info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
New Mind or Never Mind
28 views
Skip to first unread message
Glenn
Sep 22, 2021, 12:25:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
“This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-it-from-bit-is-winning-the-cosmology-wars/
Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-it-from-bit-is-winning-the-cosmology-wars/
jillery
Sep 22, 2021, 1:05:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:20:27 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
wrote:
>“This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
>Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
Your quote above has nothing to do with your cited article below.
>https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-it-from-bit-is-winning-the-cosmology-wars/
Physicists use "observation" to mean anything which interacts with a
physical event, and "observer" to mean anything that makes an
observation. Both Segal and Smolin use this meaning. Their comments
about observers have nothing to do with purposeful intelligent
designers. It's almost certain Rob Sheldon knows this.
--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.
wrote:
>“This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
>Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
>https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-it-from-bit-is-winning-the-cosmology-wars/
Physicists use "observation" to mean anything which interacts with a
physical event, and "observer" to mean anything that makes an
observation. Both Segal and Smolin use this meaning. Their comments
about observers have nothing to do with purposeful intelligent
designers. It's almost certain Rob Sheldon knows this.
--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.
Glenn
Sep 22, 2021, 2:05:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
Glenn
Sep 22, 2021, 2:30:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 10:05:09 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:20:27 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
> wrote:
> >“This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
> >Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
> Your quote above has nothing to do with your cited article below.
"It's very important for understanding why the Universe is the way it is"
> wrote:
> >“This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
> >Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
> Your quote above has nothing to do with your cited article below.
https://www.closertotruth.com/series/information-fundamental
>
>
> >https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-it-from-bit-is-winning-the-cosmology-wars/
>
>
jillery
Sep 22, 2021, 6:15:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 11:01:24 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
your reasons for labeling what I wrote as "propaganda".
Consider the likelihood that my post is bad propaganda because it's
not propaganda and is instead factually correct.
wrote:
>On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 10:05:09 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:20:27 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
>> wrote:
>> >“This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
>> >Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
>> Your quote above has nothing to do with your cited article below.
>>
>>
>> >https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-it-from-bit-is-winning-the-cosmology-wars/
>>
>>
>> Physicists use "observation" to mean anything which interacts with a
>> physical event, and "observer" to mean anything that makes an
>> observation. Both Segal and Smolin use this meaning. Their comments
>> about observers have nothing to do with purposeful intelligent
>> designers. It's almost certain Rob Sheldon knows this.
>>
>You aren't good at propaganda, although you fancy yourself as being convincing.
You aren't good at coherent replies. You don't even try to explain
>On Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 10:05:09 AM UTC-7, jillery wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 09:20:27 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
>> wrote:
>> >“This now tells us how precise the Creator’s aim must have been: namely to an accuracy of one part in 10^10^123.”
>> >Roger Penrose – How special was the big bang? – (from the Emperor’s New Mind, Penrose, pp 339-345 – 1989)"
>> Your quote above has nothing to do with your cited article below.
>>
>>
>> >https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-it-from-bit-is-winning-the-cosmology-wars/
>>
>>
>> Physicists use "observation" to mean anything which interacts with a
>> physical event, and "observer" to mean anything that makes an
>> observation. Both Segal and Smolin use this meaning. Their comments
>> about observers have nothing to do with purposeful intelligent
>> designers. It's almost certain Rob Sheldon knows this.
>>
>You aren't good at propaganda, although you fancy yourself as being convincing.
your reasons for labeling what I wrote as "propaganda".
Consider the likelihood that my post is bad propaganda because it's
not propaganda and is instead factually correct.
Glenn
Sep 22, 2021, 6:30:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
jillery
Sep 22, 2021, 6:50:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 15:29:43 -0700 (PDT), Glenn <GlennS...@msn.com>
Ok, you now state explicitly that you disagree with what I wrote, but
you still don't even try to say how you disagree.
you still don't even try to say how you disagree.
Glenn
Sep 22, 2021, 8:55:09 PM9/22/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
jillery
Sep 23, 2021, 2:55:10 AM9/23/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
0 new messages