Nadezhda

@Unseen and Jake

There is no math inside the fabric of the universe. The laws of physics. Our math is an imperfect representation of those laws written in symbols we can understand. We can approximate it as best as possible, it may be found to be very reliable, have predictive qualities which help us and help us understand the universe…but the…[Read more]

The sun doesn’t do math. Every individual particle acts according to the laws of physics. There is no group think, no centralised anything, no conceptualisation and zero number work.

Humans add things up when they need to know a total.

Bats scream…they don’t do math. They don’t deal with abstract problems. They cannot communicate the number 1…[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:Math is part of the universe with or with people

If have to disagree. Math is completely separate from the laws of the universe. It’s a human construct, a human representation/modeling/conceptualisation/rendering/whatever-other-noun that we use to understand and survive in the hostile universe (and that math grows more complex as…[Read more]

There is no such thing as a math as though it is something that was created. Mathematics is only human construct to help understand, explain, forecast and manipulate their environment. The real question should be: “why did God create beings from whom a construct of numbers and number jumbling emerged”? Many human constructs emerge and yet few ask…[Read more]

A string of questions to ask them back:

Why does the existence of “reliable number jumbling” require a great singular being to have created it? If there was no patterns in nature but everything was a crazy blur of nonsense and chaos and confusion…would you still think a God created that universe? Well…the world IS a crazy blur of nonsense…[Read more]

Thomas Paine wrote:the realities are far outpacing his thesis

The truth is, the biggest source of terrorism in Europe in the last 100 years have been Christian based (including in the last decade):

Northern Ireland: Catholics and Protestants killing one another and blowing up buildings and transport most especially in Belfast and…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:Furthermore he was assisted by Russians.

That may be true…but he has an approval rating of 45%. That is, for me, the most shocking thing of all. Despite hiring criminals and idiots and firing them as well as good cabinet members, his hard core bromance with Putin, his deplorable position on family separation, inability to get…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:But Davis he did not win the popular vote.

Yes. Electoral reform is more important in this case. Though good luck changing anything in the US where most people have a strong incentive not to…and thats not even considering the outrageous gerrymandering that goes on. And the UK and Canada are no different. Them and the US are the…[Read more]

In the USA, city of Toronto, Russia, New-South-Wales, they clearly have no problem voting in a obviously undeniable immoral person. In a few European senates, to be eligible you have to have been elected twice as a member of parliament or assembly…preferably in two different jurisdictions or levels. This is an extremely intelligent…[Read more]

Remember when George Bush Jr as president seemed like the election of a know-nothing idiot who made unethical decisions riding on the coat-tails of his father and screwed up much of what he did? Well despite his disasters, people voted him in a second time. And then come one day, an utter scumbucket of the highest level of assholetry is elected.…[Read more]

@simonpaynton That’s precisely what they said multiple times quite directly. To read their paper and conclude otherwise, is to pull a Steven Pinker.

Simon Paynton wrote:According to James Q Wilson in “On Character”, nobody really knows why the crime rate goes up or down.

That’s only part of the truth.. Just like nobody knows why a book was the sold out success it was or why a revolution happened when it did.

But you can extrapolate probable factors that contributed to it. For example the…[Read more]

From what I read in the article, it seems that Pinker was fooled by his own mis-reading. First, the Freakonomics boys never claimed that allowing abortions equalled less crime, besides, abortion has always been going on anyways behind closed doors. The authors gave a probability average of how likely different factors could explain crime spikes or…[Read more]

They compared the rate of violence about 16-18 years after abortion was legalised in some states as well as in Romania after abortion was made obligatory and based on the notable change in Each state so many years later they concluded that parents having children when abortion wasn’t possible (likely because they weren’t ready) the level of crime…[Read more]