Falconer02 & falcon9 ;)

[falcon9]

I am proud to say that I lurk here daily, checking every post with  even the slightest reference to those entities of which it can be said "absence of proof is not proof of absence"-- such as G-d  (or, perhaps (D-g? oh, wait-- they don't seem to be PETA people ).

Falcon9: I greatly admire your erudition, your clarity of expression, and your obvious intellect. It is truly a pleasure to read everything you write, whether I agree or not.  While I find your replies acerbic at times, they are often warranted. It is my hope that both you and Falconer will occasionally post on matters of pure science, such as quantum physics, astronomy or other hard science fields, so that I may converse with you and expand my knowledge. And I love your animated flogging horse 

As one who is frequently denigrated, insulted and often threatened because I do believe that absence of proof does not constitute proof of absence in ANY subject, it is refreshing not to be the main course in a metaphorical barbeque. 

Thanks, E.  As far as such an "absence of proof" theory goes, are you tacitly implying that the burden of proof does or doesn't rest with the initial claimant?

[elandry]

I am proud to say that I lurk here daily, checking every post with  even the slightest reference to those entities of which it can be said "absence of proof is not proof of absence"-- such as G-d  (or, perhaps (D-g? oh, wait-- they don't seem to be PETA people ).

Falcon9: I greatly admire your erudition, your clarity of expression, and your obvious intellect. It is truly a pleasure to read everything you write, whether I agree or not.  While I find your replies acerbic at times, they are often warranted. It is my hope that both you and Falconer will occasionally post on matters of pure science, such as quantum physics, astronomy or other hard science fields, so that I may converse with you and expand my knowledge. And I love your animated flogging horse 

As one who is frequently denigrated, insulted and often threatened because I do believe that absence of proof does not constitute proof of absence in ANY subject, it is refreshing not to be the main course in a metaphorical barbeque. 

Thanks, E.  As far as such an "absence of proof" theory goes, are you tacitly implying that the burden of proof does or doesn't rest with the initial claimant?

In formal debate, if I remember my dino days in school, burden of proof rests on the initial claimant.

[falcon9]

In formal debate, if I remember my dino days in school, burden of proof rests on the initial claimant.

That's not an 'out' for an informal debate, is it?

[SherylsShado]

them both, they both add ALOT of fun to the forums.  It's nice to see a thread that gives them some credit and appreciation for a change     

[mrsbluesmith]

falconer02 can make his own wardrobe choices

I'm going with Bible Man attire.

Wherever did you find that picture?  TOO hilarious. 

[mrsbluesmith]

Quote from: elandry on August 30, 2012, 09:14:24 pm
... it can be said "absence of proof is not proof of absence"-- such as G-d  (or, perhaps (D-g? ...

Is that one of things (can't remember the name of that darn word) - like, is the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean, or is the ocean blue because it reflects the sky?

[falcon9]

"... even the slightest reference to those entities of which it can be said "absence of proof is not proof of absence"-- such as G-d ..."

 
 

Is that one of things (can't remember the name of that darn word) - like, is the sky is blue because it reflects the ocean, or is the ocean blue because it reflects the sky?

I'm not sure what word you were looking for there however, the ocean reflects the sky's apparent color and not the other way around, (water has reflective properties and the "sky" consists of a non-reflective atmosphere).  The two are therefore not interchangeable or equivalent to the "absence of proof"/burden of proof dichotomy.  

In the context which "elandry" posited that "it can be said", it can be but, not accurately.  This is because a position which posits the existence of a "g-d", (whether directly making the claim or, such a claim being inherent in a belief in a supernatural entity), is implicitly making a claim for something which has no attributable evidence.  That position then holds that the absence of evidence supporting the religious claim does not constitute evidence that what is claimed is 'absent', (doesn't exist).  The distinction between a 'positive' assertion and a 'negative' one is that one isn't required to produce evidence of what isn't, (negative assertion), but is required to produce evidence of 'what is' asserted, (under the burden of proof requirements).

[falcon9]

them both, they both add ALOT of fun to the forums.  It's nice to see a thread that gives them some credit and appreciation for a change     

Thanks, "Sheryls" however, it may be that the thread paints a target for the ones who don't quite 'appreciate' that "fun" we add to the forums.

[cateyes1]

Falcon I like you although you make me crazy because you make me feel so stupid at times, maybe if you said things in easier words that (I) can understand, well you'd make more sense to me...keep it simple will you 

[falcon9]

Falcon I like you although you make me crazy because you make me feel so stupid at times, maybe if you said things in easier words that (I) can understand, well you'd make more sense to me...keep it simple will you 

Re: Dumbing-down or wising-up?

[cateyes1]

Falcon I like you although you make me crazy because you make me feel so stupid at times, maybe if you said things in easier words that (I) can understand, well you'd make more sense to me...keep it simple will you 

Re: Dumbing-down or wising-up?

Now see i'm trying to be nice here and you say "dumbing down" as if because I dont understand you sometimes "i'm dumb".........I happen to be quite smart, i'd say intelligent but i'm not sure if I remember how to spell that haha.......ANYWAYS, I give up with you....dont get old it SUCKS, 

[falcon9]

Now see i'm trying to be nice here and you say "dumbing down" as if because I dont understand you sometimes "i'm dumb"....

No, the link was to a thread discussing the possible merits or inhibitory factors involved in 'dumbing down' a communication or, placing the responsibility to 'wising up' on the receiving end.

.....I happen to be quite smart, i'd say intelligent but i'm not sure if I remember how to spell that haha.......ANYWAYS, I give up with you....dont get old it SUCKS, 

Being "smart/intelligent" are relative terms used in comparison with 'dumb/unintelligent'.  Simply claiming either does not constitute evidence supporting the claim.  There either is, or isn't evidence for such a claim.

[cateyes1]

Now see i'm trying to be nice here and you say "dumbing down" as if because I dont understand you sometimes "i'm dumb"....

No, the link was to a thread discussing the possible merits or inhibitory factors involved in 'dumbing down' a communication or, placing the responsibility to 'wising up' on the receiving end.

.....I happen to be quite smart, i'd say intelligent but i'm not sure if I remember how to spell that haha.......ANYWAYS, I give up with you....dont get old it SUCKS, 

Being "smart/intelligent" are relative terms used in comparison with 'dumb/unintelligent'.  Simply claiming either does not constitute evidence supporting the claim.  There either is, or isn't evidence for such a claim.

Hmmmm I think I get what your saying, anyways I always get a headache talking to you...have a good day/night where ever you are

[bleyd]

I do....that's the only reason why I check out that thread once in a while...just to see what Falconer02 & falcon9 posts    I love reading your posts...make people think, hopefully...and not blinded by ignorance.  Keep up the good work.     Also, thanks for the advice and suggestions you post too.

[falcon9]

I do....that's the only reason why I check out that thread once in a while...just to see what Falconer02 & falcon9 posts    I love reading your posts...make people think, hopefully...and not blinded by ignorance.  Keep up the good work.     Also, thanks for the advice and suggestions you post too.

Thanks for your kind remarks.  I understand "Falconer02" may be looking into t-shirts and those foam finger things too, (no, you can't get 'em with *that* finger - I've looked).  Of course, I'm speculating there.