Kyle Judkins wrote: ↑
Sat 26 May 2018 01:25
Darkest I think the problem is that you are trying to think too literally... Like you literally want Han Zimmer to come out and admit to everything he has done wrong, or there is a reasonable possibility it's not all true...
But that simply just doesn't work in practice, many things including science work on observation and extrapolation for the things you can't see... You can't physically see gravity, but after observing the behavior repeatedly you can come to some conclusions although they might be guesses that will never physically be seen... sometimes evidence is just a matter of collective anecdotes
I'm not a scientist but I'm pretty sure in the sciences any conclusion based on collective anecdotes would be called a hypothesis/theory, not evidence. A hypothesis which scientists will then seek to substantiate/invalidate with actual evidence that is not based on anecdotes.
That's what I see when I read psychological publications. Even ideas based on multiple existing evidences are called hypothesis/theoretical basis.
And, of course you can't see Gravity. But that's not what gravity is about - it is not defined by being something physical you can see but a term for a behavior, a function. You can see the function of gravity but throwing something in the air.
Thus you CAN prove that it exists. Or disprove it's existence in case the thing you threw remains in the air.
You could also prove the phenomenon of "reversed gravity", if it would exist in a place. - Throw something in the air (something neutral like a shoe - not something that creates upward momentum on it's own, like a bubble) and if it goes upwards rather than downwards we have evidence that gravity has been reversed.
Not sure what you mean with that comparison. Gravity is a term for a function, not a physical object and of course you can see and feel this function.
Watch some videos where people are thrown in a room without gravity and tell me again that you can't prove it or see it - or experience it! :)
We must also specify what at this point we actually mean.
I accept The Final Game as fraudulent. Evidence has been presented and it is unlikely to be false - because as an unknown french guy you don't mess with a powerful millionaire and widely respected person like HZ by simply faking mails - not worth it...
Discombobulate is very confusing, I'm not yet ready to accept this as true for many reasons I outlined in the thread.
In that sense we gotta make sure what exactly we're talking about ATM.
In this thread was only saying that there is no clear evidence that talent alone is not enough to write a piece like Final Game. I'll check Headshots videos again though to see more clearly where he's coming from in regards to this...
Kyle Judkins wrote: ↑
Sat 26 May 2018 01:25
A good example would be a situation like North Korea, where are we can technically never know for sure whether or not China gave North Korea our missile technology... But we do know is that they are much more friendly to each other, and we did give China our missile Tech as part of a deal.
China is never going to come out and tell you that they did that, but every possible piece of information points in that direction... And as a result you would fail your country as a leader if you didn't work on those same assumptions...
I'm pretty sure if multiple people came to you and told you that they saw your girlfriend with another guy you wouldn't need to see them actually cheating on you to confront them... It's just no longer a coincidence, but a repeating pattern that can be easily observed much like many laws of physics
- Yes... of course I will confront them. But that doesn't mean that evidence is in the house that they are actually cheating. If I would count this as evidence I would not confront them (which basically means - ask for explanations
with the assumption
that they may be cheating), but simply break up.
Also, people actually witnessing, seeing certain things is much clearer than some of the things regarding HZ and writing abilities I am supposed to accept as evidence here.
Many data and infos strongly pointing in the same direction (towards something clear and graspable - not something as complicated and variable as a humans character) could sometimes also be counted as evidences - although not final. Depends how clear they are...
And yes, you may HAVE to feel decisions based on assumptions in this case. But this is because we are talking about very serious stuff here, unlike the question to which extent HZ relies on others to produce his scores or whether he as a whole is a negative person.
For example - If I suspect that you may want to kill me, another serious situation, be sure that I'll feel some quite significant decisions for safety's sake. Despite lack of clear evidence.
That has everything to do with the seriousness of the present suspicion and it's implications - not because we can always count such suspicion as evidence. Odd example.