I wasn't replying to you. I already said that that was my mistake for not being specific in what I meant.
Y'all need to get the focus back on chaos.
In a way, the concept of time is how humans demystify the universe around them. If nature is chaos, then time and math are how we make sense of it all. This also is why some think that chaos isn't a real thing. Because if we are making mathematical proofs of the processes that are seen to be chaos, then are they really chaos?
I was merely pointing out how your methods of qualifications are biased and bogus. Much like saying my response was "weak ass". Aristophenes decides criteria for "weak-ass", and "effin boss!" on his own, then passes judgement. Yup, biased and bogus.
If chaos doesn't exist, then tell us what the future holds...
Still waiting on an answer to this post, Triknighted.
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
Autolykos: Still waiting on an answer to this post, Triknighted.
What is the actual question? I clicked it and it's a bunch of dialogue, but I don't know which one it is.
By "answer", I meant the same thing as "response" (i.e. a follow-up post). I can edit my post to replace the former with the latter, if that would help you.
I was merely pointing out how your methods of qualifications are biased and bogus.
My methods, huh? Not those in the academic journal that I posted from the professor who did the actual research. Not the hundered or so sources that he cited. But my posting of that journal article.
Good one.
decides criteria for "weak-ass", and "effin boss!" on his own, then passes judgement. Yup, biased and bogus.
Zing!
You are doing the same thing, genius.
Another good one.
This merely depends on what people's plans are. My guess is that you will follow the same schedule for your life that most people do for theirs. If a war breaks out, a terrorist attack, or an earthquake occur, aren't these all perfectly explainable? The war was planned (lots of planning), the terrorist attack was also planned (also, likely to be lots of planning). These aren't chaos. An earthquake is a geological process that we can determine through techtonic plate movements (among other things). We may not be able to predict it, but that in no way makes it chaos.
Shit, even if a comet hit the fucking Earth, it is not chaos. It is the culmination of a process (maybe not even the culmination of it, but simply, a segment of a large process).
If chaos exists, give an example.
Black holes? No. Human action? No. Supernovas? No. Tsunamis? No.
Jackson LaRose: I was merely pointing out how your methods of qualifications are biased and bogus. Much like saying my response was "weak ass". Aristophenes decides criteria for "weak-ass", and "effin boss!" on his own, then passes judgement. Yup, biased and bogus.
Don't tell Aristophenes that humans are animals, he will freak out and call you retarded. . . .
Do you keep bringing this up because you do not have any further points? I clarified what I meant many posts ago.
Did you also forget that you called me retarded?
Aristophanes: Aristophanes:You are a retard. Triknighted:You're the retard. Triknighted:See how illogical retorts go nowhere? Aristophanes:You cannot ask a normative question about something that has no normative value, dumbass. Autolykos:I define "descriptive question" as "a question about the nature of (part of) reality", and "normative question" as "a question about what one expects of (part of) reality".
Aristophanes:You are a retard.
Triknighted:You're the retard.
Triknighted:See how illogical retorts go nowhere?
Aristophanes:You cannot ask a normative question about something that has no normative value, dumbass.
Autolykos:I define "descriptive question" as "a question about the nature of (part of) reality", and "normative question" as "a question about what one expects of (part of) reality".
That last quote of Autolykos is what he wants you to respond to. I am with him. And, now that I think about it, you are skirting a response because you would have to admit that you made the same semantical, rhetorical mistake that I did with the animal/human thing. Face it, man, you are a loser that is afraid to suffer embarassment. That is why you keep projecting (in the Freudian sense) my mistake. It is really yours, but you are unwilling to admit you did the same thing.
I think it was you that said,
triknighted:Y'all need to get the focus back on chaos.
i think you have shown that you concede. You asked an idiotic question, then had nothing to back it up. So, you argue with Autolykos about semantics. You and Jackson LaRose, neither of which apparently can spell my name correctly, have both tacitly conceded loss in this debate.
Autolykos: By "answer", I meant the same thing as "response" (i.e. a follow-up post). I can edit my post to replace the former with the latter, if that would help you.
Yeah, if you don't mind. I'll be happy to respond.
So I have to ask, what, if anything, is wrong with chaos?
Um... I don't like stuff on fire flying through the air?