Hi John. I am still lost trying to follow what you are saying. I don't think you replied when I asked you to clarify your earlier response so I'm not getting anywhere. Any elucidation would be welcome!
Just in case you missed it... On 2 September 2014 09:21, John Mikes <[email protected]> wrote: > Did I come close? > > Dunno. I was asking what you meant when you replied to my earlier post. I said (commenting on the SSA and the Doomsday Argument): Actually I'm surprised that there are *no* "populous" universes anywhere in > the string landscape / level 4 multiverse (if such exist). Or perhaps it's > more likely that there are, but their proportion is so much lower than our > sort that the chances are still better to find oneself in a universe where > the life of civilisations is either nasty, brutish and short, or involves > us evolving into an "Childhood's End" style Overmind. > > You replied: and HOW ON EARTH (verbatim: this one) would you know the entire World? Not to ask: what would you call 'populous'? Is a trillion 'many'? Please do ot quote Adam and Eve, Adam started out to be alone with a spare rib. And they(?) made the entire crowd. I didn't understand how your reply related to what I said. I still don't. I am happy to talk about being steered by aliens as per 2001 if you like but if you aren't actually responding to what I said maybe you could start another thread. Or if you are, please explain what the connection is. (Please keep it simple, I am a bear of little brain.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
