On Dec 29, 2011, at 5:17 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 11-12-29 01:57 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence
<sa...@pobox.com> wrote:
On 11-12-28 08:40 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
Unless I'm greatly mistaken, you've accused a number of people of
failing to exist.
The only allegation of non existence I've ever made is the non-
existence of a proper and credible experiment that proves that the
E-cat works as advertised. Of that, I'm quite sure.
The other non-existence attributes I've alleged are only potential
-- as in: "Rossi's anonymous customer may not exist or may be
associated with Rossi." -- to give an example. I've never accused
anyone of fraud in conjunction with Rossi and Defkalion. I have,
however, pointed to Steorn as an example of something which
developed similarly and appears very similar and clearly is a
fraud -- which has been crystal clear for at least two years. I
have said many times that Rossi and Defkalion could be frauds. I
think the probability that they are is quite significant. It's an
opinion-- not a statement of facts.
Having said all that, Stephen, please prove you exist.
That's a tough one.
Descartes's "proof" was defective, of course -- it proved only that
I do not see how I could not exist, not that I could not possibly
not exist. Among other issues with his proof, the rules of
inference with which he was working are an assumption, akin to an
axiom, and can't be proven.
If you accept the causal nature of the universe then that which is
not can not create that which is not. If you deny a causal universe
then there can be no meaning in anything, especially logical
philosophical discussion. The premises of logic do not hold.
Logical discussion is not possible.
I create therefore I am. If you agree with the existence of my
creation then you agree with my existence.
These words are my creation. Do you have a response? 8^)
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
