On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote: > Mater doesn't have to be fundamental for your lab to work.
I never said one word about matter being fundamental, in fact I think if anything is fundamental it's consciousness not matter; however I did say that a non-materialistic theory is not falsifiable and you said I was confused. So cure my confusion by giving me a EXAMPLE (not a loquacious definition that is so general it's useless) of a non-materialistic theory that is falsifiable. > I don't know. I assume you accept wikipedia as a reasonable gauge of the > credibility of terms Yes, I do indeed. If you run across a technical term or acronym you don't understand when reading Nature or Science or Physical Review Letters you can just look it up in Wikipedia and it will tell you all about it, but Wikipedia has never heard of UDA or FPI or any of Bruno's peepee terminology, and yet Bruno acts as if they were household words that any educated person should know. > I am still waiting for your comment on this, by the way: Then you may rejoice, your wait is over. John K Clark -- 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.
