Museum Curator Dr. Kirk Johnson: I Might Not Exist!

[GuySmiley]

No, I was razzing fool for butting in when I would have preferred a continuation of the dialogue with Vac.

Ok, that's what Vaquero told me he thought you meant also, but I thought you were saying ha ha, it was Einstein so there! My misunderstanding.

It is? I thought the point was to ridicule him for not being prepared for an existential philosophy debate. That certainly took the bulk of Bob's time on the show.

It shouldn't take much preparation to answer. I think it takes a lot of preparation and pondering to answer no, but I think most people would answer yes just off the cuff.

He's local, right? Get him on the show, discuss the display's deficiencies, discuss his own reluctance to 'fess up to his own existence, call him a fool, poke him with sharp sticks, do whatever you want to do.

That would be cool, but I don't work for BEL, but I'd love to hear that. I doubt he'd do it though, maybe without the sharp sticks.

Again, I would want to hear the exchange before I agreed.

I was there too, so if you need a voucher . . .

 

[fool]

It shouldn't take much preparation to answer. I think it takes a lot of preparation and pondering to answer no, but I think most people would answer yes just off the cuff.
.

And it is the same "off the cuff" "the sun rose" that led Bob into the cage that a fool just slammed the door on.

 

[GuySmiley]

And it is the same "off the cuff" "the sun rose" that led put Bob into the cage that a fool just slammed the door on.

Did you see my edit? I repeat it here. From our human perspective the sun does rise. It doesn't just seem to rise, or have a 'rising' phenomenon, it actually rises in relation to our perspective. So saying the sun rises is not an off the cuff inaccurate figure of speech, it actually rises, if you want to be technical.

 

[fool]

Did you see my edit? I repeat it here. From our human perspective the sun does rise. It doesn't just seem to rise, or have a 'rising' phenomenon, it actually rises in relation to our perspective. So saying the sun rises is not an off the cuff inaccurate figure of speech, it actually rises, if you want to be technical.

My bold.
The parts of your post that I have bolded are the pertinent ones. Bob does not report including these terms in his "absolute statement" about the sun rising. Hence his statement is false. The sun didn't move, he did.

 

[aharvey]

Did you see my edit? I repeat it here. From our human perspective the sun does rise. It doesn't just seem to rise, or have a 'rising' phenomenon, it actually rises in relation to our perspective. So saying the sun rises is not an off the cuff inaccurate figure of speech, it actually rises, if you want to be technical.

If I trip and fall flat on my face, I'm not sure it makes much sense to say that technically the ground is rising!

 

[GuySmiley]

If I trip and fall flat on my face, I'm not sure it makes much sense to say that technically the ground is rising!

But in an aharvey-fixed aharvey-centered reference frame it is! But yeah, its kinda dumb to say so. Kinda like telling your date to look at how the Earth rotated so the the sun is now visible to your location, we should probably just stick to common terminology that everyone understands.

 

[aharvey]

But in an aharvey-fixed aharvey-centered reference frame it is! But yeah, its kinda dumb to say so. Kinda like telling your date to look at how the Earth rotated so the the sun is now visible to your location, we should probably just stick to common terminology that everyone understands.

Not to belabor the point (since there are much more interesting things afoot elsewhere), but you do realize you're saying that in one case it's dumb to describe your movement as that of something else's, and that in the other case it's dumb not to!

But whatever. So where did this event occur that everyone seems to have attended but apparently has left no actual record?

 

[fool]

But in an aharvey-fixed aharvey-centered reference frame it is! But yeah, its kinda dumb to say so. Kinda like telling your date to look at how the Earth rotated so the the sun is now visible to your location, we should probably just stick to common terminology that everyone understands.

Once again, qualifiers, in what is suposed to be an unequivicated statement.
Do you understand what I'm getting at? The Dr. was wise not to fall into this trap, just as Bob was unwise to say that he's absolutly sure that the sun rose, I've pointed out that it didn't rise, and all you can do is give us an apologetic about Bob's reference frame. If Bob's statemnet was absolutly true then the sun would need to have moved.

 

[fool]

Did any of the attendees get any pictures of the exhibit that we might see?

 

[Johnny]

Bob?

 

[Vaquero45]

There was a reporter from a newspaper in Colorado Springs who took pictures. I wonder if they have printed anything from tour yet. I don't recall anyone else with our group taking pictures but someone might have.

 

[GuySmiley]

Not to belabor the point (since there are much more interesting things afoot elsewhere), but you do realize you're saying that in one case it's dumb to describe your movement as that of something else's, and that in the other case it's dumb not to!

Not to belabor your belabored point, but I'm about to belabor it further. Yes, I realize that, but its common terminology to say that you fell down in your example, and no one would disagree. Its also common terminology to say that the sun rises, and no one disagrees either unless a pastor that you like to nit pick says it. You have to go to an absurd technicality to say that the sun doesn't really rise, just like its an absurd technicality to say that the ground rose up and hit you. I think fool is nit picking Bob Enyart almost to 'ThePhy'-like levels.

But whatever. So where did this event occur that everyone seems to have attended but apparently has left no actual record?

It was a tour of the 'Prehistoric Journey' exhibit (a permanent exhibit) at the Denver Museum of Natural History. Denver Bible Church organized it with the folks from BC Tours. I was invited through TOL connections. Like Vaquero said, a reporter from the C. Springs Gazette Telegraph was there, but I'm not sure if they printed a story or not yet. I wish I did bring a camera, but next time I'm at the Denver Museum I'll take pictures of those exhibits.

 

[Johnny]

You have to go to an absurd technicality to say that the sun doesn't really rise

I wasn't aware that reality is just an absurd technicality. I guess that explains the creationist position.

 

[fool]

I wonder how long it will be before Bob graces us with his presence again.

 

[Johnny]

Who knows. He seems to come and go alot, which I understand because I do the same thing.

 

[fool]

Who knows. He seems to come and go alot, which I understand because I do the same thing.

True, he mentioned in the nodules thread that he would debate you on the exe program after he did Phy on the time issue. I wonder if he meant that, he won't touch me with a ten foot pole. perhaps we should ask him.

 

[GuySmiley]

Oh forget it, I just deleted this post cause its really really belaboring the belabored.

 

[CRASH]

Again, it would be nice to hear both sides of the story and the actual conversation. Just as Bob delights in a wrong conclusion,
I would like to have heard for myself the nuances of Dr. Johnson's response to Bob, and the actual question given. Without having anything other than Bob's version (and now your corroboration of that version) to go on, I suspect that Dr. Johnson wasn't really giving the question as much thought as he would have if he had been asked it in say, a moderated debate whose topic was "Existential Philosophy".

The nuances of "no, I am not sure I exist?"

Nuances?

You've got to be kidding. How do you say that with nuances?

Q Do you know if you exist?

A. No (with lots of nuances that really mean yes):nono:

 

[koban]

The nuances of "no, I am not sure I exist?"

No, the nuances of the entire conversation.

Nuances?

Yep!

Nuances.

You've got to be kidding.

:noid: I never "kid".

How do you say that with nuances?

Well, it's hard in print, and even harder when it's related from one's opponent (hint)

Lemme try.......

Hmmmmmmm-----"no, I am not sure I exist"......

OK, here we go.......

no, (you idiot!) I am not (entirely un-) sure (that) I (would be happier if your mother had never) exist (ed)

I can do lots more if you want - it's kinda fun. :chuckle:

Q Do you know if you exist?

You bet!

If you want a demonstration of my certainty, I'll be glad to kick you in the butt. :chuckle:

A. No (with lots of nuances that really mean yes):nono:

Bob has already demonstrated his inability to keep up with the conversation. He should be glad we don't make him sit at the kiddies table.

 

[CRASH]

No, the nuances of the entire conversation.



Yep!

Nuances.



:noid: I never "kid".



Well, it's hard in print, and even harder when it's related from one's opponent (hint)

Lemme try.......

Hmmmmmmm-----"no, I am not sure I exist"......

OK, here we go.......

no, (you idiot!) I am not (entirely un-) sure (that) I (would be happier if your mother had never) exist (ed)

I can do lots more if you want - it's kinda fun. :chuckle:



You bet!

If you want a demonstration of my certainty, I'll be glad to kick you in the butt. :chuckle:



Bob has already demonstrated his inability to keep up with the conversation. He should be glad we don't make him sit at the kiddies table.

There were no nuances. It was a very civil conversation.
The guy just said "no."
I was there.