Parakeets do not exist.

Page 1 of 5 [ 76 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Oct 2009, 2:22 am

Parakeets do not exist. And nobody can prove otherwise.

ZEGH8578
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,532

30 Oct 2009, 2:28 am

does photographic evidence count?

_________________
''In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center.''

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Oct 2009, 2:30 am

No, because photographs can be altered.

ZEGH8578
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,532

30 Oct 2009, 2:32 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

No, because photographs can be altered.

i saw one, but then again, i could be a filthy liar, but hey
that IS a pretty realistic photo. its difficult to create such a natural looking parakeet from scratch. "photoshop" doesnt even come close

_________________
''In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center.''

Jaythefordman
Raven
Raven

Joined: 26 Aug 2009
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 117
Location: Perth, Australia

30 Oct 2009, 2:33 am

Um, not quite sure how to respond to this.

We got millions here in Aus, you want me to catch one and send it to you?

Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Arizona

30 Oct 2009, 2:48 am

How do I know you really exist?

ZEGH8578
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,532

30 Oct 2009, 2:55 am

how do i know none of you guys are chat-bots?

me and a friend made a chatbot, sometimes it was almost coherent, and that was 10 years ago.

maybe im here talking to myself

_________________
''In the world I see - you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center.''

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Oct 2009, 3:11 am

Jaythefordman wrote:

Um, not quite sure how to respond to this.

We got millions here in Aus, you want me to catch one and send it to you?

I actually have 4 cockatiels and 1 budgie already. Don't think it would be legal to send one internationally anymore, but it would be cool to see them in the wild sometime.

My thread here is facetious, mainly. It is arguing the negative and thereby forcing everyone else to argue the positive, because of the maxim that "only those who make a positive claim need to provide proof" or something along those lines. It is basically a cop-out which is mainly performed by trolls and militant atheists. In this thread, I would hope to make such a maxim visibly ludicrous by claiming that something which is obviously true to be false. Obvious can be considered "argumetum ad numeram" if ones likes, or some other fallacy, but I am not here to prove the existence of such creatures, but instead to follow the previously stated maxim.

It is always easier to tear down then to build up; to destroy than to construct; to argue against rather than argue for.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Oct 2009, 3:17 am

ZEGH8578 wrote:

how do i know none of you guys are chat-bots?

me and a friend made a chatbot, sometimes it was almost coherent, and that was 10 years ago.

maybe im here talking to myself

No, you're not talking to yourself or to a chatbot. I'm actually an android.

zena4
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2009
Age: 65
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,054

30 Oct 2009, 3:24 am

Of what kind?

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Oct 2009, 5:49 am

zena4 wrote:

Of what kind?

Corporeally, I have an endoskeleton composed of hydroxyapatite crystals arranged by microscopic robots for optimum compression and tensile strength, I have many trillions of microscopic robots of various types performing different functions all utilizing nanotechnological machinery within each of them, each cell and the functions of the machinery uses adenosine triphosphate to power each individual reaction with optimum efficiency, the computing interface I use can process background functions at the CPU rate of approximately 1 petahertz (which can be stated as 1,000 terahertz or 1,000,000 gigahertz also) and I can store up to 250 terabytes of data in memory, and my optical systems have a resolution of 15 megapixels for live video.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Oct 2009, 5:53 am

zena4 wrote:

Of what kind?

Or do you mean what kind of parakeet? Parakeets in general, perhaps budgies specifically.

zena4
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2009
Age: 65
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,054

30 Oct 2009, 6:02 am

Thanks for the answers.
But... Can you post a pic of each (in 3D if you have) please so I can get it better?

Like that, it doesn't mean much to me

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

30 Oct 2009, 6:22 am

zena4 wrote:

Thanks for the answers.
But... Can you post a pic of each (in 3D if you have) please so I can get it better?

Like that, it doesn't mean much to me

As for the system I've described, that machine is the human body.

As for the birds:

zena4
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Jan 2009
Age: 65
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,054

30 Oct 2009, 6:30 am

Ooooh thanks again :heart:

Gromit
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 May 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,302
Location: In Cognito

30 Oct 2009, 12:04 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

My thread here is facetious, mainly. It is arguing the negative and thereby forcing everyone else to argue the positive, because of the maxim that "only those who make a positive claim need to provide proof" or something along those lines.

And are you determined to dispute any proof you are offered? Just trying to save you a lot of tedious typing.

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

It is basically a cop-out which is mainly performed by trolls and militant atheists. In this thread, I would hope to make such a maxim visibly ludicrous by claiming that something which is obviously true to be false.

I inferred that intention with a high degree of confidence just from reading the thread title and the author.

The thing about parakeets is that one can go to where they live and see them in the flesh. If you were determined to be solipsistic you could claim them to be a hallucination. Then I would congratulate you on your imagination and let you get on with it.

Are you saying there is an equal obligation to prove positives and negatives, even when it is impossible to prove the non-existence of an entity somewhere in the unobserved universe?

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

the computing interface I use can process background functions at the CPU rate of approximately 1 petahertz

On what do you base that estimate?

Page 1 of 5 [ 76 posts ] Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Jump to:

Parakeets do not exist. Post Reply New Topic

Parakeets do not exist.