I don't have a need to prove it or disprove it. I don't know of anyone who thinks or suggests that Santa Claus is the intelligence behind the origin of mankind...
Zeleologist, can you prove that Santa Claus is not the intelligence behind the origin of mankind? Only Santa Claus could be capable of creating all the vast amounts of things we see in the natural world. Any other explanation, such as that these things just appeared, is ridiculous. Also, do you think it's coincidence that Christmas trees are...evergreens?? I mean really. Do you think that's just a massive coincidence?
lol.... hmmm, now where have we seen this before. I mean where have we seen Zeleologist make unsupported assertions, get challenged to provide any sort of proof or backup, and resort to his triumvirate of avoidance 'ad hominem, strawman, red herring'. Oh yeah.... we've seen it in every thread Z starts. (I'm sorry - I just really want to see if we can get Zeleologist to crack and start bellowing about anal penetration like he did a few months back when a bunch of his assertions were proved to be baseless).
and your ignorance in that matter should be taken as proof that the theory is invalid??? no offense son, seems to me you simply can't disprove it... and why is that do u think? such a straightforward theory... i think its a pretty robust alterna tive to evolution, and randomness
Listen again. He stated that the anthropic principles states the laws of nature or the laws of the unverse are in part dependant on our own existence. He then sort of rephrases it in a more accurate And then says it is silly. I agree it is silly if you belive there are an almost infinite amount of landscapes or universes with different laws such as gravity. But - in now way did he contradict what I had previously quoted for you. In which he said if math or science goes on to show that his speculation about landscapes is incorrect then physicists would be hard pressed to answer the I.Ders and the anthropic principle.
This is a reply to 2cents. I do not know what set you off. Previously you wrote like a reasonable guy who studied physics --- then you start making crap up. I guess when I explained to you what Susskind was saying even though I only had a few physics classes you became a little emotional and your emotional imbalance manifested later in thread.