can someone answer my question?

kkollins at kkollins at
Sun Dec 6 00:04:25 EST 1998

Bloxy's wrote:

> In article <3668A18F.C6584F3E at>, kkollins at wrote:
> >Ray Scanlon wrote:
> >
> >> [...] Theories are another matter. Anyone may put forth a theory. Theories
> >> are a
> >> dime a dozen.
> >
> >Except when they're verifiably-correct. ken collins
> And correctness is not even defined,
> as in order to be classified as correct,
> the theory needs to be complete.
> If something is missing, or not considered,
> as a result of currently held limited belief system,
> then there is no guarantee that your verifiability
> of correctness is anything but utter fiction,
> caused by delusions of limitations of your currently
> held views and a scope of consideration of isues.

Well, I guess one can "imagine" "contradictions" to a theory in Physical Science, even
though 100% of the available experimental evidence Verifies the theory in question...
but sustaining such "contradictions" is a "tough row to hoe"... where can one find any
evidence with which to do so?

If you say, "but there's a lot of stuff out there that folks have not yet witnessed",
I'll agree with you, but then I'll have to ask you to point me to the
"catastrophic-boundary" that =must= exist if the stuff of your "contradiction" is to
be sustained... then I'll have to ask you to explain how it is that our "corner" of
the Universe is so-"special" that, within it, the stuff of your "contradiction" has
absolutely no Physical evidence that's correlated to it.

And then I'll have to ask you to explain how it is that the stuff of your
"contradiction" cannot cross-over into our "corner" of the Universe...

...and you'll not be able to respond with even a tiny-smidgeon of experimental
evidence that can support your "contradiction"... and so I'll have to praise your
"imagination", but ignore everything you say with respect to your "contradiction".

[Let me make one thing clear... I'm =not= talking about God... I =Believe= in God... I
can do no other be-cause the Physical Evidence is Sufficient to Warrant such.] ken

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list