unreality

does 2 letters mean 2 digits?

Please name a piece of evidence -- just one will suffice -- that God does not exist. Thats what I'm talking about in the quote in the quote. Right there. You just proved my point. You ask us for proof that god does NOT exist. That proof is not needed- it is all around us. We should be asking you. Like Scraff, I am done here. You pulled apart my post and did your best, but you aren't converting anyone... the fact is that you believe claims from something known to contain LOTS of false information, and its been told to you over and over that that is the truth. I do not accept that truth. So I ask you: give me proof that god DOES exist. But it is a rhetorical question, because there is no such proof. That's what agnosticism is about (though I'm not agnostic personally) Maybe I'll check back here once in a while, but probably not, because you pointed out silly flaws in my arguement that dont relate (such as the definition of brainwashing) and you completely ignored the message I was giving you in my post. Like Scraff, and like the enlightened writersblock said (that such a debate cannot be won), I'm outta here

spoxjox, about the brainwashing, I do not mean actual brainwashing, but something similar, as I said in that chunk you quoted I dont mean hypnotizing or anything like that. Just repetitive instructing that one thing is true. That has never happened to me, so that is how I know that I am not brainwashed- though maybe I am totally brainwashed and I dont even remember that I was brainwashed, but that's unlikely and not the kind of brainwashing I'm talking about lol as for that the last quote in Part One (gah this quote thing is confusing), do you remember when i said these are MY reasons for being an atheist... yes I have not received that proof. I am only speaking for myself. On another note I'd like to add, spoxjox, that you have showed much closedmindedness while talking to Scraff.

I will tell you why I am an atheist. I am not sure if this is the same reasons as Ploper, or Martini, or Scraff, but this is why I am an atheist: (btw cool new board, Rookie) I have examined religion, I have been to church- different churches- I have seen and talked to religious people and heard their beliefs. Many of them have been brainwashed by religious organizations and assume that 'their way is the only way'. Whether or not you want to call it "brainwashing" is a fine point, but it's similar. They believe the teachings from a book. A book! A book that is known to have many discrepancies, controversies, wrong facts, outlandish claims, contrary 'evidence' and facts with no evidence to back it up, put together by MANY people over MANY years with MANY differing opinions and many of them are just that- opinions And yet people worship this book. It doesnt have to be the bible, it could be the quran, or whatever. The fact is, people are told, over and over again, by convincing good speakers, that this book is cold, hard, unarguable fact. Yet many religious scholars themselves know that most of the bible is fiction. YES, FICTION. I dont mean to sound rude, but it is INSANE that people believe that a WORLDWIDE FLOOR with enough water to COVER MT EVEREST happened at some point. This is plain impossible, but also, we would definitely have evidence now, and we know when all the major extinctions have been as well, and there has been no mass extinction during humans' lives on earth. Yes, the Greeks have a legend about a flood in which only few people survived and the japanese have a similar myth. It shows that Floods were a dangerous natural disaster for early civilizations. Anyway I'm gonna debate the outrageous fact of a Worldwide Floor, it's just plain false, same with people walking on water, with people parting oceans, with people resurrecting from the dead (and I never did understand how Jesus saved everyone by dying, they left that fuzzy), same with angels, and demons and devils, and heaven and hell... those are pretty extraordinary claims, as others have said, and require extraordinary evidence. Also, religion started as a replacement of science. People made up gods and stuff to explain things that back then, couldn't be explained, such as volcanoes and lightning bolts and earthquakes and floods and diseases. Today, these are all easily explained. Religious people understand that lightning is static electricity and that earthquakes are caused when two tectonic plates collide. Any spiritual evidence that you may have now... what if that is explained by science as we move on? Just another thing to think about Another thing that makes me laugh about religious people is that they assume that THEIR religion is correct. That goes to show, they believe in whatever church they or their family goes to. I respect Buddhism and its openness a lot though. The thing about atheism is: freedom, free will. We marvel at the beauty of our world- and how it's just one planet. I always hated how religion acts like Earth is "special" in some way. Maybe we are, maybe we aren't, as of now we have only found primitive life on other planets and moons, but life nontheless. But I'm not gonna debate this. Whether Earth is "special" or not is a matter of personal opinion. Anyway I could go on, but there is just no reason that anyone should believe in any god or outside spiritual force. Since there is no proof and never has been, instead of religious people grilling atheists on "whats your proof that god doesnt exist" it should be the other way around. We atheists 'should' grill theists about why they think that god does exist, since THAT is the contrary arguement that goes against ALL evidence. Yet we atheists don't usually care about what the theists think. It's their own business. I don't honestly give a damn if someone believes in God. If it gives them hope and morals and stuff, well good for them. I find hope and morals in myself, not in any god. On a final note... I forgot what I was gonna say. lol, sorry. Maybe I'll think of it later

Well I agree with everything Ploper just said Also, Writersblock, I'm not going to dispute you saying "I know there is a god" cuz I know there isnt- or if it is, it cant be proved, EITHER WAY, but I'm not going there. What I am asking is this: how do you know the god you 'connected with' is the Christian God? What if its Buddha? or Zeus? Sure you felt a connection to "Him" as you said, but does that mean that it must be abraham's god? What about other gods?

all you know is if there are more or less, so it only works if it's a tie in front of you, that's the only way you could deduce your own color. And then that would tell nothing to the people in front of you, so 10 would live for sure and 10 would have a 50/50. Yours doesnt work the best one I've found so far is the one I posted a while back where 15 people are saved no matter what, but I'm thinking for the 19-saved solution

sure

Am I missing something? You said the OP's solution wouldn't work because it wasn't a yes or no question. I pointed out that the solution given was a yes or no question. I don't see where you later retracted that comment. I was just pointing out that he didnt give his answer in YES or NO form. If you look at the next line I said: which is a YES or NO question, I assumed that was the YES or NO question the OP asked with those answers. Nvm. It doesnt matter

"Is princess B older than princess C" is a yes or no question. Yeah I know, as I said later The question the OP supplied works, it's just that the OP didn't explain why. If you get a "yes" answer from Princess A, go with Princess C. If you get a "no" answer, go with Princess B. Possible scenario: Princess A: eldest-truthteller Princess B: youngest- liar Princees C: middle- normal Princess A could only answer no, so by going with Princess B, you don't get the middle child. Another scenario: Princess A: youngest- liar Princess B: eldest-truthteller Princees C: middle- normal Princess A could only answer no, so by going with Princess B, you don't get the middle child. Another scenario: Princess A: middle- normal Princess B: eldest-truthteller Princees C: youngest- liar If Princess A answers yes, you pick C and get the youngest. If she answers no, you pick B and get the oldest. Either way you don't end up with her. I think what the OP meant was that it doesn't matter if the middle child decides to tell the truth or lie, since you never pick the Princess you're asking the question to, you won't end up with her. there are 6 possibilities, not 3

The closest I've been able to get is asking #2 a certain q about #1, and if its NO then choose #3 and you're set, and if its YES then choose #1 and there's a 4/5 chance that you're okay. However this isnt the "perfect answer"

I couldnt find a way around the Mischievious one answering either YES or NO randomly This wouldnt work. It has to be a YES or NO question, remember? So say you do that, and line them up, 123. Ask Princess 1 if Princess 2 is older than Princess 3. the truthteller will say the truth (YES or NO), the liar will lie, and the mischevious princess would also say either YES or NO. Your own answer does not work. The middle one wouldnt say "either one is good", she would say a specific one is younger as well.

I hope its not something stupid like "Oh to make it a fair challenge the evil king makes everyone's hat color the same", I highly doubt it. Is my answer on the right track at least?

In mine (a few posts up) I saved all but 5. Hmmm I must rethink this...

It's a matter of semantics, right? It depends how "sound" is defined.

Hehe.

Yeah many people are close-minded. I guess I'm lucky to have friends that are either atheist/agnostic or theist yet tolerant and good people.

I guess it depends on if the H2O molecules clump together and go in together and whether their clumpy position was vertical or horizontal... and how you define "inside the bowl" so there can be some leeway. That, coupled with the fact that a liter isnt defined to the molecule, and you're definitely right

Okay I was wrong- it saves 15 people FOR SURE and the other 5 each have a 50% chance of survival, meaning on average there will be 17.5 survivors (2 short of the 19.5 of the "perfect solution" of this problem), or a 1/32 that all 5 will make it. It may be possible to expand on my technique. I tried but this seemed to make the most of it, and it seems that 15 people guaranteed is the best you can do- though stwalk thought 13 people was, so I'll keep working for that 19

I just figured out how to save 19 people FOR SURE I think. Maybe 18

Seems right to me. If just for a trillionth of a nanosecond, like you said

Yeah especially with something as hypothetical as we're talking about.

Yeah! another atheist on this forum we're so discriminated against its not even funny...

ah, I see now. Though my reasoning was: he knows that at least one of the other two is already going to die, yes, but knowing which one changes it. But I guess not. I believe in true randomness Exactly. That's HOW it relates to the riddle. In the lottery example you also don't ask about yourself. You ask about the others which doesn't help you narrow down your chances of winning. yep I see now. Thanks man!

yep. THough they did it right in the first movie and the third movie, so I dont know what's up with that. Maybe they went forward then went back and lived their lives to be that old. This is paradox-wrought, though, of course. Though with my parallel universe theory, you would go forward, there would be no you, you would go back (creating a new parallel universe from the universe you just came from, so they have the same history up the point you traveled back to and split off a new universe). So now there are 2 of you in this universe, 0 in the one you came from. NOW you can go forward and see yourself aged. I've thought and thought and thought and with my theory there are NO paradoxes...

It seems like that's impossible- the person at the very front, who goes first, who can see the 19 people in front of him, has no idea what color his own hat is. It seems like he would always have a 50/50 chance, so there can never be a 100% sucessful outcome. Or is my reasoning wrong?