Henrik Danielsson

Keeping the lights on in the server room

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@GeorgeP53360785 @SebastienSantin @laughinglich07 Looking at the background action he's moving relatively slow here, but they've never been really good at keeping that consistent.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@Felix111234 @retneysholocron @laughinglich07 He's moving relatively slow at the time, just look at the background action.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@_Misael5 @NedKellysReveng @LaurenWitzkeDE Yeah, and as nothing else has revealed anything other than it being a natural rock formation and nothing like the boat from that myth, so will these tests. Won't stop them lying about it tho.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@_Misael5 @NedKellysReveng @LaurenWitzkeDE No. Nobody seems to be doing any of that if this is their opening line.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@kyletanderson @robertadamcek @JonathanLierma2 Neither did anyone else, all just myths without any evidence. A just god owes me a explanation at the least. Everything we "know" about god's comes from men, which we know can lie and device for their own benefits. We have no reason to believe any of it without evidence.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@Bevmtgl @flip_barry @McClureShawn Man can not create any chemical reaction which could not happen naturally, even tho some are unlikely. Chemistry & physics has no "say" in which interactions happen when chemicals interact, regardless of why they were brought together or who did it, it either happens or doesn't.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@_N_H_T_ @McClureShawn There is not even an initial reason to begin thinking something like a soul exist (which in itself is an extremely loosely defined concept so it can't even be agreed upon how to test if such a thing exists). Eyes can at least use a mirror. Nothing mirrors a soul.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@MH29418 @McClureShawn Where's the verifiable evidence that ever happened?

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@flip_barry @Bevmtgl @McClureShawn Perhaps. In some ways that outcome seems inevitable, given any single molecule which can be duplicated and modified through natural processes will continue to do so as long as the environment allows it.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@Opaopa13 @McClureShawn @sj27426 At least we still have this gem to keep us company for now.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@flip_barry @Bevmtgl @McClureShawn We are getting close to creating it from scratch, being able to make new cell-like structures divide to copy themselves. Nothing so far suggests we'll hit a "wall" where progress is just not possible, which would be the case if that ability was exclusively limited to some deity.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@Bevmtgl @McClureShawn Why would we need to have created a biological cell or life when evolution is not about the creation of life, but how it adapted?

Life also reuses only existing energy and material every single time it does anything. Non-life becomes part of life in countless processes daily.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@sj27426 @McClureShawn You need to test that reality confirms your logic, it does not go the other way around.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@sj27426 @McClureShawn Maybe you shouldn't be using an LLM to write your replies if you can't even get it not to stroke your ego and just echo your own flawed reasoning.

Gravity in no way needs logic. Logic only exists in the minds of humans as a tool to reason, describe and relate concepts.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@sj27426 @McClureShawn Therefor, we can only act within it and derive our logic from our experiences about how it behaves internally. There are some axioms within that scope, yes, but we can not use those axioms to absolutely or objectively determine everything about it yet.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@sj27426 @McClureShawn Gravity is closer to the topic than logic itself. Logic does not exist as a physical effect, gravity does. Logic is merely a device in our thoughts. There is no evidence the universe as a whole obeys our existing definitions of logic, as we can only observe it from within.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@sj27426 @McClureShawn If someone has faith gravity does not exist you don't simply take their word. You force them to demonstrate it and produce repeatable tests, results, etc, before accepting it as evidence the theories and practicalities about gravity aren't true. Faith never comes into anything.

[Henrik Danielsson @two_d]

@sj27426 @McClureShawn We can trust science and empirical evidence lead to truths because we have put in the work and made it repeatably verifiable. Nobody needs to trust gravity exists as it is empirically verifiable, regardless of the of any individual's or a collective's faith.