jane wrote:Hi I will be rational

I will show what I found on the net

First Dean shows 1=0.999.. which is a contradiction in maths

https://www.reddit.com/r/TopMindsOfReddit/comments/fd7v9z/erotic_poet_proves_mathematicsscience_end_in/

what does this notation mean-you see it but the result conflicts with your education so mind still refuses to see

0.888...

and

0.999....

and while you are at it

integer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integer

"An integer (from the Latin integer meaning "whole")[note 1] is a number that can be written without a fractional component. For example, 21, 4, 0, and −2048 are integers, while 9.75, 5+1/2, and √2 are not.

The set of integers consists of zero (0), the positive natural numbers (1, 2, 3, ...), also called whole numbers or counting numbers"

1 is an integer

0.888.. is not an integer

0.999.. is not an integer

thus when an integer 1= a non-integer 0.999.. maths ends in contradiction

Now that seems very clear to me-being rational


Second Biology is not a science

https://www.reddit.com/r/badbadmathematics/comments/f3hinf/a_philosophy_to_dangerous_to_acknowledge/

bear in mind we are told by science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

"Biology is the science concerned with the study of life."

but

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

"There is currently no consensus regarding the definition of life"

so basically

without science knowing what life is

then dead and alive have no meaning

biology science dont even know what life is-how ironic they study life but dont know what life is

that is why biology is not a science

Now that seems very clear to me-being rational



Thirdly Godels theorems

http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/g%C3%B6del%E2%80%99s-1st-theorem-is-meaningless.4304/

1) Gödel’s 1st theorem

a) “Any effectively generated theory capable of expressing elementary arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete. In particular, for any consistent, effectively generated formal theory that proves certain basic arithmetic truths, there is an arithmetical statement that is true,[1] but not provable in the theory (Kleene 1967, p. 250)


note
"... there is an arithmetical statement that is true..."

In other words there are true mathematical statements which cant be proven
But the fact is Godel cant tell us what makes a mathematical statement true thus his theorem is meaningless

If Godel said "effectively generated formal theory that proves certain basic arithmetic gibblies, there is an arithmetical statement that is gibbly"

but did not tell us what gibbly or gibblies are/meant you would have no trouble saying hey Godel your statement/ theorem is meaningless

same goes for true maths statement if he cant tell us what makes a maths statement true then his theorem is meaningless

Godel's 2nd theorem is about

http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/godels-2nd-theorem-ends-in-paradox.4306/

"If an axiomatic system can be proven to be consistent and complete from
within itself, then it is inconsistent.”


But we have a paradox

Gödel is using a mathematical system
his theorem says a system cant be proven consistent


THUS A PARADOX

Godel must prove that a system cannot be proven to be consistent based upon the premise that the logic he uses must be consistent . If the logic he uses is not consistent then he cannot make a proof that is consistent. So he must assume that his logic is consistent so he can make a proof of the impossibility of proving a system to be consistent. But if his proof is true then he has proved that the logic he
uses to make the proof must be consistent, but his proof proves that
this cannot be done
THUS A PARADOX

Thus as far as I see being rational

dean does show mathematics science end in meaninglessness

[Reveal] Spoiler:

fuck off you little bastard.

- MRS

bear in mind we are told by science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

"Biology is the science concerned with the study of life."

but

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

"There is currently no consensus regarding the definition of life"

so basically

without science knowing what life is

then dead and alive have no meaning

biology science dont even know what life is-how ironic they study life but dont know what life is

that is why biology is not a science

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... cience.pdf

or
https://www.scribd.com/document/3488159 ... -a-Science

1)Darwins book is called On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection ....

but

this paper shows natural selection is not the origin of new species Natural selection is not the origin of new species

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo ... ection.pdf

or
https://www.scribd.com/document/3345454 ... d-or-wrong

"Natural selection does not generate new genes/species Natural selection adds no new genetic information as it only deals with the passing on of genes/traits already present and it will be pointed out genetics cannot account for the generation of new species/genes as it is claimed the generation of new genes [via mutation] is a random process due to radiation, viruses, chemicals etc and genetic cannot account for these process happening as they are out side the scope of genetics physics, chaos theory etc may give some explanation but genetics cant"

Biologist cant tell us what a species is -without contradiction thus evolution theory ie evolving species is nonsense

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... TS-DON.pdf
or
https://www.scribd.com/document/3488216 ... species-is

Biologists agree there is species hybridization
but that contradicts what a species is

THE COLIN LESLIE DEAN SPECIES PARADOX
The first humans Adam and Eve gave birth to Cain and Able
so who did Cain mate with

similarly
who did the first bird mate with who did the first dog mate with

an individual of species A gives birth to a individual of the new species B so who did this new individual of new species B mate with to continue the new species
either
1)there was no one to mate with- so how did the new species B become common
or
2)a whole lot of species A gave birth toa whole lot of new individuals of species B at the same time so that these new individual members of species B could mate together

if this 2) was the way it happened
we have a major problem
it would mean something made a whole lot of members of species A give birth to a whole lot new members of species B at the same time
we are told species form due to random mutations
so
it is beyound possibility that the same random mutation took place in a whole lot of different members of species A at the same time

the other alternative is that some intelligence was at work

NOW
There is a a dilemma
1)in order to resolve the dean paradox
the dean paradox makes you abandon the word species
in which case biology is destroyed

or
2)biology uses the word bird
signifying it is different from its parent organism
science uses the word species
as such
you have the dean paraodox

in order to resolve the dean paradox
the dean paradox makes you abandon the word species
in which case biology is destroyed
and all this talk in biology about speciation species this species that is meaningless nonsense

Svartalf wrote:Who exactly is this dean fellow and why does "jane" repeatedly call him magister?

Mr. Skeptic wrote:stop giving Dean attention. his fucking stupidity will die on his own. I wonder if he's doing this ironically, somebody who celebrates the absurd and shitty logic to make a point about logic (it's subjectivity perhaps?) or he's just philso-trolling.

OlivierK wrote:Kiore, you missed two threads:

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/philo ... 56536.html

And this one from the point where it got necro'ed

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/mathe ... l#p2735634

dean shows Schrödinger's cat thought experiment is meaningless as he cant tell us what dead is what alive is
Now as dean points out, if some bright spark wants to tell us what according to them, not Schrodinger, dead is what alive is

then

in the process tell us your religion your culture your philosophy your spirituality your science behind what dead is what alive is

and if you go to science for your definition of life

bear in mind we are told by science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

"Biology is the science concerned with the study of life."

but

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

"There is currently no consensus regarding the definition of life"

so basically

without science knowing what life is

then dead and alive have no meaning ....


Aside dont you think it strange that after say 85 years none of the worlds greatest geniuses have bothered to ask what Schrodinger means by dead means by alive or do the geniuses ask does dead mean? what does alive mean? -this is the power of consensus trance

consensus trance

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Consensus_trance

this meaninglessness of Schrodinger's thought experiment is one proof of the view that all products of human thought end in meaninglessness ie mathematics and science

this part of Magister colin leslie dean "A philosophy to dangerous to acknowledge"-mathematics and science end in meaninglessness

https://www.reddit.com/r/badbadmathemat ... knowledge/