Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CaptainGemini" data-source="post: 6718723" data-attributes="member: 6801122">And what you are stating is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike what I have said. You would be a fine heir to the drink making machine on the Heart of Gold.If you don't like them being conflated, then stop conflating them.You were the one who <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?466337-ask-a-physicist/page14&p=6718088&viewfull=1#post6718088" target="_blank">first thought to conflate my question about a fixed set of physics being slightly different from how we think the laws of physics work with the idea that everything results from random chance</a>. I humored you and responded to your absurdity to point out that what you say is possible, but that it would be different than what we have observed, and then pointed out the issue of my question was not related to that. I misworded my comment at the end, so I take responsibility for the confusion that resulted. It was also you who had to go on the offensive because your conflating of two entirely unlike things and my miswording confused freyar. That was when I clarified my question to freyar, so that he could see exactly what I was actually talking about, before responding further to your absurdity by pointing out that you were speaking from ego and not an understanding of science.But, I see my not-so-gentle prodding flew over your head, so now I am speaking plainly: If you don't like the problem of conflating you complain about in your last post, then stop causing it. I made it a point to make my question clear after I saw the confusion caused earlier. Why you felt the need to ignore the obvious and continue on your holy crusade, I have no idea.Also, you completely misunderstand the way probability works. It doesn't tell you something will exist; it tells you the chances that something might exist. There is no such thing as 100% probability unless you are talking about events that have already occurred. That was why I told you to ignore the fact life does exist when trying to figure out the chances life could exist. Probability operates under the scientific knowledge that absolutely nothing is guaranteed. Which was why I made that comment about ego leading to bad science... because science itself accepts the fact that nothing is guaranteed unless it has already happened. And as we increasingly discover planets so close to having become another Earth, but which had something go wrong to prevent it, we get even more reinforcement of exactly how lucky we are to exist in the first place.Yes, we got lucky. No, our existence was not guaranteed, and the existence of another race in the universe or even another planet like Earth is not guaranteed. That's science.</blockquote>

Verification