| 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 31 OF 31 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| 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... |
|
| May-19-16 | | iking: <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> .... as a Christian, i do believe in the resurrection of the dead, the great and the small in the last day .... judgment DAY. |
|
| May-19-16 | | iking: < 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)> .... evolution is a religion of uncertain terms .... 1% fact, and 99% assumptions. |
|
| May-19-16 | | Absentee: <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)> No, it doesn't. Quoting words at random won't make it read like one, either. When your data, besides being dubiously collected, is also "alleged", you have a problem. I read the article from Nature cited on that page. The data is cleanly referenced and wasn't collected by picking a few disconnected measurements and assembled with a blatant feel-good, apologetic finality. One full quote: "The activity of burrowing animals is the main factor that limits our temporal resolution, but the effect is generally negligible over evolutionary time-scales". "Generally negligible" sounds quite different now, doesn't it? I knew there was a reason I'd kept away from this discussion. |
|
May-19-16
 | | diceman: <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:> Heh, heh, now all we need to cover are
the "Negitive/Posative" Atheists,
and we're there. |
|
May-19-16
| | diceman: <Overgod:
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.> Sounds like he already has devout faith. |
|
| May-19-16 | | BobbieM: This has to be the worst topic on chessgames |
|
| May-19-16 | | iking: why? many GMs are embracing atheism ... |
|
| May-20-16 | | not not: there is no data available to examine God / Satan / aliens / space conquest whatever crap you dream of but there is plenty of humans to examine (that is what psychology does) to find out about their dreams / phantasies/ fixations / obsessions it is of no sense to talk about God or Satan; but how people are sick in their heads dreaming of both, that is possible and valuable to dwell upon, even though it is quite difficult to get into someone's head that is all we, people who are philosophers/ thinkers/ observers, are left with: watching cookoland of human mind, and how it affects each individual in regards to choices they make people don't always act upon logic and sense; they do day-dreaming most of the time, alas; and that is what can be scrutinised, not religion itself |
|
May-20-16
| | diceman: <not not:
(that is what psychology does)>
...or at least pretends to. |
|
| May-20-16 | | schachtourist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpl... |
|
| May-25-16 | | Conrad93: Damn, even on a site like Chessgames you have theistic nutcases using their classic cliche fallacy of ad ignorantiam. Hey, I can't prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist, and I can offer various reasons why he does. That does not mean he is real. It's like debating the existence of faires, yet most theists would find that topic incredibly stupid. Ironically enough. |
|
May-25-16
| | diceman: <Conrad93: Damn, even on a site like Chessgames you have theistic nutcases using their classic cliche fallacy of ad ignorantiam.> Good thing you weren't here to take them apart.
<It's like debating the existence of faires> Why would you do that?
You don't hate them. |
|
Jun-19-16
 | | perfidious: <chancho: <If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, everyday would be Christmas. ~John Boehner>
By no stretch of the imagination am I an admirer of Boehner, but that is very good. |
|
| Jun-19-16 | | celsochini: We the elder lost Viktor! So, keep moving Garry! Tks ! |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 31 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.
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 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC
|
Kibitzing
