Friday, October 26, 2007

The Delusion of Delusion

Recently someone using the pseudonym 'brucev' left a couple of comments of one of my past blog entries, no doubt hoping that I wouldn't see them and that they'd be left to stand unchallenged.

Unfortunately 'brucev' was too pusillanimous to declare openly whether he was a theist, though it seems likely from his comments that he is - and forgive me if 'brucev' should be either feminine or androgynous, but allow that I use the pronoun 'he' simply for brevity. Nevertheless, irrespective of brucev's gender, it is quite clear that he is either duplicitous or disingenuous, given the tenor of his 'drive-by' comments, since he asserts that I would not accept any evidence that what he refers to as 'God the Father' exists, but notably fails to produce a single scintilla of evidence that this fabled entity does. Naturally, I have challenged brucev to do so, but I doubt that he will respond - unsurprising, really, since theists have failed this challenge completely over the millennia, which is why they can be accurately diagnosed as suffering from delusional psychosis; in simply terms, they are mentally ill or, in vulgar usage, 'mad'.

Presumably brucev is aware that there is no credible evidence that this so-called 'god' to which he refers so reverentially exists- but if not, then he is truly delusional - which is why he makes an appeal to authority, in the persona of Roger Primrose. Unfortunately, the claims which brucev attributes to Primrose do not have the authority which he would wish to confer on them, but even if they did, they are both irrelevant and nonsensical from a mathematical standpoint, as I have pointed out in my response to his moronic comments. Furthermore, even if Pemrose's estimates (to use his own words, not 'calculations' as brucev lies claims) of the probability of the cosmos coming into existence without some form of cognitive design and direction were correct, they would no more prove the existence of this 'god' to which brucev refers to than the existence of a pumpkin proves that birds were designed to fly, or some such equally irrelevant metaphor.

Brucev also fails to explain why this 'God the Father' to which he refers and credits with designing the cosmos is any more credible that the 4,397 other so-called 'gods' of creation that mankind has, at the last count, invented over the 12,000 years or so since relatively modern humanoids trod the earth. In short, where is his evidence that the cosmos was not created by Ctulthu, Negominod, Qu-D'a'athlon, Yug'th'lato, Tu-tal-em'pthon, or Pan himself - or even that its existence is simply a figment of his imagination?

In conclusion, as a mathematician of some small repute myself, I estimate that the probability of the existence of anyone by the name of brucelev is in the region of 1 to the exponential power of 287 trillion zeroes, but that if any such person does in fact exist, the probability of him being a delusional psychopath is 1.

In other words, brucelev, put up some real evidence that this 'god' you refer to exists, or accept that you are a sad, delusional, psychopathological moron.

No comments: