Contrary to popular belief, Usenet is not dead, and in fact certain newsgroups are quite active, such as the (in)famous creation/evolution “controversy” discussion newsgroup, which I am proud to say I am a member of. I do not believe that Usenet will ever truly die for as long as there are people who prefer the text of a command line over the shitty Web 2.0, Usenet will live on.

In order to get onto Usenet you need a newsreader and a newsserver, something like Mozilla Thunderbird for the newsreader and for the newsserver would do, both are free and vastly superior to Google Groups, the web-based Usenet interface.

Have fun!

Addressing “criticism”

On Usenet some trolls have raised some vacuous, so-called “criticisms” in response to my essay called “A Purposeless Universe“, one of these so-called “criticisms” is reproduced down below:

Your argument seems to be that because we are unable to recognize any
sign of awareness, that means that the he universe has no awareness.
You have a rather exaggerated opinion of our capabilities, that if we
can’t see something, it therefore mustn’t exist. – Martin Harran, Original post available here.

One notices that the “critic” above refuses to address how we can be able to recognize signs of awareness within a universe devoid of any signs of awareness or any other form of cognitive activity. This is the same for the other trolls as well, of which I refuse to repost their so-called “criticisms” for both the sake of brevity and to avoid repetitiveness within my refutation of their crap.

One also notices that said troll disses our capabilities as a species, apparently the scientific method can only go so far, without any justification for this incredulity. Really, this troll engages in a fallacious argument from incredulity here. Note that there’s no way to falsify his assertion, he’s claiming that the burden of proof is on me, the author, to show that the universe isn’t aware when it’s the other way around.

The entirety of our knowledge as a species can be derived from two sources, a priori reasoning and a posteriori reasoning, essentially rationalism and empiricism, respectively. A priori reasoning is knowledge derived from logical deductions and rational analysis, and a posteriori reasoning is knowledge derived from empirical observations.

These two forms of reasoning are what the scientific method is based off of, and to diss the best way that we, as a species, can gather knowledge is very insulting and absolutely REEKS of arrogance. Perhaps said troll will be willing to explain how we can be able to detect evidence that our universe is aware and capable of cognitive activity?

Don’t plan on it, if there’s anything I’ve learned over the years, trolls always refuse to respond to challenges in an honest and direct way. There’s no reason to suspect otherwise.