|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 02/14/2011 : 04:40:20 [Permalink]
|
Buck, simple biology tells us that "a live, swimming, talking, breathing/aquatic respiring merperson" will not be produced by Dave nor anyone else. While fish are in our evolutionary linage (Cambrian), they are not and never have been partially mammal. Mermaids are and shall remain merely sea stories made up by bored sailors and spun to the impressionable ashore. That sort of thing has been going on ever since there were sailors. Heh, and not even a sailor is stupid enough nor horny enough to mistake a manatee or a dugong for half a woman, and the wrong half at that.
Dugongs and manatees belong to the order Sirenia, refering to the Greek myth of sirens luring sailors to their deaths with song. I don't know who thought that one up but I takes me hat off to him. It's a doozy.
Landsmen will believe anything. 
And if any of these hypothesis are correct, even the universe is mortal.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
 Posted - 02/14/2011 : 05:19:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
If such persuasive arguments really did exist there would be no need for terms like atheism, agnosticism or theism; there would be no need for argumentation on the subject.
|
You're ignoring humankind's ability for self-delusion. Especially if it offers comfort to a fearful mind.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 02/14/2011 07:52:19 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 06:53:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Are these laws and this knowledge immutable - not ever subject to change or alteration, even replacement by newer concepts? Is it possible that our knowledge of biology and our understanding of physics is a process, not a finality - semper veritas? |
Of course not. All conclusions must be held tentatively, and we must be willing to change our minds when presented with new evidence. Conclusions must be based on what we know today, and not on what we might wish to find in the future.
Because there's no way to predict how scientific knowledge will change, and so the fact that it does change offers no hope for hypotheses which are even tentatively held to be false today. For example, there's no reason to think that science will ever change in such a way as to present us with a biologically plausible mechanism for homeopathy. If it ever does, that'll be an interesting day, but that's not reason enough to withhold judgment based on what we know now.Dave
So because we haven't searched every cubic inch of ocean, and thus cannot say that it's "totally false" that mermaids exist, you're agnostic about their existence? |
Yes, but it has nothing to do with searching for mermaids or mermen. Unless I was persuaded that a mercreature was an impossibility, I would have to remain agnostic as to their existence. |
Wow. It's easy to make up zillions of hypotheses which aren't impossibilities for phenomena which are already explained (for examples, gravity or electricity), and you're saying that you'd be forced into an agnostic position on these fabrications merely because they're not impossible?| "Totally" probably does not belong in front of "false" It is almost an oxymoron in this context. |
Well, it was your phrase.In a lifelong and largely unproductive search for wisdom, sufficient erudition to define the impossible has eluded me. It certainly is not that some event has never occured to the best of mankind's collective knowledge, because we are almost daily presented with evidence of that which has never happened before. Nor is it - outside of the realm of mathematics and constructs which are self-contradictory (like Steve Martin's "Cadillac up your nose" parody of Perry Como) - that the impossible does not exist.
God is rationally impossible yet despite eons of attempts, no one yet in the history of civilization has successfully offered argument conclusively demonstrating such impossiblity, or it's converse. If such persuasive arguments really did exist there would be no need for terms like atheism, agnosticism or theism; there would be no need for argumentation on the subject.
This is, I believe, because of the nature of the very concept of evidence. I have read pretty extensively on the subject of proof of existence; and there is a great deal to be learned about what constitutes evidence for the possible, but next to nothing on what constitutes evidence for the impossible. Perhaps your quest for knowledge has provided you with substantial reference on how to prove that a logically valid reality concept is impossible. I would be pleased to hear such reference and to receive an assist in settling this vexing problem that has troubled me for many years. |
Well, there's your problem. Logical validity has little, if any, bearing on existence. Elephant-shaped watermelons are in no way a logically invalid concept, but that doesn't mean that we'll ever find them growing wild. On the other hand, wave-particle duality might be logically self-contradictory, but it happens in the real world.
Logical validity thus seems to be irrelevant to empirical existence claims. If it were otherwise, we'd be forced to accept the conclusion of the Ontological Argument, and words like "atheist" and "agnostic" would only describe a few crackpots who refuse to accept the logical necessity of God.| No, Truth is defined by evidence. |
Then why isn't falsehood? Can we not have evidence in favor of the hypothesis that "mercreatures do not exist?" (Including, as filthy points out, the truth of common descent?)| Show me a live, swimming, talking, breathing/aquatic respiring merperson; and I will pretty much attest to its existence or truth. But the fact that you can't show me one does not negate its possibility of existence. |
Absence of evidence may not be evidence of absence, but we need not rely only on the absence of evidence to dismiss alien visitations, mercritters, werewolves, etc. We have other evidence that suggests these things don't exist or don't happen.| Thank you for your permission. I really don't understand why it was necessary, but I appreciate the gesture, nonetheless. |
You seemed to be asking for tolerance of your ideas.| Perhaps you could offer your choice for a "reasonable" standard for falsity? |
The same standard as for truth: a preponderance of the evidence. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 10:31:30 [Permalink]
|
Humbert.....
Originally posted by bngbuck
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. |
I've seen that quote dragged out now by Christians, Scientologists, creationists, cryptozoologists, homeopaths, psychics, diviners, crystal healers, breatharians, Raelians, and ufologists, all of them mistakenly thinking it makes some point in their favor when actual evidence is absent. It doesn't. Credulity is not a virtue. |
Well.......!
First, I thank you for helping me understand some of the subtleties of Shakespearian prose. I deeply apologize for "dragging out" such an offensive homily as a quotation from Hamlet, and I do feel properly chastised well onto the platform of weird, wild-eyed wackos where I certainly belong -somewhere below the Raelians, well under the floor of any possible credibility.
| Credulity is not a virtue. |
Nor should it ever be considered so. Certainly Horatio's simpleminded religiosity bespeaks ignorance and is well addressed by Hamlet's jibe.
The concept of using a quotation from the Bard to strengthen an argument never occured to me, although it is a novel idea; because I was not in the process of argumentation. In my pathetic and childish way, I was attempting to suggest that none of us, and particularly myself, have omnicience; and our musings about what is and what is not possible may miss the mark occasionally - opinion being what it is - a mere guess, frequently without the polish of education. Filthy, Dave, myself - none of us can possibly divine the future or even begin to comprehend the totality of the present.
In my humble view, Shakespeare had an uncanny talent for cutting to the core of hubris with remarkably spare prose. And hubris is certainly the appearance that one knows more than anyone possibly could of the totality of human knowledge - or worse, has an accurate prescience of the future.I believe that this was the intent of the Bard of Avon with respect to the famous Hamlet couplet. I do not see Hamlet making an "argument" to Horatio.| And let's not forget the quote's original context, which is a fictional play in which one character is attempting to convince another that talking ghosts are real. |
Another view might be that the protagonist is commenting on his friend's naiveté. wiki
Hamlet's skepticism is juxtaposed in the play with Horatio's more traditional Christian worldview. Despite the friends' close bond, Hamlet counters Horatio's faith with the seemingly agnostic comment, "There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy." |
There are more possibilities on this mortal coil, Humbert, than you could possibly have imagined in your wildest nightmares.
How's that for hubris? |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 11:17:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
...our musings about what is and what is not possible... |
Wait a minute. Possible? My saying that given what we now know we can conclude that ETs aren't visiting Earth says nothing about whether it's possible or not. Lots of things may be theoretically possible, but practicality often gets in the way. Is it possible that some aliens have tapped an entire galaxy for energy to power a wormhole to get to us nearly instantly? Sure. But what purpose would be behind such a trip, how would the nitty-gritty of the technology actually work (and why haven't we witnessed any galaxies winking out of existence)? Answers to such questions allow us to narrow down the likelihood of the hypothesis in question, and see whether it can rise above "a snowball's chance in Hell." |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 16:52:14 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
First, I thank you for helping me understand some of the subtleties of Shakespearian prose. I deeply apologize for "dragging out" such an offensive homily as a quotation from Hamlet... |
Oh, it isn't offensive. Just clichéd.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 18:57:33 [Permalink]
|
| And there's another little problem with "I'm agnostic about thing-that's-probably-false because science might change to show it's true," which is that science might change to show that things we think are true now are really false. It's inconsistent, at best, to be agnostic with regard to ET visitations due to science's malleability without also being agnostic with regard to electron theory, evolution and heliocentrism for the same reason. Yes, those three examples are all wildly successful models with tons of evidence to support them, but if "none of us can possibly divine the future or even begin to comprehend the totality of the present," then they could all be just plain wrong. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 20:34:10 [Permalink]
|
FILTH.....
| Buck, simple biology tells us that "a live, swimming, talking, breathing/aquatic respiring merperson" will not be produced by Dave nor anyone else. While fish are in our evolutionary linage (Cambrian), they are not and never have been partially mammal. |
But cetaceans of the family Phocoenidae most certainly are mammals, and after a look at the boobs on that merbabe that you posted, my dreams are getting wetter all the time.
Don't be too confident about what Dave might or might not produce in the right procreational environment. Certain species come to mind....!
| Mermaids are and shall remain merely sea stories made up by bored sailors and spun to the impressionable ashore. |
Not if I can do anything about it. With a fetish like mine, the advantages of a small whale tail precluding the spawning of mannows, but yet providing, to me, many of the advantages of a more conventional piece of tail, are overwhelmingly attractive. I shall contribute heavily to Save the Whales for their Tails and immediately found and fund the Marine Institute for Tail Transplantation. I shall push the envelope on this vital cetacean research - I fear I don't have much time left. I also damn well better learn to swim. BUT WITH THE AID OF POSIEDON, WE WILL SHOW YOU WRONG!, and mermaids WILL BE CREATED.
Please don't report me to ASPCA. My abuse is only half-assed.
| not even a sailor is stupid enough nor horny enough to mistake a manatee or a dugong for half a woman, and the wrong half at that. |
SIR! Your preoccupation with goats has obviously prevented you from tasting the tender pleasures of cohabitation with manatees. (I would have said female manatees, but it really doesn't matter)And that crack about "the wrong half" is really offensive. We mazophiliacs do resent your unhealthy preoccupation with the bottom (pardon) half of the female MAMMAL. After all, to what do these ladies owe their taxonomic classification? You know, we all know, IT'S THE RACK, JACK!
Love that lady's navel! Proof positive that I am on the right rac...er, track.
RE: The end of the Universe. It will end with a whimper. Our portion ia already rapidly becoming a Wasteland. Cheers, T.S.
Also. Biology is not simple! I think I am flunking! Help! |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 21:11:22 [Permalink]
|
Hey Bill. Your post reminded me of a song that I wrote for a rock opera about P.T. Barnum. Maybe we can fit you into Franklin's role.
Franklin Bites the Dust
I waited near my mermaid
As others passed on by
I told her to be patient
And she turned and winked an eye
And then the time of closing came
I hid beneath her stand
And waited for an hour
Holding back my trembling hands
Soon the voices faded
As everyone went home
Just you and me my mermaid
Now it’s time we were alone
I drew her up into my arms
Her lightness made me brave
I told her that I loved her
And that’s the best I ever gave
I told her that I loved her
I told her that I loved her
I told her that I loved her and that’s the best I ever gave
Her scales were dry and falling off
Her hair was freshly greased
And wrapped around her paralyzed
I kissed the awful beast
Her lips just crumbled at my touch
Revealing pointed teeth
I felt my hearts deception
As she came apart beneath
Her straw stuffed guts, slipped on down
The fish half, hit the floor
I released the monkey
And the mermaid was no more
Well I reeled in confusion
Would I throw up? Would I scream?
But I only stood and shivered
I destroyed her, so it seemed
The message was delivered
There’s your mermaid, Just a dream
The stench was more than I could take
I had to leave the room
And though the smell has washed away
I’ll always wear the gloom…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/14/2011 : 22:28:10 [Permalink]
|
bng said:
| Also. Biology is not simple! I think I am flunking! Help! |
It is definitely not simple. But it isn't so difficult that you can't learn it! Buck up man! errr, wait, is it appropriate to tell a person named Buck to buck up?
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 05:45:04 [Permalink]
|
Speaking of vivisecting together differing critters, here's Basilosarus:
The name translates into "King Lizard," and that looks pretty good, but...but what is it, really? Well, while long extinct, it's as close to a mermaid as we're likely find outside a taxidermist shop or a Disney 'toon.
As for the Sirens, when I was a kid in FL, I made a loose acquaintance with a couple of manatees that used to come up a canal near where we lived to eat water hyacinth. I loved to watch them and missed them sorely when we moved back to GA. But even at that young and impressionable age, I knew that they were anything but mermaids. They are wonderfully ugly.
It is probably just as well that I was not allowed to swim in that canal.
The Little (fat) Mermaid
So, back to topic, whatever that might be. Oh, right, alien visitors and astronautical delusions.
The big question is: Why? Why would any alien in it's right mind(?) want to visit us -- assuming that it is somehow possible. After all, they would find a planet dominated by an extremely prolific, and aggressive to the point of rapacious species, that is tinkering with space flight. They might pause long enough to drop a photon torpedo, or some damned thing on us, just to be on the safe side, and get the hell out of the vicinity.
That is assuming that there actually are "sentient" organisms out there. Hell, the more rabid of the theists could be right and we are alone in the universe. Evolution works with the current environment and if an organism fits snugly into it's niche, Big E slows way down and sometimes gets weird. For an example, our common horseshoe crab is all but unchanged since the Cambrian, some 550 million years ago. The universe could be speckled with the equivalents of it.
Xiphosura
We don't know and, I think, are unlikely to find out. The best we can do is raise a glass to crabs and whales, and mermaids and those sailors who invented them; and another to the barnacles on the Lunar Lander's hull.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 12:20:47 [Permalink]
|
Kil......
David, you are obviously one sick puppy! That Gothic poetry would do justice to H.P.Lovecraft at the height of his insanity. And the really disturbing image puts most of Filthy's horror gallery to shame. Right down to the oxidized copper rivets, antique glass showcase, and blonde excelsior bedding for the poor dear.
I would guess one of the Ripley "I can't believe it's real because it's not" tourist traps in various US cities that I just can't stay out of every time I find one. Where the hell did you find it, or did Mooner photoshop the whole damn thing?
And have you written much more of the fisherell that accompanied that loathsome image of Daryl Hannah (my, how she has aged since the film!) If so, you deserve the other half of the Edgar literary award - the Poe - for the weirdest shit written since Stephen King slithered onto the scene! |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 13:29:19 [Permalink]
|
Yeah Bill. There are a few more mermaid songs in the opera, plus the rest of the opera.
The photo came from google images and is probably one of Ripley's copies. And yeah, I saw what was billed as "Barnum's Mermaid" at a Ripley's in San Francisco. Not likely. The original FiJi mermaid was lost when Barnum's American Museum burned down.
Ad for the Fiji mermaid and other wonders.
The Fiji mermaid.
Also see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum's_American_Museum
This link refuses to work with forum tags. I have no idea why. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/15/2011 : 17:08:39 [Permalink]
|
Dude.....
| It (Biology) is definitely not simple. But it isn't so difficult that you can't learn it! Buck up man! errr, wait, is it appropriate to tell a person named Buck to buck up? |
Actually, Holly and I have matriculated from Biology 101 into Chemistry 100 (go figure). Second year Biology starts next summer, and I am looking forward to it. Thanks for the encouragement and rest assured that I have Bucked many ....things, as I slog forward toward the century mark.
I did find elementary Biology difficult, as I had no basis in my early education - high school or college. Although Chemistry requires some atttention, I have the advantage of having acquired, back in the 1940's, a very solid footing in chemistry. Damn, but a lot of work has been done since then, tho', I am discovering. All the many years that I spent in pursuit of the mighty (?) dollar, the scientists were moving forward at an ever-increasing clip. A kid that doesn't take education seriously today doesn't have a chance in tomorrow's world!
I was kidding about flunking Biology 101, although it sure felt like it from time to time. Holly and I both got solid B's, but we worked our asses off for them. I couldn't have done it without her. The reverse seems to be true now that we are attacking another Hard Science. That will lessen as we get deeper into current pedagogical approaches to basic science and the significantly larger body of subject matter including a great deal more insight into nuclear theory (still kind of new back in the '40's)
I have managed to kind of keep up through the years on a sort of anecdotal basis - the advent of Google/wiki helped enormously - and it will be interesting to observe the learning curve differences (if any) between 42 and 82 as she and I climb the hill toward the goal of ever- higher education. |
|
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/16/2011 : 00:28:58 [Permalink]
|
To SFN.....
This thread has become horribly unravelled and I am as responsible as any one for the kerfuffle.
There has been no intent to hijack, but what with Ugly Annie, image deletion, extensive editing, mermaids, and Shakespeare; there is little left of the original topic.
Much remains to be said, but I am anathemic to monologues. At least in this format.
Is bmnb123, Socratic Gadfly, or anyone else still interested in the original subject matter of astronaut Mitchell's declarations or the well-worn UFO/Alien visitation/ are we alone in the Universe? topic?
If no one cares to post, topic-wise, I'll go back to real work.
bngbuck
|
| Edited by - bngbuck on 02/16/2011 00:41:03 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Moon-walker claims alien contact cover-up
