rationalskepticism.org

Destroyer wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:Yeah, I mean nature intentionally trying to deceive you is WAY more likely than the two models not being complete enough to overlap. Great argument.

Not actually an argument, just a snippet. Maybe intelligence is just disguised/dressed-up as electrical impulses.

That must be the nice thing about spitballing, you don't have to actually defend any positions you can't defend because you're just "putting it out there". Might want to familiarize yourself with Occam's Razor, you'd find the amount of assumptions necessary to propose a deceptive disembodied intelligence is far more than simply incomplete modeling.