| Ultimate Blitz Challenge (2016) |
|
Played in St. Louis, Missouri, USA 28-29 April 2016. Players received 5 minutes for the whole game with a 3-second increment from move one. Games started at 2:00 pm USA/Eastern. Prize fund: $50,000. Live games: http://www.uschesschamps.com/2016-u...
|
|
| page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36 |
     |
 |
|
| page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36 |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 30 OF 31 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-18-16 | | diceman: <not not:
Obama>
Proof God exists! |
|
| May-18-16 | | Jim Bartle: The question isn't whether it scares you. The question is whether you are capable of recognizing mockery. I would have thought someone on such a <higher level> would be more aware. <...some people really think like this and may be reading along. > I seriously doubt any believers in the Flying Spaghetti Monster are reading this thread. |
|
| May-18-16 | | Big Pawn: <May-18-16
Premium Chessgames Member perfidious: <Clemens....My guess is that you just like to debate people....>
He likes to browbeat others, not have the healthy give and take implicit in the concept of debate.>There is no compromise:
A. God exists
B. God does not exist
However, participants in the discussion need to know that truth claims require reasons and arguments. Only someone on the pop culture level will say, "Huh? Atheism needs no proof. You can't prove s negative". That's simply not a statement that is remotely entertained in modern philosophy. Any research done by anyone here to refute this point will show instead that I'm correct in relaying this information. Atheism needs arguments if we are to believe it is true that God does not exist. If you want to shirk your burden of proof, then walk a long ways toward theism starting now and stop at agnosticism. But, you must at that point concede that theism is possibly true and that atheism is possibly false. |
|
| May-18-16 | | diceman: <not not:
when the sun goes down, it will all stop>
I think it will by "Supernova." |
|
| May-18-16 | | diceman: <Jim Bartle:
The question is whether you are capable of recognizing mockery.> In liberalism, that's what's known as "debate." |
|
| May-18-16 | | Big Pawn: <not not: atheist are good people, cos they reason things out> I'm so glad to hear you say this!
I'm going to call you Mr. Reason.
Please tell me <mr reason>, your reasons and arguments for think atheism is true. I see you went to some lengths to say that is Jesus people are silly. Very convincing!
Maybe I should put my tail between my legs and run home now? Not a chance! You are the one that is silly, as you talk about atheism and reasons while giving none yourself! Step into the ring with me and let's see your arguments, evidence and reasons for the truth of "God does not exist" <to the posters on this forum page> I realize that this is s chess page, unlike the <Rogoff> forum where topics such as these are commonly discussed, so this is my last post here. I know, I know, you'll all miss me!
So if anyone wants to debate me about anything to do with this, please find me in my forum or the <Rogoff> page. Be well. |
|
May-18-16
 | | perfidious: <Appaz: I didn't know you accepted the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a divine entity, <Big Pawn>.> We all get our jollies one way or another. |
|
May-18-16
 | | MissScarlett: <<Did you know that of the 10 highest IQ's on earth, 8 are theists? And of those 8 6 are Christians?>> That list can't be right. I'm not on it. |
|
| May-18-16 | | Appaz: <<Big Prawn> We have good reasons to believe that a Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist.> Here is the claim, now prove it or accept His existence. <What kind of evidence would we expect to find? That's the question.> That's up to you to tell me. You have the burden of proof for non-existence since you made the claim. [...]
<Any truth claim requires evidence, reasons and arguments for justification. "God does not exist" is one such claim. It's a truth claim; a proposition.> Hey, don't change the subject, we were talking about His Holy Noodleness. Now, disprove Him or reject your false claims. |
|
| May-18-16 | | Absentee: <Big Pawn: <keypusher: <Did you know that of the 10 highest IQ's on earth, 8 are theists? And of those 8 6 are Christians?> Since no global reliable register of IQ scores exists, this claim is utter crap.> Sorry this fact annoys you so much. Try to cheer up. Have a GREAT day!!> That article doesn't have a leg to stand on.
The methodology is completely off. From the premise:
<Another important point is that there are competing ideas on which tests most accurately measure intelligence. Not everyone takes the same IQ test, and there are enough claims, counterclaims, and disputes in this subject to drive a researcher bananas! All I could do was read everything I could find on it, and rank the candidates based both upon their scores and on who seemed to be the most unanimously agreed upon as worthy (ignoring many "fan clubs" along the way).> The author picked a few scores from different tests, with no indication of reliability or even how they scale to each other, and heaped them together. He also suffers from a severe and apparently unrecognized case of confirmation bias, picking the data that could support his argument, in such a way as to support his argument, and ignoring the rest.
This would be enough to can the article from even the skankiest peer-reviewed journal, but it gets worse when you see that half of the data is just made up: <has apparently [...] has apparently [...] is alleged [...] has apparently [...]> No, this doesn't work.
If you want to discuss something, make sure your arguments hold. Or at least that they don't leak as badly, because if you try something like that in any semi-serious context, you'll get ripped to shreds. And you might not even notice, which is even worse. |
|
May-18-16
| | perfidious: <Absentee....If you want to discuss something, make sure your arguments hold. Or at least that they don't leak as badly, because if you try something like that in any semi-serious context, you'll get ripped to shreds. And you might not even notice, which is even worse.> How would <antonin> ever take notice? He would be too busy slagging someone or something else. |
|
May-18-16
 | | OhioChessFan: <Absentee: <has apparently [...] has apparently [...] is alleged [...] has apparently [...]>> Yeah, reads like an evolutionist's article in a peer reviewed publication. <"generally negligible"... "Biologists.....curiously reluctant"......"reasonable to infer"......"sometimes"......"often"....... "some debate"......."broad agreement"......."some drawbacks"......"most likely"......"infer"........"usually"....... "tend to be"....."not necessarily futile" (yeah, boy, <that> is sure to get people on board the program)...... > Gregor Samsa Mendel chessforum (kibitz #103) |
|
| May-18-16 | | chessalem: <So> if anyone wants to debate me about anything to do with this, please find me in my forum or the Rogoff page. <So> Long
Does God exist.
I think <So.>
Go Wesley...<So>n of ChessGod. |
|
| May-18-16 | | chessalem: Harvard study - average IQ by religion - 04-07-2010, 02:58 AM Muslim- 92
Christian- 98
Pagan- 98
Hindu- 104
Buddhist- 108
Jew- 115
Atheist- 119
Chessalem- 150
Wesley So- 150 |
|
| May-18-16 | | chessalem: What's the difference between pagan and atheist? |
|
| May-18-16 | | chessalem: REVISED IQ SCORE:
chessalem- 162
Wesley So- 162 |
|
| May-18-16 | | chessalem: Wesley currently no. 2 chess.com bullet chess player: <Name Rating Win Loss Draw Last OnlineGM Hikaru 3200 5835 (89%) 510 (8%) 221 (3%) 5 hours ago GM gmwesley_so 2942 144 (61%) 67 (29%) 24 (10%) 31 minutes ago GM LiemLe 2937 130 (70%) 43 (23%) 14 (7%) 12 hours ago GM Noukii 2921 5139 (57%) 3447 (38%) 498 (5%) 35 minutes ago> Wesley also no. 2 blitzplayer
<GM Hikaru 2902 1882 (86%) 183 (8%) 132 (6%) 5 hours agoGM gmwesley_so 2842 79 (65%) 26 (21%) 17 (14%) 33 minutes ago GM LevonAronian 2807 4 (36%) 3 (27%) 4 (36%) 6 weeks ago IM Sophiste2 2790 85 (67%) 31 (24%) 11 (9%) 2 weeks ago> |
|
| May-18-16 | | morfishine: <chessalem> A 'Pagan' actually worships something, but more along the lines of nature, earth or idols and is considered not a Christian, Jew, or Muslim (or probably also not a member of the other major religions like Hindu, Buddha or Shinto) An atheist is simply one, who when they die, is all dressed up with nowhere to go ***** |
|
| May-18-16 | | chessalem: I worship Wesley So- <So>n of chessgod. |
|
| May-18-16 | | tuttifrutty: <chessalem: REVISED IQ SCORE: chessalem- 162
Wesley So- 162>
Tuttifrutty-161 |
|
| May-18-16 | | Clemens Scheitz: < diceman's Ahhh, that's how you fix it. Put <Positive> in front of it>. In case you are not joking, there is a distinction between Negative and Positive Atheism, you can see it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negat... |
|
| May-18-16 | | Overgod: <Big Pawn: What do you mean? I copied this right from you: <If there is one piece of advice I can give to anybody here (including you, <Pawnsac>), it would be this: believe in nothing...> So I took your advice right there and decided to implement it by not believing your post to be true. Now answer my questions:
Atheism is expressed in the proposition "God does not exist". What good reasons and arguments are there to think this is true? What should anyone think that atheism is true?
Atheism makes a truth claim: God does not exist. Truth claims need arguments, evidence and reasons to justify them. What are those reasons?
>
I actually agree with you that atheists have no logical right to make a claim about the existence (or non-existence) of a God/god. However, semantics aside, the general atheist simply asserts that unless you can demonstrate empirically the existence of something (be it God, the pink unicorn flying in the sky, etc.) you have no sensible and logical right to believe in such. In other words, there is no justification for the belief that (at the very least) the Christian God exists. However, I never claimed to be an atheist. I am also not a theist in the sense that <Pawnsac> suggests. If you cannot grasp what I have written prior, then you clearly do not have the aptitude required to further discuss this issue with me. The claim that a reasonable atheist would make is the following: I cannot prove, nor can I disprove the existence of a God. And this inability indicates that I should ignore the claim as content-free. In other words: If I count five marbles in a bag, then it is useless to suppose the existence of a sixth marble, regardless of whether or not I can prove it. It's called noisy data. And noisy data in research is useless data. Supposing the existence of a hidden 6th marble, serves no purpose. Hence, I may safely dispense with the notion. It is this same idea guiding the proverbial atheist. Full stop.
And this is where the majority of religious folk fail in their thinking. An atheist is simply an individual who does not wish to take on faith a single thing. A religious nut, on the other hand, will believe in anything he fancies, including the flying pink unicorn. Do you understand this?
This being the case, I am not an atheist. So quit labeling me. I explained already to <Pawnsac> how things are, and they are not beliefs (to me). I have a certain understanding of this cosmos. This understanding is based on my personal research. My research may well be erroneous. However, I believe my research to be correct, which is why I have a particular viewpoint. Unlike you (and most other religious nuts), I am capable of reviewing/updating/upgrading my viewpoints according to the evidence I obtain. This doesn't necessarily imply that they are falsifiable, either. I have always had a problem with so-called 'falsifiability.' How can anybody attempt to falsify that I am alive, for instance? The idea of falsifiability simply suggests that an assertion is subject to experimental scrutiny. But unless we experimentally scrutinize every single object in the cosmos, we cannot scientifically claim (according to the Popperian view) that it definitively exists. Popper's scientific philosophy is in desperate need of a rigorous update. Anyway, I think I'll leave you be now. You don't seem to be able to comprehend what you read. |
|
| May-18-16 | | schweigzwang: What the ... ? I seem to have ended up in the Rogoff forum again. Damn, I was looking for that St. Louis Blitz thingy. |
|
| May-18-16 | | Overgod: <Clemens Scheitz: <Overgod> I'm glad to hear about your passion for music and I wonder if your "superior" music taste is as good as mine (ha!). When you get a chance please comment on a couple of pieces I was showing <Visayanbraindoctor> under "Russian Team Championship". As far as <...our cosmos is an immanent as well as transcendent intelligent creation, govern by beings trillions of years ahead of us in evolution> I would like to ask you if you believe that these "superior beings" have any empathy or concern for the suffering of innocent sentient "lower beings", and if so, what is, according to you, the reason why they did not use their power to improve the conditions under which life started to unfold in this planet. I'm counting on you not to throw the " Original Sin" irrational experiment into your answer. If you are tempted, save it and less just concentrate on the music.
>
Regarding the music: just post it here, and I'll look into it when I have some time. Regarding your questions concerning higher and lower beings as well as the notion of 'original sin.' Please elaborate on what you mean by original sin. After said elaboration, I may endeavor to address your question... |
|
May-18-16
 | | chancho: <Why Faith Is Important
Faith is an expression of hope for something better. More than a wish, it is closer to a belief, but not quite. A belief is rooted in the mind. Faith is based in the heart. We act in faith when there is no guarantee, no certainty. No one knows what kind of life an infant will have, yet people continue to have children. No one can know how life with our mates will turn out, yet we continue to have faith our relationships will last a lifetime. Faith speaks the language of the heart.
It is an expression of hope that goes beyond the conscious mind. All that we hold precious rests upon a faith in people, their potential not yet fulfilled. The evidence of history points us in a different direction—the world is full of ugliness, brutality, and injustices. Yet there is also tenderness, kindness and concern and that takes the bigger part of our hearts. Without faith in ourselves we would hold ourselves cheap, and without a faith in others we could never live as free people. This is the water that quenches parched souls.
Here is a famous parable: Once a traveler came across an old woman who was stooped over what appeared to be thin sticks. He asked the woman what she was doing.
“I am planting orange trees,” she explained.
The traveler thought this was a waste of her time.
“Why do you bother?” he asked. “You are an old woman. These saplings will take years before they will be old enough to bear fruit. You will be long gone by then.” “True enough,” she answered. “But I don’t plant these trees for myself but for those who will come after me, just as those before me planted the trees that bear the fruit that I eat today.” ~ Arthur Dobrin>
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo... |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 30 OF 31 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
NOTE: Create an account today
to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users.
Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username,
then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.
|
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
- No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
- No trolling.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
- Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.
Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic.
This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general,
visit the Kibitzer's Café.
|
Messages posted by Chessgames members
do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration. |
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC
|
Kibitzing
