Infinite Past

[untermensche]

Well, you haven't been able to describe the reason. You have not been able to explain your reasoning. You have not been able to argue your case (not having a case to argue).

You simply assert, reassert and assert again. Assertion being all you have.

[
It is an imaginary concept invented by humans that cannot possibly apply to anything real.

To show it is not imaginary requires evidence, not claims.

Yet you are making claims here and now, and every post you have offered to date. Nothing has changed.

It is not a claim that infinity is an imaginary concept. It is a fact.

To prove this wrong show me some EVIDENCE.

Not a claim.

I feel as if I am arguing with a religious fanatic.

Show me some evidence your god is real or I dismiss it as imaginary with the wave of my hand.

You merely state that it's a fact without offering a rhyme or reason why its true...therefore you are not proving that its a fact, you claiming that it's a fact. You have no descriptions. You can't address the questions being asked or the problems raised. You have no argument. You drift away building a strawman with your ''evidence for god.'' You have assertions. That's all.

You don't know how to behave rationally and consistently.

This is how one behaves rationally and consistently:

"My god is real".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

"Infinity is real".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

 

[bilby]

Well, you haven't been able to describe the reason. You have not been able to explain your reasoning. You have not been able to argue your case (not having a case to argue).

You simply assert, reassert and assert again. Assertion being all you have.

[
It is an imaginary concept invented by humans that cannot possibly apply to anything real.

To show it is not imaginary requires evidence, not claims.

Yet you are making claims here and now, and every post you have offered to date. Nothing has changed.

It is not a claim that infinity is an imaginary concept. It is a fact.

To prove this wrong show me some EVIDENCE.

Not a claim.

I feel as if I am arguing with a religious fanatic.

Show me some evidence your god is real or I dismiss it as imaginary with the wave of my hand.

You merely state that it's a fact without offering a rhyme or reason why its true...therefore you are not proving that its a fact, you claiming that it's a fact. You have no descriptions. You can't address the questions being asked or the problems raised. You have no argument. You drift away building a strawman with your ''evidence for god.'' You have assertions. That's all.

You don't know how to behave rationally and consistently.

This is how one behaves rationally and consistently:

"My god is real".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

"Infinity is real logically impossible".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

FTFY.

You are the one with the burden of proof here, despite your attempts to build a strawman. Not one person has claimed at any point in the three (3!) threads currently devoted to your insanity, that infinity is real. Only that you cannot demonstrate in any way that it is not.

 

[untermensche]

Well, you haven't been able to describe the reason. You have not been able to explain your reasoning. You have not been able to argue your case (not having a case to argue).

You simply assert, reassert and assert again. Assertion being all you have.

[
It is an imaginary concept invented by humans that cannot possibly apply to anything real.

To show it is not imaginary requires evidence, not claims.

Yet you are making claims here and now, and every post you have offered to date. Nothing has changed.

It is not a claim that infinity is an imaginary concept. It is a fact.

To prove this wrong show me some EVIDENCE.

Not a claim.

I feel as if I am arguing with a religious fanatic.

Show me some evidence your god is real or I dismiss it as imaginary with the wave of my hand.

You merely state that it's a fact without offering a rhyme or reason why its true...therefore you are not proving that its a fact, you claiming that it's a fact. You have no descriptions. You can't address the questions being asked or the problems raised. You have no argument. You drift away building a strawman with your ''evidence for god.'' You have assertions. That's all.

You don't know how to behave rationally and consistently.

This is how one behaves rationally and consistently:

"My god is real".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

"Infinity is real logically impossible".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

FTFY.

You are the one with the burden of proof here, despite your attempts to build a strawman. Not one person has claimed at any point in the three (3!) threads currently devoted to your insanity, that infinity is real. Only that you cannot demonstrate in any way that it is not.

That is called INCONSISTENCY.

Nothing logically impossible about a god. There simply is no evidence of one.

When people claim things are real. Anything.

It is up to THEM to provide evidence to back up their claim.

Otherwise their claim is dismissed with the flick of the hand.

Infinity real?

What a joke.

 

[bilby]

Well, you haven't been able to describe the reason. You have not been able to explain your reasoning. You have not been able to argue your case (not having a case to argue).

You simply assert, reassert and assert again. Assertion being all you have.

[
It is an imaginary concept invented by humans that cannot possibly apply to anything real.

To show it is not imaginary requires evidence, not claims.

Yet you are making claims here and now, and every post you have offered to date. Nothing has changed.

It is not a claim that infinity is an imaginary concept. It is a fact.

To prove this wrong show me some EVIDENCE.

Not a claim.

I feel as if I am arguing with a religious fanatic.

Show me some evidence your god is real or I dismiss it as imaginary with the wave of my hand.

You merely state that it's a fact without offering a rhyme or reason why its true...therefore you are not proving that its a fact, you claiming that it's a fact. You have no descriptions. You can't address the questions being asked or the problems raised. You have no argument. You drift away building a strawman with your ''evidence for god.'' You have assertions. That's all.

You don't know how to behave rationally and consistently.

This is how one behaves rationally and consistently:

"My god is real".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

"Infinity is real logically impossible".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

FTFY.

You are the one with the burden of proof here, despite your attempts to build a strawman. Not one person has claimed at any point in the three (3!) threads currently devoted to your insanity, that infinity is real. Only that you cannot demonstrate in any way that it is not.

That is called INCONSISTENCY.

Nothing logically impossible about a god. There simply is no evidence of one.

When people claim things are real. Anything.

It is up to THEM to provide evidence to back up their claim.

Otherwise their claim is dismissed with the flick of the hand.

Infinity real?

What a joke.

Not one person has claimed at any point in the three (3!) threads currently devoted to your insanity, that infinity is real.

I am not sure what part of that you are having trouble with.

YOU are the person who made a claim. YOU are the one who continues with his stupidity after everyone else dismissed it with a flick of the hand.

If you can't or won't obey the rules you yourself demand must be obeyed by all, that's literal insanity.

 

[untermensche]

Not one person has claimed at any point in the three (3!) threads currently devoted to your insanity, that infinity is real.

I am not sure what part of that you are having trouble with.

YOU are the person who made a claim. YOU are the one who continues with his stupidity after everyone else dismissed it with a flick of the hand.

If you can't or won't obey the rules you yourself demand must be obeyed by all, that's literal insanity.

It must be claimed real to try to apply it to a real entity like time.

You can't apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

You can't rationally claim that real entities have arbitrary imaginary qualities.

What is next? Time is all knowing?

 

[bilby]

Not one person has claimed at any point in the three (3!) threads currently devoted to your insanity, that infinity is real.

I am not sure what part of that you are having trouble with.

YOU are the person who made a claim. YOU are the one who continues with his stupidity after everyone else dismissed it with a flick of the hand.

If you can't or won't obey the rules you yourself demand must be obeyed by all, that's literal insanity.

It must be claimed real to try to apply it to a real entity like time.

You can't apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

So you keep claiming without evidence. But nobody cares, because we are dismissing that unsupported claim with a flick of the hand.

Not one person has claimed at any point in the three (3!) threads currently devoted to your insanity, that infinity is real.

Your attempt to use a further unsupported claim to show that they have done something you insist (without evidence) is equivalent is just more bullshit.

You need to demonstrate the infinity is logically possible, because that is the claim you have made.

You cannot demonstrate the truth of your claim by making a further unsupported claim that others have claimed the opposite. That's not how this works. It's your claim. Support it or withdraw it. Don't pretend that others have made claims that nobody has actually made. Don't make further, equally unsubstantiated claims, like "You can't apply imaginary concepts to real entities"; Put up, or shut up. Provide evidence for your claims. Not deflection; Not further unsupported claims; Not strawmen; Not shifts of the burden of proof; Just evidence.

Your incredulity is evidence only of your ignorance.

 

[untermensche]

It must be claimed real to try to apply it to a real entity like time.

You can't apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

So you keep claiming without evidence. But nobody cares, because we are dismissing that unsupported claim with a flick of the hand.

So you have no example to refute it yet you dismiss it? It is not a claim that something is real. It is a claim that something is true. To disprove it takes more than your hand wave. You need to at least refute it with some other truth claim.

You are in effect saying it is rational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities. In what case?

Just more irrationality from you.

You can't rationally claim that real entities have arbitrary imaginary qualities.

What is next? Time is all knowing?

What imaginary quality will you next try to apply to reality?

 

[bilby]

So you keep claiming without evidence. But nobody cares, because we are dismissing that unsupported claim with a flick of the hand.

So you have no example to refute it yet you dismiss it?

Yes. That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

You see, as someone else here recently pointed out, when someone makes a claim, it is up to THEM to provide evidence to back up their claim. Otherwise their claim is dismissed with the flick of the hand.

Just more irrationality from you.

It is the antithesis of irrational to ask someone for evidence to support the claims they make.

You can't rationally claim that real entities have arbitrary imaginary qualities.

And I didn't.

Equally, you can't rationally claim that they don't; But you have.

What is next? Time is all knowing?

What's next, another strawman? Nobody has made the claim that time is all knowing. If they do, then we can discuss it.

Right now, we are discussing your claims. Or we would be, if you had provided any evidence. Instead, we are just hearing you make and re-make unsupported claims ad-nauseam, sprinkled with diversionary tactics and insults. You are behaving like a madman.

By the way, that's not an insult; it's an observation. You are, quite literally, acting in a fashion that suggests some kind of mental illness.

 

[untermensche]

So you have no example to refute it yet you dismiss it?

Yes. That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

It is not a claim that something is real. No evidence can be provided.

It is a claim that some idea is true.

It is the claim that it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

If you disagree you are saying it is rational to do it.

How is it rational?

 

[bilby]

Yes. That which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

It is not a claim that something is real. No evidence can be provided.

It is a claim that some idea is true.

It is the claim that it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

If you disagree you are saying it is rational to do it.

How is it rational?

You are making a claim. You know that you are making a claim. Support it, or withdraw it. It's not my job to do your homework.

 

[untermensche]

It is not a claim that something is real. No evidence can be provided.

It is a claim that some idea is true.

It is the claim that it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

If you disagree you are saying it is rational to do it.

How is it rational?

You are making a claim. You know that you are making a claim. Support it, or withdraw it. It's not my job to do your homework.

I am making a claim.

I am claiming it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

An example would be claiming the universe is all knowing.

But you are making a claim too.

You are saying you disagree. If not then you agree and I am done with your idiocy.

If you disagree you are saying it is rational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

Give me an example.

If you have no example you can't be rationally disagreeing. You may object but without an example it is just an irrational objection. Nothing but the wave of a hand. Nothing any rational person would take seriously.

 

[bilby]

You are making a claim. You know that you are making a claim. Support it, or withdraw it. It's not my job to do your homework.

I am making a claim.

I am claiming it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

I know that's what you are claiming. The next step is for you to support that claim with evidence.

An example would be claiming the universe is all knowing.

You don't need examples, You need evidence. Evidence that supports the claim. If you claim that all animals have four legs, and try to support that by saying 'An example would be horses', I hope you could see that your example is not sufficient to demonstrate the truth of your claim.

But you are making a claim too.

You are saying you disagree.

No, I am not. I am saying you haven't demonstrated the truth of your claim. I don't know whether or not it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities. But I do know that I won't just take your word for it.

If you disagree you are saying it is rational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

Give me an example.

If you have no example you can't be rationally disagreeing. You may object but without an example it is just an irrational objection. Nothing but the wave of a hand.

I am not disagreeing. I am saying that you have no justification for your belief. I have no belief either way; But you want to depend upon the truth of your claim to make your argument - and so YOU must demonstrate that it is true, or discard it.

The default position is that we don't know. If you make a claim that you do know, then you must support that claim. My insistence that you do NOT know does NOT imply that you are certain to be wrong - just that you are not allowed to pretend that you are certain to be right.

That's how this whole 'thinking' thing actually works. You should try it sometime.

 

[untermensche]

I am making a claim.

I am claiming it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities.

I know that's what you are claiming. The next step is for you to support that claim with evidence.

You support claims that something is real with evidence.

And then if proven real it can be applied to something real like time.

But this is a claim some idea is true.

Those claims are not supported with evidence. There is no evidence to support the idea that it is irrational to apply human traits to inanimate objects. There are only arguments for and against the idea.

This is a claim about the application of concepts. Not a claim that something is real.

To think evidence is possible is just to once again not understand the difference between imaginary concepts and real entities.

Despite all your handwaving if you disagree with the idea that it is irrational to apply imaginary concepts to real entities you are saying it is rational to do so.

Despite your handwaving we are not talking about claims that something is real. Although we are discussing claims. You have that much right. My claim I freely make and defend as it can only be defended, with argument, and your claim you run away from.

I am saying that you have no justification for your belief.

Prove this claim.

 

[untermensche]

What is under consideration here is the question of whether or not the concept of infinity can rationally be applied to time.

If it cannot rationally be applied then it is a rational contradiction to apply it under any circumstance. Even under the circumstance that the past ends at the present.

Therefore the positive claim that needs to be defended is that it is rational to apply the concept of infinity to time.

The concept of infinity is a mathematical concept, not a property of reality.

To claim it could be some property of reality takes some explaining.

How is it property of reality? Because one says so?

 

[DBT]

Well, you haven't been able to describe the reason. You have not been able to explain your reasoning. You have not been able to argue your case (not having a case to argue).

You simply assert, reassert and assert again. Assertion being all you have.

[
It is an imaginary concept invented by humans that cannot possibly apply to anything real.

To show it is not imaginary requires evidence, not claims.

Yet you are making claims here and now, and every post you have offered to date. Nothing has changed.

It is not a claim that infinity is an imaginary concept. It is a fact.

To prove this wrong show me some EVIDENCE.

Not a claim.

I feel as if I am arguing with a religious fanatic.

Show me some evidence your god is real or I dismiss it as imaginary with the wave of my hand.

You merely state that it's a fact without offering a rhyme or reason why its true...therefore you are not proving that its a fact, you claiming that it's a fact. You have no descriptions. You can't address the questions being asked or the problems raised. You have no argument. You drift away building a strawman with your ''evidence for god.'' You have assertions. That's all.

You don't know how to behave rationally and consistently.

This is how one behaves rationally and consistently:

"My god is real".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

"Infinity is real".

"Prove it show me some evidence".

Yet you can't seem to grasp that nobody has claimed that infinity is real, just that there is no obvious logical reason why it cannot be real.

But, given your track record, I guess you aren't too good with making basic distinctions.

You are an expert at avoiding questions though. Like, if time had to have a beginning (this being your claim), what was the state immediately before time emerged?

Think about that. If you can.

 

[ryan]

To claim it could be some property of reality takes some explaining.

The reason why it is rational to say that it can exist is because so far it works in our current model of the universe.

That's it; there's nothing more to be said about this at this point in physics/cosmology.

 

[untermensche]

Yet you can't seem to grasp that nobody has claimed that infinity is real, just that there is no obvious logical reason why it cannot be real.

But, given your track record, I guess you aren't too good with making basic distinctions.

You are an expert at avoiding questions though. Like, if time had to have a beginning (this being your claim), what was the state immediately before time emerged?

Think about that. If you can.

So you finally understand infinity is imaginary? Then say it. Infinity is an imaginary concept. No more real that the Easter Bunny.

And if nobody is saying it is real then nobody should be trying to apply it to real entities.

If you think you can apply infinity to time you are in effect saying infinity is real.

Whether you understand that or not is immaterial.

And I never once claimed time had a beginning. I am not making claims about the nature of time beyond saying it is real. I am making claims about concepts applied to time. I did claim that the term "no beginning" is meaningless and has no scientific or rational definition.

 

[untermensche]

To claim it could be some property of reality takes some explaining.

The reason why it is rational to say that it can exist is because so far it works in our current model of the universe.

That's it; there's nothing more to be said about this at this point in physics/cosmology.

Our current models do not in any way demonstrate it is possible for infinity to be real.

To demonstrate infinity could be real takes evidence, not just claims.

To claim it could be real requires some evidence where it is real.

 

[ryan]

The reason why it is rational to say that it can exist is because so far it works in our current model of the universe.

That's it; there's nothing more to be said about this at this point in physics/cosmology.

To claim it could be real requires some evidence where it is real.

So you are saying that we have to show evidence that it is real in order to claim that it could be real. That is like saying that we must show evidence that there is life on other planets to claim it could be real.

Is it not rational today to claim that life on other planets can exist even though we have not found evidence for it?

 

[ryan]

Or, a better analogy from what you have been saying in other threads would be like you (untermensche) saying that life on other planets can't exist because it is still just in our imaginations and with no real evidence.

Your position is too black and white. We have intuitions like life on other planets, which might be right, even though there is 0 evidence for it.