauty wrote

I didn't post "infinite pantheistic energy" here, you did.

finding my posts on the internet to create a strawman

You lie. You did post it here. Dug this up from 2008. This whole time there was something super familiar about this. Maybe you forgot. But How could you? You are perfect after all.

http://ravingatheists.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14734

Edit: man that thread is a good read. Choobus, sternwallow and others smacked yer ass hard. Lol!!

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

zero-point energy implies that any volume of space contains infinite energy

We've already covered this. Idiot.

Zero Point Energy concerns the minimum energy that any quantum mechanical system may have. IT DOES NOT state that the energy is infinite. For that to be the case, space would need to be infinite but, although large and growing, it is finite.

In addition, zero point energy is a controversial theory since there is an unexplained difference between the theoretical and actual vacuum energy. Also, the theoretical model is, as yet, incomplete.

You are bat crap crazy.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

my system works

or better yet I am a possessed typist ...

Oh you're possessed alright.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

look up "renormalization" where they remove the infinities to come up with finite answers

for example if you quantize the space in your hand, it gives more energy than the entire observable universe of matter

You fuckin' idiot.

If you quantize space-time, you ELIMINATE INFINITIES - NOT create them, ffs. This was shown by Heisenberg and Ivanenko.

I call you a fuckin' idiot but actually, you may be a fuckin' liar - or possibly both.

[hertz vanrental]

Hobotronic2037 wrote

More energy than the entire observable universe of matter is less than infinite.

Try again.

Oh, ffs, PLEASE don't suggest to Bumble Butt Wank that 'He try again'

Fuck knows what the delirious dullard will come up with this time.

I've had to rebut his zero point energy wank twice already and his idea of quantised space once.

He's already getting tedious.

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

"The Texas sharpshooter fallacy is an informal fallacy which is committed when differences in data are ignored, but similarities are stressed. From this reasoning a false conclusion is inferred."

what differences in data am I ignoring?

1. The difference between the theoretical and the observed vacuum energy.

2. The difference between quantised and non-quantised space-time - which eliminates infinities.

3. The difference between you actually posting about infinite pantheistic energy and the claim that you did not.

You want me to go on?

[hertz vanrental]

HumbleBeauty wrote

look up "renormalization" where they remove the infinities to come up with finite answers

for example if you quantize the space in your hand, it gives more energy than the entire observable universe of matter

FFS, NO, NO and Thrice NO!!!

Quantisation of space-time ELIMINATES infinities. It DOES NOT create them.

If renormalisation removes infinities, why do you insist that energy is infinite when, patently, it isn't?

Therefore, through quantisation and renormalisation, energy becomes finite. NOT infinite.

Wanker.