No, that’s a comparative measure of difference in our understanding over time.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-20 02:36:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428546574053937155
Reply addressees: @FedorLives1889
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428544284098142210
Too imprecise a question to answer. Knowelge evolves in a competitive market with some knowledge products surviving despite inferior quality and some because of superior quality. Over time science has rapidly removed ignorance, error, bias, and deceit.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 23:38:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428501710864064514
Reply addressees: @FedorLives1889 @Lord__Sousa @joeldavisx
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428500189367574530
1) witness isn’t proof. Witness is testimony. Testimony is either undecidable, possibly true, or definitely false. The problem is that all such testimony has been false because of the original scam run by the original middle east priests when organized religion evolved.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 23:13:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428495290529615872
Reply addressees: @FedorLives1889 @Lord__Sousa @joeldavisx
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428492701834440707
So the way would counter this under testimonialism is that you must take responsibility for the consequences of claiming that such a mythological analogy is true – you can’t because you can’t warranty it. As such it’s just a matter of saying you believe which is not irreciprocal.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 23:02:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428492602299621378
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428491714386350083
That’s fine. As long as you don’t claim it’s true (testifiable), rather than a choice for whatever purposes you feel you need to make that choice then you’re speaking truthfully.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 23:00:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428492060148080648
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428491714386350083
So one must merely choose what possibility to leave open. The problem is every self centered, egoistic, (arrogant) supernatural claim has been demonstrated false, and not a single one has survived the incremental expansion of our knoweldge.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 22:56:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428491201171410948
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889 @joeldavisx
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428490006134509570
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889 @joeldavisx I have the courage to accept that our perceptions of reality are limited to the reality that we can act within. If this means I must leave open the question of finite or infinite time that’s not a problem for me. I don’t need to pretend I know. I only know we don’t know.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1428490006134509570
I just stated and demonstrated that I have escaped the problem – by stating the field of options given our awareness of a long history of our egoistic presumption that the universe somehow serves us or our interest, and that as far as I know, there is a field of possibilities.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 22:54:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428490625276592134
Reply addressees: @FedorLives1889 @Lord__Sousa
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428489898365841410
I have the courage to accept that our perceptions of reality are limited to the reality that we can act within. If this means I must leave open the question of finite or infinite time that’s not a problem for me. I don’t need to pretend I know. I only know we don’t know.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 22:52:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428490006134509570
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889 @joeldavisx
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428489542521266187
3of4
Lastly, to make Fedor chuckle, I won’t play with the grammar of your presumption of WHAT IS vs WHAT do we REFER TO. In other words your grammar is a godlike presumption and assertion, rather than an epistemic question of the meaning of a term.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 22:40:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428487031882199044
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428486716705415170
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889 3of3
The universe may always exist as a timeless now, a cycle of times, a multi-universe vibration of times, or infinite time, and we have no idea if that’s even an intelligent question to ask yet. Relativity was shocking. It’s only getting worse the more we know.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1428486716705415170
1of2
Existence: Persistence of state across time.
Experience: The continuous relative perception of change produced by our hierarchy of memory.
Being: Experience of Sensation, Perception, Prediction, Permutation, Choice, Action, Observation(Sensation).
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-19 22:31:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428484828912099335
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa @FedorLives1889
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1428438090843049994