Re:A Visiting Star Jostled Our Solar System 70,000 Years Ago
by rhapsodic on Thursday March 22, 2018 @12:56PM
(#16650418)
>It isn't like creationism because it is based on some otherwise currently unexplained observations such as quantum mechanical behavior and magic physical constants. The idea is that these are exactly the sort of observations you'd see if you were in a simulated universe.
Really? Why would you not simply "see" whatever the Creator(s) want you to "see"? After all, it's a simulation.
And it seems to me likely that Creationism originally grew out of a then-unexplained observation: "Hey, we're alive and we exist! How the heck did that happen???"
>Now if we were to observe new species being created in N days, for small integer N, then I suppose your assertion about creationism would also hold.
I'm not sure what you mean. My assertion about classic Creationism is that it's disproven bunk.
Are you saying that if "if we were to observe new species being created in N days, for small integer N" then my assertion that simulation-Creationism is also bunk would hold?
Really? Why would you not simply "see" whatever the Creator(s) want you to "see"? After all, it's a simulation.
And it seems to me likely that Creationism originally grew out of a then-unexplained observation: "Hey, we're alive and we exist! How the heck did that happen???"
>Now if we were to observe new species being created in N days, for small integer N, then I suppose your assertion about creationism would also hold.
I'm not sure what you mean. My assertion about classic Creationism is that it's disproven bunk.
Are you saying that if "if we were to observe new species being created in N days, for small integer N" then my assertion that simulation-Creationism is also bunk would hold?