I'm posting this simply based on this challenge:

Paul Almond wrote:If you want to criticize my own writing, I suggest you set up a thread specifically for that: In fact I am actually challenging you to do that. I don't think doing that would violate any rules here in principle.

Some of you may have noticed that Paul has his own site filled with many articles.
Some of these make sense. Things on critical thinking and atheism e.t.c

But some are well...in a wild territory.
Take for example: http://www.paul-almond.com/IndirectMindUploading.htm
Another starts saying that atheists can justifiably say There is no God. And then a few sentences later acknowledges that there is no evidence for that view. Where do you go on from there?

It seems Paul got carried away.
There is just some unscientific stuff in their that is not based on any evidence what-so-ever.

What do you think? Did Paul go overboard?
The site seems to imply a man intoxicated on his own self-donned intelligence, who does he think he is?

Thommo wrote:

Eliakim wrote:But some are well...in a wild territory.
Take for example: http://www.paul-almond.com/IndirectMindUploading.htm

Well, I agree it's not really scientific, but since it's a philosophical article, what exactly is the problem there? He presents both sides of the argument for each point and makes no false claims that I can see from a quick skim reading.

It's a speculative praisee of a thought provoking topic, what's your specific objection to that?

Eliakim wrote:Another starts saying that atheists can justifiably say There is no God. And then a few sentences later acknowledges that there is no evidence for that view. Where do you go on from there?

Well, I've heard Paul summarise this argument before and whilst I don't necessarily agree with every detail I think it's a good argument.

Do you think it's reasonable for me to claim there are no fairies living at the bottom of my garden? If not, why not?

Now, I do think that's a reasonable claim - and yet just like with the god issue there is no evidence.

Of course its not reasonable to say fairies would be at the bottom of the garden. Why? Because I could falsify it. How? By cutting the bottom of the garden off. And trying to smoke them out. Like this:

starr should be worried.

Couldn't you just leave out some stylish cushions and see if they take the bait?

Thommo wrote:Right, so when you've done that, you can make the claim.

But you haven't done it and you still make the claim. Why is that? And who says your experiment would work on fairies anyway?

You postulated fairies. Tell me about the fairies attributes. Where do you live? I could do this if you want.

Animavore wrote:Couldn't you just leave out some stylish cushions and see if they take the bait?

Do they like stylish cushions?

Eliakim wrote:

Animavore wrote:Couldn't you just leave out some stylish cushions and see if they take the bait?

Do they like stylish cushions?

So the stereotype goes. The only ones I know are rockers. Must stop getting my life experience from Ugly Betty.

Thommo wrote:

Eliakim wrote:

Thommo wrote:Right, so when you've done that, you can make the claim.

But you haven't done it and you still make the claim. Why is that? And who says your experiment would work on fairies anyway?

You postulated fairies. Tell me about the fairies attributes. Where do you live? I could do this if you want.

The fairies are exactly smart enough that whilst they are definitively physical and live at the bottom of your garden, you aren't smart enough to outwit and detect them.

They also like blueberries.

Oh and the also emit a 4-dimensional space folded over into a 0-dimensional space that is shaped like a cylindrical torus and some other bollocks.

So what if I fired a nuclear missile at the garden? I could send a salvage squad to test for fairy remains.

Best derail ever

Thommo wrote:

Eliakim wrote:

Thommo wrote:

Eliakim wrote:

Thommo wrote:Right, so when you've done that, you can make the claim.

But you haven't done it and you still make the claim. Why is that? And who says your experiment would work on fairies anyway?

You postulated fairies. Tell me about the fairies attributes. Where do you live? I could do this if you want.

The fairies are exactly smart enough that whilst they are definitively physical and live at the bottom of your garden, you aren't smart enough to outwit and detect them.

They also like blueberries.

Oh and the also emit a 4-dimensional space folded over into a 0-dimensional space that is shaped like a cylindrical torus and some other bollocks.

So what if I fired a nuclear missile at the garden? I could send a salvage squad to test for fairy remains.

I feel this has got rapidly into a derail so that you can miss my point, unless you actually have a nuclear missile I think that you're probably talking shit now. How about you swing this back to discussion of Paul Almond's article, since you seemed to want to discuss that?

I could hypothetically get a nuclear missile. If I convinced North Korea, you were a South Korean spy conspiring with the government of your country.

Anyway,

Its not just the one article. And I need help debunking him,

Any takers?

I may respsond to some of thsi, if the LOLs stp 4 lnh enougj 2 allow me to ahvieve enoough copporrdinationn to type.