₦airaland Forum

TenQ:
Why then is it difficult to answer these two questions


Questions:
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?

Because I already answered them.

.

budaatum:
There. Though Unknown's defines it better, as does wiki.

Another example. If I physical was with you and spoke to you would you call my words you are hearing tangible?

budaatum:
There. Though Unknown's defines it better, as does wiki.

So as we can see touch is the central characteristic for determing if it is tangible or not. A mirror's image is NOT tangible since it cannot be touched. Even Wiki gives touch as central to it being tangible or not.

budaatum:
The image in a mirror is tangible because it can be perceived with the senses.

Do me a solid and post the meaning of tangible from the same source you used for intangible.

KnownUnknown:
After seven pages and all the software shenanigans, I conclude that intangibility is another attribute of this spirit thing.

The working definition of spirit is “non physical, invincible, and intangible” aka nothing

7 pages of round and round arguments about semantics with no point on what spirit is or how we can know it exists. Sounds exactly like nothing.

budaatum:
It would, my Lord, especially if you limit yourself to the most basic meaning.

Below is a definition that includes the use of all the senses, which is obviously far more than just that of touching.

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/intangible

So is the image in the mirror tangible or intangible.

TenQ:
budaatum refuses to learn even with correction.

And of course you know this and that is why you refuse to answer my question 4 and 5

Anything that is tangible will have at least one of these properties: mass, spatial dimension (length), Energy. This is what make it perceivable which physical senses hence which can be shown and touched and experienced.
There is not one single equipment other than with another software with which one can even perceive a software code.



Tell me you don't understand the implications of these two questions below?
Questions:
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?

It is you who doesn't understand the implications of this answer:

LordReed:
You cannot measure intangible things directly because surprise they are intangible.

to those questions. Think some more.

ocnovakmichael:
May be that is not an intelligent response, but an intelligent man says he's not had a miracle ever in his life and all you intelligentsias agree.

Miracle is the divine intervention in the course of life. His birth was a function of divine intervention yes or no?

Think about that!

Are you an illiterate who doesn't know about how human reproduction works? How is a sperm fertilising an ovum and producing a child 9 months later a miracle? At what point does this divine intervention enter into the equation in reproduction? When the god was watch the man fuçk his wife?

budaatum:
My Lord, tangible does not only mean touch. It also means feel, see, hear, etc.

If you can observe the "images on a screen or mirror", then those images on a screen or mirror are tangible in their own right since you can see and observe it, which you could not possibly do if it were intangible.

I do not need to "directly touch the software itself" in the machine, though I can argue that I could if I wanted to since I could very easily decompile the software so I can see it, which is what one does if one wants to debug the code in the machine. The point is that I must write tangible code in a tangible format on a tangible medium and tangibly give it to a tangible compiler to convert it to machine readable code that some are here claiming is intangible. I can even decompile the machine readable code back into its tangible human readable code, which I am arguing can not be done if the code in the machine is not tangible in itself.

Just think. I can be sitting here in my home instructing you in my mind to stick your fingers in your eyes, but the intangibility of that instruction would be obvious because you would neither see nor hear nor feel it in anyway and would not be able to follow the instruction in my mind. But as soon as I make the intangible instruction in my mind tangible for you to hear or read or see, you will be able to either follow it or tell me to go do one.

The contention here is the tangibility of the code when it is in the machine, but that to me sounds like asking me to prove with my naked eye that there is machine code in the machine, which is simply oxymoronic since I am not limited to proving anything only with my naked eyes and not with all my other senses.

No my dear buda it only refers to touch.

TenQ:
Since you do not have an answer, go sleep

LoLz. Use those 2 remaining cells so you stop knocking your thick skull against something so simple.

budaatum:
Software may indeed produce non-physical effects (though that does depend on the effect you mean), but the software itself must physically exist for it to produce any effect at all.

Just think. If I were to give you a software called Microsoft Windows, you will be receiving physical code, be it on a disk or downloaded. I can't just think it in my head and give it to you.

Same as thoughts. I can think in my head what I am writing here, but until I make my thoughts physical on here for you to receive and read, you'd have nothing whatsoever to respond to.

Same as air we breathe too, which we can not see with the naked eye, but can detect with other senses.

Do be aware that when they say "see", I read 'detect' with any of the other senses. I don't just have to look with my eyes, since I can smell with my nose, and hear with my ears, and feel with my hands etc, and I can even enhance those senses so they "see" better what one can not see with the naked eye.

However, they have not yet told me how they enhance any of their senses so they see the spirits they claim they "see".

My dear buda we have had a discussion along this line in the past. Remember when we spoke about images on a screen or mirror? Those images are intangible, you cannot physical touch them but you can carry the medium they are on. It is the same with software. You can physically carry the medium it's on but you cannot directly touch the software itself.

Aemmyjah:
Lemme ask him

LordReed, as our dumdum professor with a PhD from dumdum college, kindly educate us

LoLz! Omomo keep waiting for me to spoon feed your understanding.

TenQ:
Questions:
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?

You like making simple things difficult!

No you are! Just think about it some more with those 2 brain cells that are still working in your head. LoLz.

budaatum:
That, my Lord, would be the day.

As we can all see right. LoLz. The dishonesty is mind numbing.

TenQ:
You just answered question Three:

It now remains 4 and 5

Questions:
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?

LoLz. Keep wait for me to spoon feed you understanding.

TenQ:
That was not the issue.
The issue had been:

These are the Questions you have not answered:
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?




No more no less!

IT IS the ISSUE. You cannot measure intangible things directly because surprise they are intangible. But go ahead keep knocking your thick skull against this simple thing. LoLz.

Aemmyjah:
Our dumdum professor, LordReed knows all things

And you dumbarse know nothing.

labake1:
Why is it difficult to get these qualities in a man?

Na only you like better thing. Any man that has these qualities is probably already married or at the least has a babe. And if he doesn't womanise he won't look twice at you.

TenQ:
They throw tantrums when they can't answer simple questions like an Autistic kindergarten pupil

Bwahahahahaha! You that can't get it through your thick skull that intangible things can manifest physical effects and need a kindergarten teacher to explain that to you. LMAO!

TenQ:
Boo hoo!: cry me a tear!
From one who escapes answering Questions!

LoLz. Yes you slowpoke cry me a dishonest river as you are wont to do. Bwahahahahahahaha!

triplechoice:
It's not only that he doesn't want his beliefs critiqued, but also that he is very clueless about what he has been trying to explain and because of that he cannot see how he has been fumbling with it.

True that. He has been on this software shtick for years now but has not for once made any reasonable point. All he does is bleat on about nonsense.

basilico:
Almost all the jurors rely on NYTimes. NYT is worse than a conspiracy theorist. With qanon you already know there is likely no proof.
NYT is a very wealthy and resourceful publication that spreads lies about Trump 24/7.
Trump is fuccked up in this case before it even begins

Yeah he shouldn't have committed chargeable actions.

TenQ:
Paid you back with your OWN coin: why are you troubled!
Didn't I tell you exactly what I was doing?

Did you read this in my post header?

I will use your exact method to answer Your questions except you FIRST answer my three other questions


My Question still stand:


In case you want us to move forward:


You Did NOT answer ALL my Questions: you answered Questions 1 and 2 ONLY
I promised to answer ALL your questions BUT ONLY after you have answered my Unanswered Questions: except you want me not to answer your own questions too. This is just fair!

Again:
These are the Questions you have not answered:
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?


OR take the answers above as appropriate for your Questions!


Otherwise, I take it that a Dishonest Coward is FLEEING an intellectual conversation because he is boxed in the hole of his own logic: If this is your option, please have a nice day ahead!

Again you are the dishonest coward who doesn't want his belief critiqued that's why you dishonestly answered. It should be clear to any one observing that you and the others like you are nothing but dishonest and stupid imbeciles.

basilico:
You lack knowledge. Judge doesn't want any juror who reads qanon. He is OK with NYT.
Qanon and NYT are no different. NYT is worse because its supposed to be credible, yet it spews lies from cockcrow to sunset.
These are your jurors sources .
Get this book from Amazon.
cc ijebosb

Ahh! You want conspiracy theorists on the jury. Figures.

basilico:
Is there amy difference between qanon and NYT?
Pick just one topic.

LoLz! We are talking about one thing and you want to deflect to another, your usual MO.

TenQ:
You are NOTHING but a Big IGNORANT Coward who FLEE from answering Direct Questions:

Paying you Back with your own Coin: why thou get angry?
Why don't you just accept "whatever" I post whether is has anything to do with the Question of not?

I HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTIONS (exactly as you answered mine)


"I answered your questions if you don't answer mine then no further conversation is necessary because that is the stupid game people like you play. You duck and weave when it gets to you answering questions. Not playing that game with you."


In case you want us to move forward:


You Did NOT answer ALL my Questions: you answered Questions 1 and 2 ONLY
I promised to answer ALL your questions BUT ONLY after you have answered my Unanswered Questions: except you want me not to answer your own questions too. This is just fair!

Again:
These are the Questions you have not answered:
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?


OR take the answers above as appropriate for your Questions!


Otherwise, I take it that a Dishonest Coward is FLEEING an intellectual conversation because he is boxed in the hole of his own logic: If this is your option, please have a nice day ahead!

Bwahahahahaha! The dishonest coward here is you. You answered my questions with what can only be described as dishonesty and a blatant attempt to not answer the questions while pretend. You were even very transparent with it yet you want to point fingers at me. LMFAO!

You are just a dunce masquerading as someone with more than two brain cells.

TenQ:
I will use your exact method to answer Your questions except you FIRST answer my three other questions

Oya answer my own questions.
1. What is spirit?
ANSWER: Many atheist think spirits do not exist because it cannot be quantified

2. What is the spiritual realm?
ANSWER: The Soul/Spirit can be observed or measured by its effects. Something so simple that was staring at you since your first response to me on this thread.

3. How can we obtain evidence of the existence of spirit and spiritual realm?
ANSWER: Dumdum, you observe or measure the effects of the soul/spirit!
If we blast you with questions now you'll start going from pillar post and not answer any.

I have given you the kind of answer you gave me:
If you want to KNOW the REAL ANSWERS to your QUESTIONS, answer my three other Questions TRUTHFULLY





You Did NOT answer ALL my Questions: you answered Questions 1 and 2 ONLY
I promised to answer ALL your questions BUT ONLY after you have answered my Unanswered Questions: except you want me not to answer your own questions too. This is just fair!

Again:
These are the Questions you have not answered:
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?


OR take the answers above as appropriate for your Questions!

LMAO! There you have it folks, prime example of disingenuousness.

TenQ:
You Did NOT answer ALL my Questions: you answered Questions 1 and 2 ONLY




I promised to answer ALL your questions BUT ONLY after you have answered my Unanswered Questions: except you want me not to answer your own questions too. This is just fair!

Again:
These are the Questions you have not answered:
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?

I don't care that you PROMISED. Answer them now.

I answered your 5 questions that you don't like my answers is not my problem.

TenQ:
Finally, you developed some balls
My Question ONE:
1. If an existence is not tangible i.e. cannot be measured in terms of Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time, does it prove it doesn't exist?
Your Response

Correct: Meaning that existence cannot be proved only by physical measurables like Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time
Conclusion: It is ignorance that makes Atheis require physical proof of existence such as the Soul/Spirit as a proof of its existence


My Question TWO:
2. Is a software within a machine REAL or not?
Your Response:

Correct: Meaning that an EXISTENCE can Be REAL without having ANY measurable physical evidence of like Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time


My Question THREE:
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?

This is NOT the Question sir.
Can a software WITHIN a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means? In other words without using another software, can you measure or detect the presence of a computer program running inside an AI machine?


My Question FOUR:
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
Your Response:

This is not the Question!
Is it WISDOM to insist on requiring a physical evidence for a software withing an AI machine to conclude that it exist or STUPIDITY?

You are required to take either of the two positions and then give explanations or reasons if you think it requres it.

My Question FIVE:
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?
Your Response:

You gave not a single HOW TO in question 5.

The Question again: Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?



I promise to answer ALL your questions BUT ONLY after you have answered my Unanswered Questions: except you want me not to answer your own questions too. This is just fair!

Again:
These are the Questions you have not answered:
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?

I answered your questions if you don't answer mine then no further conversation is necessary because that is the stupid game people like you play. You duck and weave when it gets to you answering questions. Not playing that game with you.

TenQ:
My question was not about the effect software produces BUT the software itself.
Is the software not real inside an AI machine ?
Why do you think my questions are difficult for you to answer: are they not straight forward questions that require simple answers?


Let me go with you:
How do you determine by effects that an AI Machine has EFFECTS such that the effects to you is an evidence that such a Machine is run by a Software?
i.e. What are the characteristics you see that make you conclude that an AI Machine has a software (even when you can't quantify, handle or touch the software itself without another software)?

I have answered your questions now answer mine.

TenQ:
Again my Challenge to Atheists:
1. If an existence is not tangible i.e. cannot be measured in terms of Mass, Dimension, Energy and Time, does it prove it doesn't exist?
2. Is a software within a machine REAL or not?
3. Can the software within a machine be "measured" or "quantified" by any physical means?
4. Is it wisdom to insist on a physical quantification of a software within a machine to conclude that it exist?
5. Tell me, how can one prove the existence of a software WITHIN an AI machine's CPU or MEMORY without the use of another software?



Otherwise, admit that you are a bunch of good for nothing noise makers!

Cc:
LordReed,
triplechoice

LoLz! Please continue to expose your ignorance so we can school you.

1. Nope. Tangibility has never been a characteristic of existence. Your insistence in saying atheists want only physically tangible stuff shows your own depravity.

2. Software is real.

3. Software can be observed or measured by its effects. Something so simple that was staring at you since your first response to me on this thread.

4. It is the dumdum who doesn't realise that this intangible software is producing tangible effects and so thinks physical evidence of software is impossible to obtain. What a dullard.

5. Dumdum, you observe or measure the effects of the software!

If we blast you with questions now you'll start going from pillar post and not answer any.

Oya answer my own questions.

1. What is spirit?

2. What is the spiritual realm?

3. How can we obtain evidence of the existence of spirit and spiritual realm?

Just 3 questions o, let's see how you fumble. Bwahahahahaha!