I tried to be polite and patient here, but it didn’t work, I’m trying new strategies now. I’m quite sure my reasoning is stronger than reasoning of people who don’t agree with me.
I find “your communication was not clear” a bit funny. You are scientists, you are super observant, but you don’t notice a problem when it is screamed at your face.
Just to add since I didn’t respond to this part: your posts are mostly saying that very well-known and well-studied problems are so simple and obvious and only your conclusions are plausible that everyone else must be wrong and missing the obvious. You haven’t pointed out a problem. We knew about the problem. We’ve directed a whole lot of time to studying the problem. You have not engaged with the proposed solutions.
It isn’t anyone else’s job to assume you know what you’re talking about. It’s your job to show it, if you want to convince anyone, and you haven’t done that.
That is what people are doing and how they’re using the downvotes, though. You aren’t seeing that because you haven’t engaged with the source material or the topic deeply enough.
Yes, but neither of us gets to use “possible” as a shield and assume that leaves us free to treat the two possibilities as equivalent, even if we both started from uniform priors. If this is not clear, you need to go back to Highly Advanced Epistemology 101 for Beginners. Those are the absolute basics for a productive discussion on these kinds of topics.
You have presented briefly stated summary descriptions of complex assertions without evidence other than informal verbal arguments which contain many flaws and gaps that that I and many others have repeatedly pointed out. I and others have provided counterexamples to some of the assertions and detailed explanations of many of the flaws and gaps. You have not corrected the flaws and gaps, nor have you identified any specific gaps or leaps in any of the arguments you claim to be disagreeing with. Nor have you paid attention to any of the very clear cases where what you claim other people believe blatantly contradicts what they actually believe and say they believe and argue for, even when this is repeatedly pointed out.
Just to add since I didn’t respond to this part: your posts are mostly saying that very well-known and well-studied problems are so simple and obvious and only your conclusions are plausible that everyone else must be wrong and missing the obvious. You haven’t pointed out a problem. We knew about the problem. We’ve directed a whole lot of time to studying the problem. You have not engaged with the proposed solutions.
It isn’t anyone else’s job to assume you know what you’re talking about. It’s your job to show it, if you want to convince anyone, and you haven’t done that.
And here we disagree. I believe that downvotes should be used for wrong, misleading content, not for the one you don’t understand.
That is what people are doing and how they’re using the downvotes, though. You aren’t seeing that because you haven’t engaged with the source material or the topic deeply enough.
Possible. Also possible that you don’t understand.
Yes, but neither of us gets to use “possible” as a shield and assume that leaves us free to treat the two possibilities as equivalent, even if we both started from uniform priors. If this is not clear, you need to go back to Highly Advanced Epistemology 101 for Beginners. Those are the absolute basics for a productive discussion on these kinds of topics.
You have presented briefly stated summary descriptions of complex assertions without evidence other than informal verbal arguments which contain many flaws and gaps that that I and many others have repeatedly pointed out. I and others have provided counterexamples to some of the assertions and detailed explanations of many of the flaws and gaps. You have not corrected the flaws and gaps, nor have you identified any specific gaps or leaps in any of the arguments you claim to be disagreeing with. Nor have you paid attention to any of the very clear cases where what you claim other people believe blatantly contradicts what they actually believe and say they believe and argue for, even when this is repeatedly pointed out.
I am sorry if you feel so. I replied in other thread, hope this fills the gaps.