The fact is that there are certain robust resources (like sunlight etc.) which exert constant pressure on the world, and which everything is dependent on. Whatever happens, these resources must go somewhere, so any forecast for the future that’s worth its salt must ultimately make predictions about those.
Each part of my argument addresses a different factor involved in these resource flows. Often you can just inspect the world and see that clearly that’s how the resources are flowing. Other times, my argument is disjunctive. Yet other times, sure maybe I’m wrong, but the way I might be wrong would imply the possibility of a lot of resources rushing out into some other channel, which again is worth exploring.
Plus, let’s remember, Strong Evidence Is Common. If there’s some particular parts of the argument where you don’t know how to inspect the world to get plenty of evidence, then I can try to guide you. But blinding yourself because of “muh evidence” is just makes your opinion worthless.
Making a point-by-point refutation misses the broader fact that any long sequence of argument like this adds up to very little evidence.
Even if you somehow convince me that each of your (10) arguments was like 75% true, they’re still going to add up to nothing because 0.7510=0.05
Unless you can summarize you argument in at most 2 sentences (with evidence), it’s completely ignoreable.
This is not how learning any (even slightly complex) topic works.
Yudkowsky 2017, AronT 2023 and Gwern 2019, if you’re curious why you’re getting downvoted.
(I tried to figure out whether this method of estimation works, and it seemed more accurate than I thought, but then I got distracted).
Cope. Here you’re taking a probabilistic perspective, but that perspective sucks.
The fact is that there are certain robust resources (like sunlight etc.) which exert constant pressure on the world, and which everything is dependent on. Whatever happens, these resources must go somewhere, so any forecast for the future that’s worth its salt must ultimately make predictions about those.
Each part of my argument addresses a different factor involved in these resource flows. Often you can just inspect the world and see that clearly that’s how the resources are flowing. Other times, my argument is disjunctive. Yet other times, sure maybe I’m wrong, but the way I might be wrong would imply the possibility of a lot of resources rushing out into some other channel, which again is worth exploring.
Plus, let’s remember, Strong Evidence Is Common. If there’s some particular parts of the argument where you don’t know how to inspect the world to get plenty of evidence, then I can try to guide you. But blinding yourself because of “muh evidence” is just makes your opinion worthless.