The Epistemic Communication Dilemma Why Infinite Consequences Require Perfect Communication My Personal Argument

[anew1]

@Acltalls

@anew1

This is another one of ‘your beyond absurdism’ claims that you keep making in this thread.

There is no absurdism,

If this is what you believe is absolutely true, then okay.

@Acltalls

you have said that space is less infinite due to objects,

Are they the exact words that I have said?

@Acltalls

which is not what being infinite is and would make the universe not infinite.

If this is what you really want to believe here, then okay.

But, I have pointed out other things, which you must of missed or misunderstood if this is what you see and believe here.

@Acltalls

You stated as such here:

@anew1

@Acltalls

Is there an infinite amount of space?

Of course not.

Obviously there are physical objects. Which, obviously, reduces the amount of ‘space’, clearly.

Just because I stated ‘as such’, this never means that you comprehended and understood what was meant. And, you obviously still have not.

@Acltalls

So you do not think that space is infinite by your own statement.

I have NEVER even thought it, let alone said or implied it anywhere.

And, I KNOW that ‘space’, itself, is not infinite and because it is not now could never have been nor ever could be.

@Acltalls

So why would I think so either if you do not?

1. you are absolutely free to think absolutely whatever you like.
2. I have NEVER EVER wanted you to think something that is obviously NOT true is true.

Why are you AGAIN going down some completely off topic and absolutely nothing I have said path for exactly?

@Acltalls

You are contradicting yourself here because you do not actually know what you are talking about,

LOL, LOL, LOL

Imagine being as STUPID as this one is here.

it AGAIN introduces things that I have absolutely NEVER EVER said, implied, nor even thought, but then LOL uses its own INTRODUCED ideas to argue against or claim that ‘they’ make ‘my claim’ contradictory.

Are you STUPID and do not know what you are doing here now, or are you just ‘trying to’ trick, fool, and deceive the readers here.

Once again, I have NEVER EVER said that ‘space’ is infinite. I have, INSTEAD, said and claimed that the Universe, Itself, if infinite, and eterna. The Unvierse, do not forget, at the fundamental level is made up of ‘space’ and ‘matter’.

@Acltalls

because all of your ideas stem from a closed mind.

LOL, LOL, LOL

So, ‘this one’ here is ‘trying to’ claim;

‘I’ am contradicting “myself” BECAUSE ‘I’ do not actually know what ‘I’ am talking about BECAUSE absolutely ALL of ‘my ideas’ STEM from a ‘closed mind’.

‘I’ wonder if ‘you’ realise just how STUPID ‘you’ coming across here.

@Acltalls

You cannot understand others if you know nothing about them, which is what happens when you don’t not read any philosophy.

AGAIN, what has absolutely ANY of this got to do with the Fact that I claim the Universe is infinite BECAUSE ‘the proof’ shows that It IS?

@Acltalls

@anew1

But, ‘the proof’ that the Universe is infinite is in the Fact that ‘space’ only stops or ends at and with a physical object.

If distance is space, then whether space stops at an object is entirely relative to which object you base that off of.

But ‘space’ always stops or ends at ‘an object’. Therefore, there is NO ‘whether’ ‘space’ stops at ‘an object’. ‘Space’ ALWAYS stops at objects.

And, also CONTRADICTORY to your other claim here, ‘space’ stopping at objects is absolutely NOT entirely relative to ‘which object’ I or you base that off of AT ALL.

Again, you really do say and claim some of the most weirdest and absurd things sometimes.

@Acltalls

Does the distance from one object change because there is another object in the way?

OF COURSE, when the objects move away from or closer to each other, OBVIOUSLY.

@Acltalls

No it does not,

AGAIN, you ask a question, and then answer it, and again you answer it as though ‘your answer’ is the one and only true and correct one. Which, again, is absolutely hilarious to watch you continually do.

Here is a suggestion for you, INSTEAD of asking questions here, which you are just going to answer “yourself” anyway, why do you not just write ‘the claim’, itself, which you believe to be the absolutely truth?

Now, once more, OBVIOUSLY when objects move closer to or away from each other, then ‘the distance’ changes. Again, the ‘space’ between the objects changes in lentgh, or distance.

What made you even believe that when the length between objects change ‘the distance’ does not?

@Acltalls

so in this way,

There is NO ‘this way’ BECAUSE ‘your way’ here is IDIOTIC and NONSENSICAL.

Even your words, “in the way” is ILLOGICAL and NONSENSICAL. What do you even mean by, “there is another object, in the way”, exactly?

“In the why” of ‘what’, exactly?

@Acltalls

distance would have to be infinite by your logic and could not be stopped by objects,

you have gone COMPLETELY INSANE here now.

Here you are ‘trying to’ claim that SOMEHOW ‘the distance’ HAS TO BE INFINITE, and LOL if ‘an object’ laughably got “in the way”.

Do you have absolutely any idea or clue as to just how NONSENSICAL you are being here?

And, LOL worse still ‘you’ claim that ‘these words’ of yours are ‘my logic’. you make me laugh “acltalls”.

you also are ‘trying to’ claim now that ‘space’ cannot be stopped ‘by objects’, which is even MORE INSANE.

@Acltalls

therefore making this ‘fact’ that you claim,

Once again, you INTRODUCE things, which, besides being BEYOND ABSURDITY, you also ‘try to’ claim that ‘they’ have something to do ‘with me’ or ‘with my words’. Which, again, is ABSOLUTELY ABSURD.

The only one you’re really arguing against here is “your” ‘self’.

Just so it is absolutely clear here ‘that’, which you introduced, is NOT ‘my claim’ AT ALL.

@Acltalls

completely false because it is entirely relative and lacks any form of absoluteness.

What you just said and claimed here is ‘completely false’ for the simple fact that it is all of your own made up ABSURDITY.

@Acltalls

Your proof relies on this fact, and due to this fact being untrue, your proof is no longer justified.

LOL See how again, like I have previously stated, ‘these people’ will ‘try’ to twist words and definitions around and use in them ‘a way’ so that somehow hopefully ‘they’ will back up and support their already well-maintained, strongly held beliefs of theirs.

Again, you INTRODUCED something of your own making, showed how Truly IDIOTIC ‘it’ is, and then claimed, rightly so, that ‘it’ is not justified. Which I TOTALLY AGREE WITH.

And, considering that ‘it’ had absolutely nothing at all to do with anything that I have said, what happened and occurred is ALL of your own making.

@Acltalls

Are you going to engage with this or just say that I am misinterpreting you?

1. I have already engaged with it.

2. I am still going to say that you are misinterpreting ‘my words’.

3. But, it appears you might have already KNOWN this anyway, right?

   @Acltalls

   Because for some reason, instead of actually engaging with anything I say most of the time, you just keep saying that you are misunderstood.

LOL BECAUSE you HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD.

@Acltalls

Actually engage with my argument and find where I am wrong rather than just saying nuh uh to it.

AGAIN, I HAVE ALREADY DONE THIS.