Numbers...

[Res Ipsa]

That's not what the Schroedinger's cat thought experiment shows. It does not assert that the observer has any control over whether the cat is alive or dead when the box is opened. Nor can the observer effect the result of the double slit experiment through force of will. PG can correct me, but what you are talking about is the result of "taking a measurement", not the characteristics of the observer.

I didn't assert that it did.

What did you assert?

[Valo]

I didn't assert that it did.

What did you assert?

Go read it a few posts up.

[Res Ipsa]

What did you assert?

Go read it a few posts up.

If I got it wrong, you should easily be able to correct me. But you won't. Because it would show that you are relying on some trivial difference.

[Valo]

Go read it a few posts up.

If I got it wrong, you should easily be able to correct me. But you won't. Because it would show that you are relying on some trivial difference.

That's not true. It's almost impossible to correct people unless they want to think otherwise.

[Res Ipsa]

If I got it wrong, you should easily be able to correct me. But you won't. Because it would show that you are relying on some trivial difference.

That's not true. It's almost impossible to correct people unless they want to think otherwise.

Yes, it is. I'll do it right here with your last post. My post didn't say anything about persuading me of anything. It says that, if I got it wrong, you should be able to easily to post an explanation of how I was wrong. Like I just did in this post with your last comment. Simply asserting "I didn't say that" without any explanation is a tactic of evasion.

[Valo]

That's not true. It's almost impossible to correct people unless they want to think otherwise.

Yes, it is. I'll do it right here with your last post. My post didn't say anything about persuading me of anything. It says that, if I got it wrong, you should be able to easily to post an explanation of how I was wrong. Like I just did in this post with your last comment. Simply asserting "I didn't say that" without any explanation is a tactic of evasion.

No it isn't.

[Res Ipsa]

Yes, it is. I'll do it right here with your last post. My post didn't say anything about persuading me of anything. It says that, if I got it wrong, you should be able to easily to post an explanation of how I was wrong. Like I just did in this post with your last comment. Simply asserting "I didn't say that" without any explanation is a tactic of evasion.

No it isn't.

Say goodnight, gracie. Your schtick is even older than me.

[Valo]

No it isn't.

Say goodnight, gracie. Your schtick is even older than me.

Goodnight.

[High Spy]

Marcus is about as clever as a toilet lever.

Whose to say a toilet lever ain’t clever.

Bears repeating, as does the fact that the magnitude of the earthquake that landed Moroni’s instrument was a 5.7.

Thank you for supplying yet another datapoint.

So, still no response to the basic properties of numbers debunking your 'magic' claims. No surprise. And your celebration of earthquakes that destroy lives is as distasteful as ever.

The stars aligned in 1957 like the Mazzaroth video I’ve posted multiple times. 57 became a marker, much like placing Gods fingerprint on the downing of Moroni’s instrument. The timing pattern shown at march8miracle.org shows that it was done in Christ’s name, thereby assuring us that it wasn’t of evil origin. Else said event would just be another meaningless earthquake, except for the fact that The Wicker Man also decried the deception that is the Angel Moroni. Really it was Parley P. Pratt that would peddle his wares on his annual wagon route.

(Downing … Landing)

. . . * . . . . . . . . **

[Dr. Shades]

The is the classic crackpot paradigm: Scientists can't explain everything, so the crap I make up is just as good.

Indeed. I'm sure you've noticed how pathologically often both Mopologists and rank-and-file Mormons employ it to explain away contradictions within their scriptures and teachings. It's like they have nothing else in their arsenal.