Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

justin

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    50

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by justin

  6. Posted

    Has anyone received the Portland show MP3 yet? The two previous shows were released within hours, so I just figured I'd check in case it's an email issue on my end.

     

    I also haven't received the Portland e-mail yet.

     

    edit: logging into gumroad.com and re-downloading the entire zip file of shows worked. it's kind of dumb if i have to download the entire zip file every week, but whatever.

     

    edit 2: immediately after making this post i received two emails for the Portland show.

  11. Posted

    You're all whiny little bitches. It's a fucking free podcast. Steve-O referred to this as an interview, it's obvious he's not familiar with the format of the show. He's been conditioned to talk a lot and elaborate in interviews because that's what shitty morning radio station interviewers want. I can't believe anyone could get their jimmies so rustled over a free podcast; some of you must not have much else worthwhile in your lives. It's sad.

  14. Posted

    Hey Jeff,

     

    I hope this isn't too intrusive of a question. Is Earwolf turning a profit yet? I remember the last time I heard you speak on the financials of the company you were still losing money (that was probably over a year ago). Again if this is something you don't want to answer I understand.

  20. Posted

    Just a heads up for whoever is doing the work on the forums, the icons to the left of each thread are broken images for me. Also the quote box color and the text color are both too similiar. I'm sure you guys already know this but I thought I'd bring it up anyway.

     

    In my opinion, the old color scheme worked best with the dark gray background and the white text. But whatever's fine.

  22. Posted

    @Roy Ziegler

    I shot them an email to explain that to them. David responded, and it seemed like he got offended that I brought it up and he wasn't open to learn about the logical mistakes he was making.
    -
    From: Justin
    To: Professor Blastoff
    So it seems David loves to say that if something isn't able to be explained that it's pointing to proof of a god. I wanted to let you guys know that this is a logical fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance) and it is very annoying to hear it time after time. Just a friendly heads up.
    -
    From: Professor Blastoff
    To: Justin
    i think the idea is more that it leads me to believe there might be a god. as much as there is a burden of proof needed to explain how water formed on earth, or just exactly how gravity works - there is also a burden of proof needed to prove that god doesn't exist.
    david
    -
    From: Justin
    To: Professor Blastoff
    What you have just stated is also a logical fallacy (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html). You're getting the burden of proof backwards.
    -
    From: Professor Blastoff
    To: Justin
    not exactly. i was saying there is a burden of proof required for other things than just god (gravity, water on earth, etc) and since you, unless you're a secret genius keeping all this sweet info to yourself, or the rest of earth's inhabitants don't seem to know have a concrete answer - it may lead to people saying either, "who knows?" or "maybe there is a god" in some cases. i guess i've done the latter more than you care for over the course of the podcast. in my defense, that is sort of the theme of the podcast.
    -
    From: Justin
    To: Professor Blastoff
    It is a logical fallacy, it's explained here: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html (I don't know if you saw that link the first time). All you can really say is "who knows?" because nobody knows. Saying that it may be proof of a god makes as much sense as saying it may be proof of aliens. You're forming a theory based on lack of evidence. "Nobody knows what causes X, therefore X might be caused by god." That doesn't really make any sense, because nobody knows what causes X, so to draw a conclusion based on the lack of a conclusion is fallacious.

    I don't have anything against any of you guys. I feel like you, doing a science/philosophy based podcast, would like to be as informative to the audience as possible. I just wanted to give you a heads up because I would hope you wouldn't want to misinform your audience or put them in a thought process that is illogical.
    -
    From: Professor Blastoff
    To: Justin
    i did see the link. thanks for passing it along. i never said there was proof of a god. certain times, a lack of evidence makes me lean toward thinking there may be one. i've never seen a quark, but it seems reasonable. is the burden of proof on science to produce a visual image of a quark and how it works? or should we just trust math? and if you were the size of a quark, what does the space around you look like? does it just continue getting infinitely smaller, never reaching an end? if people were to sit around a table and offer their thoughts on any of these questions, we would never condemn them for having thoughts deemed illogical. if there is not a known answer, saying a hypothesis is illogical seems silly. thinking the earth was round was at one point a logical fallacy.

    we really do appreciate your input. we try to be somewhat informative, usually when we have guests, but more so we try to ask questions that listeners might enjoy hearing discussed. hope you are able to continue listening despite our constant assertions that christ is the almighty lord and savior.
    -
    From: Justin
    To: Professor Blastoff
    "certain times, a lack of evidence makes me lean toward thinking there may be one."

    All I'm trying to do is let you know that drawing a conclusion (even if it's a possible one, hell, ANY conclusion is possible really) based on lack of evidence IS illogical. I would just hope you wouldn't want your audience forming that type of thought process.

    Sorry for bringing it up as it seems I've offended you.

×