Ever felt insignificant?

[amateur51]

.

Good morning, Pab .. yes, I've been making the same point for about three days now so thanks for thinking you might have a go!

My heart goes out to Mrs scotty - what that poor woman has to put up with

[teamsaint]

My heart goes out to Mrs scotty - what that poor woman has to put up with

poor woman must be forever buying boxes of plasters .........

[heliocentric]

poor woman must be forever buying boxes of plasters .........

It's a sad indictment of our secularised society.

[scottycelt]

Impeccable.

Not quite ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3096839.stm

The BBC thinks it is possible to 'prove' non-existence, so good for it in attempting to provide that evidence to back up its positive claim of non-existence, That's fair, scientific and very rational.

The fools at the BBC got it terribly wrong on this one though ... they must have used the wrong equipment.

[scottycelt]

I'm sure I was I was just trying to be inclusive, scotty knowing how detached you sometimes feel in here

Amsey, becoming detached from you some here might well consider a most obvious 'positive event', requiring no further evidence or proof whatsoever ...

[amateur51]

Amsey, becoming detached from you some here might well consider a most obvious 'positive event', requiring no further evidence or proof whatsoever ...

Perfick!

[Pabmusic]

Not quite ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3096839.stm

The BBC thinks it is possible to 'prove' non-existence, so good for it in attempting to provide that evidence to back up its positive claim of non-existence, That's fair, scientific and very rational.

The fools at the BBC got it terribly wrong on this one though ... they must have used the wrong equipment.

They obviously haven't read our exchanges. This is reported as proof of non-existence, and of course it cannot be that, unless the BBC has been able to check everywhere, world-wide, simultaneously (it has to be simultaneously to prevent Nessie doubling back into an area that's already been checked). However, it seems they might be saying that they acheived something very close to perfection within the confines of Loch Ness. The important thing to remember, though, is that not actually being able to disprove Nessie exists does not mean that everything's up for grabs and that all returns to a neutral state. If the BBC is right, there is now very poweful evdence indeed against Nessie's existence, and anyone who is insistent it does exist has a truly moumental task in proving that claim.

[amateur51]

They obviously haven't read our exchanges. This is reported as proof of non-existence, and of course it cannot be that, unless the BBC has been able to check everywhere, world-wide, simultaneously (it has to be simultaneously to prevent Nessie doubling back into an area that's already been checked). However, it seems they might be saying that they acheived something very close to perfection within the confines of Loch Ness. The important thing to remember, though, is that not actually being able to disprove Nessie exists does not mean that everything's up for grabs and that all returns to a neutral state. If the BBC is right, there is now very poweful evdence indeed against Nessie's existence, and anyone who is insistent it does exist has a truly moumental task in proving that claim.

Very nicely put

[scottycelt]

They obviously haven't read our exchanges. This is reported as proof of non-existence, and of course it cannot be that, unless the BBC has been able to check everywhere, world-wide, simultaneously (it has to be simultaneously to prevent Nessie doubling back into an area that's already been checked). However, it seems they might be saying that they acheived something very close to perfection within the confines of Loch Ness. The important thing to remember, though, is that not actually being able to disprove Nessie exists does not mean that everything's up for grabs and that all returns to a neutral state. If the BBC is right, there is now very poweful evdence indeed against Nessie's existence, and anyone who is insistent it does exist has a truly moumental task in proving that claim.

Yes, I agree, but that surely concedes the point that it is possible to at least provide some evidence for non-existence if not absolute proof and it's because some have claimed to have seen the 'monster' and even scientists have conceded there could be 'something' unusual down there, that it would seem wrong to claim non-existence without making the effort that the BBC made to back up that position?. Anyway, we keep repeating ourselves and I don't think either of us are going to retreat from our respective views on an appropriate 'burden of proof' regarding any claim, whatever its nature.

Talking about proper monsters, and not that imaginary spaghetti variety, the really remarkable thing about Nessie is that she appears to have existed for centuries and very obviously has little intention of dying off prematurely! ...

[Flosshilde]

Not quite ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3096839.stm

"the only explanation for the persistence of the myth ... is that people see what they want to see. "

Sums it up, really, doesn't it.

The BBC thinks it is possible to 'prove' non-existence, so good for it in attempting to provide that evidence to back up its positive claim of non-existence,

Well, no, actually. I think that this -

They hoped the instruments aboard their search boat would pick up the air in Nessie's lungs as it reflected a distorted signal back to the sonar sensors.

suggests that they were looking for something that might have proved or indicated it's existence, but found nothing, which they decided meant that it didn't exist.

Yes, I agree, but that surely concedes the point that it is possible to at least provide some evidence for non-existence

What the BBC did was fail to do what they set out to do; that is, provide evidence of Nessie's existence - not quite the same thing.

[amateur51]

Talking about proper monsters, and not that imaginary spaghetti variety, the really remarkable thing about Nessie is that she appears to have existed for centuries and very obviously has little intention of dying off prematurely! ...

A bit like your favourite celestial phenomenon then, scotty?

[vinteuil]

... ah, scotty, ever reliable - agnostic about the existence of the spaghetti monster and the orbiting teapot - but presumably a true believer in a flying Joseph of Cupertino* and a flying House of Loreto**...

* www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=72

**

"According to this narrative, the house at Nazareth in which Mary had been born and brought up, had received the annunciation that she would bear the child Jesus, and had lived during the childhood of Jesus and after his ascension, was converted into a church by the apostles. In 336 the empress Helena made a pilgrimage to Nazareth and directed that a basilica be erected over it, in which worship continued until the fall of the kingdom of Jerusalem.
The narrative further states that, threatened with destruction by the Turks, the house was carried by angels through the air and deposited (1291) in the first instance on a hill at Tersatto (now Trsat, a suburb of Rijeka, Croatia), where an appearance of the Virgin and numerous miraculous cures attested its sanctity. These miracles were confirmed by investigations made at Nazareth by messengers from the governor of Dalmatia. In 1294 the angels carried it across the Adriatic to the woods near Recanati; from this woods (Latin lauretum, Italian Colli del Lauri), or from the name of its proprietrix (Laureta), the chapel derived the name which it still retains (sacellum gloriosae Virginis in Laureto). From this spot it was afterwards (1295) removed to the present hill, one other slight adjustment being required to fix it in its actual site. It is this house that gave the title Our Lady of Loreto sometimes applied to the Virgin. The miracle is occasionally represented in religious art wherein the house is borne by an angelic host"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_della_Santa_Casa

[Flosshilde]

"According to this narrative, the house at Nazareth in which Mary had been born and brought up, ...

Who needs a caravan?

... removed to the present hill, one other slight adjustment being required to fix it in its actual site.

Typical builders - can't get it right even when they're angelic


(I wonder what the 'adjustment' was?)

[scottycelt]

"the only explanation for the persistence of the myth ... is that people see what they want to see. "

Sums it up, really, doesn't it.

Ah, no, not really ... that's a positive statement so it requires proof, Flossie.

I much prefer ... 'there are none so blind as those who do not wish to see', as it's a negative claim, and I really can't be expected to provide any evidence or proof of its veracity, can I? So I feel on much safer ground claiming non-provable negatives which everyone will willingly accept at face-value, y'see.

... suggests that they were looking for something that might have proved or indicated it's existence, but found nothing, which they decided meant that it didn't exist

That's fine even by me, though, in purely 'scientific' terms it surely remains more of an assumption than any sort of 'proof' ... and your interpretation is not what the headline actually claimed, now, is it .. ?

What the BBC did was fail to do what they set out to do; that is, provide evidence of Nessie's existence - not quite the same thing.

Well, I've absolutely no idea what they set out to do, but they seem to claim they have 'proved' the non-existence of Nessie which learned members here have constantly dismissed as invalid and all very silly really.

There would appear to be a serious division and confusion here among the naysayers over the assumed or proven non-existence of all sorts of monsters and flying teapots?

[scottycelt]

... ah, scotty, ever reliable - agnostic about the existence of the spaghetti monster and the orbiting teapot - but presumably a true believer in a flying Joseph of Cupertino* and a flying House of Loreto**...

* www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=72

**

"According to this narrative, the house at Nazareth in which Mary had been born and brought up, had received the annunciation that she would bear the child Jesus, and had lived during the childhood of Jesus and after his ascension, was converted into a church by the apostles. In 336 the empress Helena made a pilgrimage to Nazareth and directed that a basilica be erected over it, in which worship continued until the fall of the kingdom of Jerusalem.
The narrative further states that, threatened with destruction by the Turks, the house was carried by angels through the air and deposited (1291) in the first instance on a hill at Tersatto (now Trsat, a suburb of Rijeka, Croatia), where an appearance of the Virgin and numerous miraculous cures attested its sanctity. These miracles were confirmed by investigations made at Nazareth by messengers from the governor of Dalmatia. In 1294 the angels carried it across the Adriatic to the woods near Recanati; from this woods (Latin lauretum, Italian Colli del Lauri), or from the name of its proprietrix (Laureta), the chapel derived the name which it still retains (sacellum gloriosae Virginis in Laureto). From this spot it was afterwards (1295) removed to the present hill, one other slight adjustment being required to fix it in its actual site. It is this house that gave the title Our Lady of Loreto sometimes applied to the Virgin. The miracle is occasionally represented in religious art wherein the house is borne by an angelic host"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilica_della_Santa_Casa

Interesting, vinteuil ... and poor Joseph! ... even his mum had no time for him?

Extraordinary things can and do happen which have baffled scientists and other 'experts', and if the people involved (who are in the best position to know) think that it is the power of prayer which has, say, caused them to have a miraculous and unexplained recovery from a terminal illness who am I to contradict them? At least that is an explanation and there is also evidence (a positive event, if you like) whether we call it 'a miracle' or do not ... did Joseph and the house actually 'fly'? ... I haven't a clue but at least it would appear that some very extraordinary things did happen if a maternal reject like Joe suddenly became the centre of great attention and wonder? We can believe exactly what we like based on similar historical accounts of the same extraordinary events.

But green-eyed spaghetti monsters and orbiting teapots ? Such very peculiar things only seem to be in the weird imagination of 'anti-religionists' and nobody else ... as far as I know there have been as yet no miraculous sitings by anyone, anywhere?