bohm

Joined

• started 191 topics
• posted 7,847 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by bohm

• 
  85

  Mormons getting hollowed out: The tipping point has occurred.

  by Qcmbr in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ever since mitt romney turned the spotlight on the lds church a growing tsunami of disaffection has been accelerated and brought to a head.. the lds core faithful members are leaving in increasing numbers such that growth has not simply stagnated in the west but it has actively reversed.

  to their credit the church is responding aggressively but not only is it too late, it is an impossible task.

  you can only paint sh*t so many ways.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Thank you for the update, this is very interesting information.
• 
  17

  Warwick, Class 5 Building project, Why?

  by DwainBowman in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so what is a class 5 project?.

  it is one done to the highest standards.

  paint & drywall, fit and finish, of everything to perfection.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Who was it who said: religions allwayes end up building their cathedrals
• 
  23

  how long are circuit assemblies and district assemblies now

  by darth frosty in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  wife was wondering.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  but to make up for the shorter time allocated, the talks has been made proportionally more booring so it still feels the same
• 
  3

  Praise Jibbers Crabst! (The oatmeal)

  by bohm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is too funny.

  pay attention to sign language girl, she is soo funny.

  and praise jibbers crabs!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  The jews were right, dont boil jibbers, or jibbers shall boil you with his fiery breath!
• 
  3

  Praise Jibbers Crabst! (The oatmeal)

  by bohm in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is too funny.

  pay attention to sign language girl, she is soo funny.

  and praise jibbers crabs!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  this is too funny. Pay attention to sign language girl, she is soo funny. And praise Jibbers Crabs!

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ_BtZ-5O60

  

  

  I believe in Jibbers Crabst!

  For the sceptics and nay-sayers, you just need:

  
• 
  11

  Vomit alert - how many Dubs actually like the noolite .tv?

  by hamsterbait in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  one witless i know actually said "i really like brother lett - his face is soo expressive, the eyebrows go up and he uses his lips to enunciate every word clearly.

  and he speaks slowly so it is easy to follow what he is saying.".

  another said "iwas so excited after watching the new tv channel.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  nooo not slow speaking! I found him to be highly intelligent, short legged and full of insightfull observations. Like this one:

  And what comes after twelve? thiirteeeen!
• 
  116

  Creationist Should Dismiss Genesis Quickly

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  chris tann,.

  in your earlier post you seemed to be under the impression that genesis and science were somehow compatible .

  however, the truth is the two are not reconcilable at all.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Apghnopos: This is just a fanciful notion that I don't put any faith in, but it would explain how the universe could be created without an increase in complexity, or at least a significant one.

  I don't see why an explanation for the universe which asssumes production of complexity at some point should be disfavored. Like i wrote above, we know the complexity of everything increase all the time (second law of thermodynamics) and one of the great problem in cosmology right now is to explain why the (very) early universe had such a low complexity and thereby why the universe has such a low complexity to this day. This is all ofcourse assume complexity means what it does in physics and i am not sure this is the case.
• 
  92

  How could you justify that God killed all firstborn children in Egypt?

  by Mr Fool in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  was it necessary for god to kill all innocent firstborn children?

  no other way out for the almighty god?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  CS: "I just keep wondering why (mostly atheists) keep thinking that believers need to justify anything that God does. Counting myself as a believer in God, and in the scriptures, I never even ask myself these questions"

  Yes, not examining ones beliefs and believing in god does seem to go hand in hand.

  CS: And certainly God doesn’t need to justify His actions to us anymore than our earthly fathers need to justify themselves to their young children in paying their taxes or making them eat broccoli instead of cake

  However for the most part parents do need to justify themselves when bodily harm is involved. For instance when they subject their children to something harmfull. It really puzzles me why believers have such a hard time not conflating eating brocoli with starvation or giving a child a vaccine with killing a child. Now is killing a child something that you would normally believe required justification?
• 
  116

  Creationist Should Dismiss Genesis Quickly

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  chris tann,.

  in your earlier post you seemed to be under the impression that genesis and science were somehow compatible .

  however, the truth is the two are not reconcilable at all.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  I think it is important not to conflate different notions of information/complexity with their popular interpretation. A basic problem is the mathematical theories that have been cited on this thread relate to a very exact (and from our perspective possible limited) notion of information. The Kolmogorov complexity of a sequence relate to the size of the smallest program that can compute the given sequence . Since a basic theorem in kolmogorov complexity theory is the kolmogorov complexity is incomputable this is not a vey helpfull notion to begin with. A second problem is the kolmogorov complexity actually measure exactly the opposite of what most people here would call "complexity"; for instance if one randomized the sequence of letters in a play by Shakespeare it would (with high probability!) obtain a higher kolmogorov complexity since natural text contain many regularities.

  This bring us to shannon information. Shannon information is defined in the study of chanels (sources) of symbols forming messages. These chanels are characterized through their probability distribution of outputs. The shannon information (in bits) of a given symbol is minus the log2 probability of that symbol; any basic application of this to the setting of the universe require us to imagine a probabilistic source of the universe and the "information" would relate to the amount of bits we imagine should be used to describe a universe from that source. I do not know what this would really mean. As before, it has the counter-intuitive notion that a random stream of symbols have larger information than a text (in a basic application).

  Alternatively one can define the notion of entropy; for (Shannon) information theory this is simply the expectation of the shannon information of symbols produced from a source; in thermodynamics it is (very basically stated) computed from the number of states the system can be in and is non-decreasing in expectation. These two notions are related and equivalent for many important problems, but it is debatable how well they exchaust each other.

  Turning to cosmology, the problem in cosmology is not to explain how the information (in the sense of entropy) arose, but why the universe (apparently!) started out in a state of very low entropy; cosmic inflation is one attempt to address this important problem in cosmology, but i really think this point is missed in this thread.

  A further problem (which should be apparent from the above discussion but need emphasis) it is to my mind not very sound to put to much stress on occam-type arguments where an information/complexity content is ascribed to god, the universe and an argument is made that since the sum of their information is larger than the parts there is a problem. This is for three reasons:

  Firstly, the information of the joint system is not the sum of the information of the parts unless one assume (information-theoretic) independence of the systems thus complicating the argument a great deal.

  Secondly, it is very hard to consider situations in science where this type of inference would lead to consistently selecting the better ideas asides post-hoc. It is for instance the case a universe populated with stars and galaxies (as opposed to these just being spots of light) is as such more complex than a universe consisting of just the solar system. This is not to say there are no serious problems with god as an explanation, i just do not know how to make that argument using information theory.

  Thirdly, the shannon/kolmogorov notions of information relate (as formulated) to descriptions of systems in some appropriate discretization. What is the true appropriate discretization is not clear at all. To what extent does the ease at which a system is described to an outsider allow us to rule out if that system really exists or not? the only stringent way I can think of is not as a physical principle, but as a guide for selecting prior probabilities in a bayesian theory of confirmation. However what should be considered physically true or not should not primarily be guided by priors but evidence.
• 
  15

  Proof and Evidence

  by Coded Logic in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .

  we can't explain something - therefore god.

  checkmate atheist!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Even better: I can't understand the explanation, therefore God.