Windevoid Posted July 11, 2013 Posted July 11, 2013 I don't think the universe can happen. It doesn't make sense. There's no source of differentiation. -1
John Cuthber Posted July 11, 2013 Posted July 11, 2013 On 7/11/2013 at 4:12 AM, Windevoid said: I don't think the universe can happen. It doesn't make sense. There's no source of differentiation. Well, it did, so you are wrong. That's the end of the story.
Ophiolite Posted July 11, 2013 Posted July 11, 2013 On 7/11/2013 at 4:12 AM, Windevoid said: I don't think the universe can happen. The universe is largely indifferent to your views. On 7/11/2013 at 4:12 AM, Windevoid said: It doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense to you. That is quite a different thing from what you said. On 7/11/2013 at 4:12 AM, Windevoid said: There's no source of differentiation. Now that doesn't make sense. 2
SomethingToPonder Posted July 26, 2013 Posted July 26, 2013 Well i hate to tell you this but here we are? The universe has to have happened, as im typing this to you now.
Phi for All Posted July 26, 2013 Posted July 26, 2013 On 7/11/2013 at 4:12 AM, Windevoid said: I don't think the universe can happen. It doesn't make sense. So since it did happen, we can quite easily see that the problem isn't with the universe. Based on the information you gave us in the OP, the problem happens when you do this "think" thing. The mechanism seems broken and you should have someone check that. On 7/11/2013 at 4:12 AM, Windevoid said: There's no source of differentiation. Have them check your "explanation" mechanism while they're at it.
Windevoid Posted July 26, 2013 Author Posted July 26, 2013 On 7/26/2013 at 7:59 PM, ACG52 said: We're here, but I'm not sure about the op. Here for now.
CharonY Posted July 26, 2013 Posted July 26, 2013 I would say that this is pretty much overwhelming evidence.
John Cuthber Posted July 26, 2013 Posted July 26, 2013 If the universe isn't real then it won't matter if someone closes this thread.
zapatos Posted July 27, 2013 Posted July 27, 2013 Why do I get the feeling that Windevoid is simply trolling? 1
Ophiolite Posted July 29, 2013 Posted July 29, 2013 Another thread devoid of win. (My apologies if we have a rule forbidding manipulation of member's names for ironic or derogatory purposes. Sometime's I just loose control. Sincerely, Oaf-I-a-lot.) 2
D H Posted July 29, 2013 Posted July 29, 2013 On 7/29/2013 at 10:42 AM, Ophiolite said: Another thread devoid of win. Not any more.
Greg H. Posted July 29, 2013 Posted July 29, 2013 My avatar is the photo negative of a false color image of the magnetic field lines of a black hole. In the context of this thread, my post makes as much sense as the OP.
Windevoid Posted July 29, 2013 Author Posted July 29, 2013 (edited) On 7/29/2013 at 10:42 AM, Ophiolite said: Another thread devoid of win. (My apologies if we have a rule forbidding manipulation of member's names for ironic or derogatory purposes. Sometime's I just loose control. Sincerely, Oaf-I-a-lot.) The name is from wind and void. The universe seems like a case of circular logic. Is the universe an example of circular logic? As in, the idea that it explains itself. Even if there is/was a "god", it would go "God explains existence, and existence explains god." Anyone else see something wrong with this? Edited July 29, 2013 by Windevoid
Delta1212 Posted July 30, 2013 Posted July 30, 2013 On 7/29/2013 at 10:31 PM, Windevoid said: Anyone else see something wrong with this? A great deal. 2
Windevoid Posted July 30, 2013 Author Posted July 30, 2013 On 7/30/2013 at 12:54 AM, Delta1212 said: A great deal. Was that a good or a bad? "great deal"
Windevoid Posted August 11, 2013 Author Posted August 11, 2013 There are trainloads of paradoxes. You don't notice them because there are so many and they are so fundamental. How can a bird chirp when I can't see it? Why can't I use magic on a whim? Stuff like that.
Windevoid Posted August 11, 2013 Author Posted August 11, 2013 On 8/11/2013 at 9:17 AM, John Cuthber said: Those are not paradoxes. On 8/11/2013 at 9:17 AM, John Cuthber said: Those are not paradoxes. Why are they not paradoxes? Maybe that is another paradox.
John Cuthber Posted August 11, 2013 Posted August 11, 2013 They are not paradoxes because they don't fit the definition of paradox. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox and it's not a paradox that they are not paradoxical.
pears Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I think somebody's been smoking too much of the green stuff...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now