Edward Current takes on Occam’s Razor.

Ed’s back and as spot on as usual:

It’s almost scary.

32 thoughts on “Edward Current takes on Occam’s Razor.

  1. Sheesh. This guy is good. I thought he was serious. Very good acting because this is the kind of logic you always get from religious nuts. I looked him up only to find out it is nothing but a comedy routine. He states quite clearly that he is not a Christian.

    This is probably nothing new to many readers here, but I have never heard of the guy before.

  2. Nunya, it’s been awhile. Didn’t think you were still lurking around here.

    Edward is practicing Poe’s Law. You really have to pay attention to realize it’s a parody.

  3. Pretty funny, however, he that isn’t the correct definition for Ockham’s Razor.

    All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best.

    Bringing in the whole conspiracy 9/11 thing was just stupid. It has nothing to do with Atheism. Also, the Ockham’s Razor cuts both directions, not just the conspiracy theorist’s but also the mainstream whitewashed population. If the American people are simply going to accept the 9/11 Comission reports as the simplest answer then it would appear they will never truly learn why the attacks happened or how similar attacks could ever be prevented. So instead of the simplest explanation, we are left with a small piece of truth, dumbed down and diluted with “patriotism” (not really patriotism). An O’reilly version of events, that is willingly turning a once great country into a police state.

  4. Er, sorry for the crazy tangent. I was trying to do 3 things at once while posting that. Totally missed making my point. I just wanted to say that the 9/11 thing was a terrible analogy.

  5. Terrorance… perhaps you should watch the video again…

    I do like this guy. I first saw one of his videos on this site, he is pretty funny. I knew rather quickly that his videos are parody, but he does make a lot of interesting points. I remember reading about Occam, who was in fact a theist. But I do not remember what his argument for theism was exactly. Though, then again, perhaps at that time theism was the simpler argument.

    I should just add, in case Les is reading/cares, that I no longer consider myself to be a Catholic/Christian. Reading the Bible helped, ironically, though that seems to be the experience of many who have actually read it.

  6. I am curious. What do you consider yourself now, Positive? If you’re willing to say, that is. I don’t want you to feel like you have to lay out your beliefs if you don’t really want to.

  7. Terrorance… perhaps you should watch the video again…

    Why is that?

    I get that it is a parody. I just don’t think it was a correct analogy. Current’s parody suggests that our currently accepted course of events is the only possible course. It is terrible that we are told claim B is false, therefore claim A must be true. So we are automatically forced to accept claim A, even though there are plenty of other questions surrounding this event that will never be properly answered or even discussed.

    So falling back to the translated statement of William of Ockham, “All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best.”. We are left with the problem that the evidence presented to us by the media is not equal; Nor have all the solutions to the events of 9/11 been presented.

  8. Hey, Les! Don’t know if you meant Nunya or me. If not, then can you remember who this is?

  9. Terrorance writes…

    I get that it is a parody. I just don’t think it was a correct analogy. Current’s parody suggests that our currently accepted course of events is the only possible course. It is terrible that we are told claim B is false, therefore claim A must be true. So we are automatically forced to accept claim A, even though there are plenty of other questions surrounding this event that will never be properly answered or even discussed.

    I’m guessing you’re one of the folks who buy into the 9/11 conspiracy theories. We’ve covered them before in other threads and there really aren’t any unanswered questions that I’m aware of. Our understanding of what happened is pretty extensive at this point.

    The example Current provides pretty much fits the reality as well as points out how absurdly complex the conspiracy theories really are.

    Gdub, I was addressing Nunya, but I do remember you who are. It’s been awhile since I’ve seen you around here as well. You still working the same job?

  10. I guess seeing as I have already thrown myself in with the conspiracy theorists, can I at least ask a couple of questions (that may or may not have been answered here before)?

    First, how is it that the greatest world altering event since WWII has had such a poor response as far as investigation (ie. 9/11 Comission reports)?

    Second, why is it that stories surrounding coincidental situations, involving billions of dollars, have little to no media coverage? (ie. Larry Silverstein / Asbestos WTC maintenance issues).

    Lastly, is it crazy to distrust a government that used these attacks to falsely send your troops into Iraq? (ie. Saddam Hussein attacked the WTC)

    Just a few points that I personally feel were never answered. I am not saying that your government blew up the WTC, but I definitely don’t think they ever tried to stop it either.

  11. Wow…what a coincidence. 2 at the same time. Anyway. Yep, still working at the same job (break-fix). However, who knows for how long. I have been told in advance that the team I am working on will cease to exist, they just don’t know when. They will be reviewing the numbers on a monthly basis and lay off accordingly. You wouldn’t believe how things have changed since you left. Just emtpty cubicle after cubicle in every building. And if you thought the stupidity was bad then…sheesh! You should see it now…

    Hope all is well with you. Are you still with “G”? I read here not too long ago you wrote that you were going to school.

  12. I agree with Les’ comments about 9/11. Not much else to be said on that point. Just as the churches and theologians will twist and turn everything in the Bible to fit their predetermined conclusions, 9/11 conspiracy theorists will act quite the same way in their own realm.

    As for me, I am not sure Les, to be honest. I am thinking that I am probably something of an Agnostic at this point. I suppose it will require more thought before I really commit myself to something.

  13. Just as the churches and theologians will twist and turn everything in the Bible to fit their predetermined conclusions, 9/11 conspiracy theorists will act quite the same way in their own realm.

    See that is where you are wrong. I don’t have any conclusions, only unanswered questions. So if you want to go ahead and fill me in, I would be most grateful.

    In truth, there is probably no point in even discussing this. I just didn’t want to be dismissed as a paranoid idiot, when in truth I am simply a neurotic malcontent.

  14. The towers have not yet been rebuilt. Or started. Not to mention all of the other quotidian screw ups of the last eight years. This was not a particularly competent government we have had throughout this decade. It is not a matter of trusting the Bush Administration. They could not silence Scott McCelellan, who does not strike me as being a particularly courageous person, but surely they can cover up their involvement in or willful allowance of the biggest attack ever on American soil. Right.

    I also appreciate the 9/11 conspiracy theorists who often imply that Americans have bought the official story because we are sort of over zealously patriotic and naive and that we must by implication be less intelligent than Europeans and Canadians. Charming. Yet individuals like Noam Chomsky reject 9/11 conspiracy theories. Is he a puppet of American government? Since when? I also find the supposed debate quite debasing to the country, it is a cheap and ill conceived attempt to score political points against an administration that we could easily criticize for legitimate reasons. I also wonder why it is that they were so cynically and surreptitiously able to plot or feign ignorance of the plan to destroy the towers, yet were unable to plant WMD’s in Iraq or prevent Obama from winning.

    Obnoxious.

  15. I also find the supposed debate quite debasing to the country, it is a cheap and ill conceived attempt to score political points against an administration that we could easily criticize for legitimate reasons.

    Right on, Positive.  Terrorance- of course there are unanswered questions about 9/11: any such complex happening will always have unexplained bits and pieces.  But as Les and others have said, there seems to be no reason to doubt the main facts: the attack was planned and carried out by Al Qaida; and the Bush administration, although its incompetence may have made the attack possible, and although it certainly used the attack cynically to further its own ends, did not actively participate in the attack, and had no advance warning of it.

    That doesn’t mean that the Bush administration is less deserving of censure, for being possibly the worst administration of American history.  Tempting as it is to paint them even blacker, I’ll go with the facts.

  16. Ok, do me a favour and just answer one of the three questions I have proposed. Just one of them. Your rebuttals so far haven’t addressed a word of what I have said. Except for the attack I made against the appeal to patriotism that your media tends to aggregate.

    What does Scott McClellan have to do with anything?

    There is the notorious mention of Bush just brushing off intelligence of impending attacks. So if we are going to bring it down to whether or not the GOP was either incompetent or negligent, I side with negligent.

    Obnoxious? Seriously?

    Your logic is utterly impeccable my friend. Ad Hominem, ignore my questions, debate a straw man and appeal to popularity.

    Go fuck yourself.

  17. Terrorance, I know you aimed that last comment at Positive, but I’d like to have a shot at your questions too, if no one minds.  You ask:

    First, how is it that the greatest world altering event since WWII has had such a poor response as far as investigation (ie. 9/11 Comission reports)?

    What exactly was poor about the 9/11 Commission report?  And I wouldn’t necessarily agree that 9/11 was the “greatest world altering event” since WWII: if I had to pick one event that had the most severe consequences, I’d say it was the election of George Bush as President in 2000.  But it’s hard to define exactly, to be sure.

    Second, why is it that stories surrounding coincidental situations, involving billions of dollars, have little to no media coverage? (ie. Larry Silverstein / Asbestos WTC maintenance issues).

    As far as I can tell, there is little to no media coverage of “Lucky Larry” because there is no story there.  Sure, there are dozens if not hundreds of foaming-at-the-mouth troother sites, who claim that Silverstein made Bush do it, that he is part of the Zionist move to conquer the world, and an Illuminati to boot.  But I’m not aware of any actual evidence for any of these accusations, and I’m picky about evidence.

    Lastly, is it crazy to distrust a government that used these attacks to falsely send your troops into Iraq? (ie. Saddam Hussein attacked the WTC)

    No, it is not crazy to distrust a government such as the Administration under Bush.  But that doesn’t mean that they are responsible for all the evil under the sun.  And as others have said, given their incompetence, for instance in keeping one man, Scott McClellan, quiet, it seems highly unlikely that they’d be able to keep the dozens or hundreds of people necessary for an inside job on 9/11 quiet.

  18. What exactly was poor about the 9/11 Commission report?

    Omission of key testimony would be my first criticism. As well, it did nothing to identify the management whose negligence facilitated the 9/11 attacks. These people were not only left to continue doing their jobs but in many instances were promoted.

    And I wouldn’t necessarily agree that 9/11 was the “greatest world altering event” since WWII: if I had to pick one event that had the most severe consequences, I’d say it was the election of George Bush as President in 2000.

    Fair enough, but would you at least concede that the events of 9/11 empowered a weak administration. I find it difficult to believe that the US would be in Iraq without the attacks.

    As far as I can tell, there is little to no media coverage of “Lucky Larry” because there is no story there

    I don’t know, even without all the surrounding 9/11 stuff, it is a pretty amazing story. I had only heard for the first time last month and at first I thought it was BS. Had this been a death, and only weeks before a large insurance policy had been taken out. Well you can imagine the police would be asking questions. Anyway, I am not making any claims as to what occurred. I really don’t consider myself a conspiracy nut. I just think it is amazing that it isn’t common knowledge.

    But that doesn’t mean that they are responsible for all the evil under the sun.

    No but they have been responsible for a lot of “evil”. I use quotation marks because it seems to be a relative term. It was popular thought that Saddam was evil because he killed and tortured Iraqis. Well I think the GOP has shown us that Saddam was only a small time evil doer.

     

      And as others have said, given their incompetence, for instance in keeping one man, Scott McClellan, quiet, it seems highly unlikely that they’d be able to keep the dozens or hundreds of people necessary for an inside job on 9/11 quiet.

    A simple press secretary turning coat long after he has left the white house. He had nothing to lose by writing a tell all book, and his book had very little to tell. If anything his book was apologetic for Bush actions, which is a fitting thing to do for a press secretary, considering Bush would never actually apologize for his own actions.

    Anyway, it makes assumptions that a conspiracy would require hundreds of people. In truth a conspiracy would only take two people to conspire, and if those people had blind, willing followers it is a simple thing indeed. I digress though, because I am not making wild claims of demolitions and such. I making claims of foreknowledge of an impending attack and blatantly ignoring it.

  19. Aside from Larry Silverstein, which I will honestly say that I know only a little about, I think I addressed your points. The Bush administration was not competent enough to pull this off and then get away with it. It is not a matter of trusting them.

    Obnoxious? Quite. Since we are being all open and honest, I would simply say that I do not like 9/11 conspiracy theorists. And fence sitters are not particularly better. I suppose it is not fair to compare it to Holocaust denial. It is not really the same sort of thing, and the Holocaust was frankly much more tragic than 9/11 in the first place. But the same callous, sophist, petty and- yes- obnoxious qualities held by one are held by the other. And as someone who lives in New York, I cannot say that I have much patience for this. If you want to pat yourself on the back for being too intelligent for the facts, perhaps you should join the I.D. movement, rather than use the deaths of thousands of people to reinforce your confused perceptions about American society and government. 9/11 conspiracy theorists make I.D. advocates look quite good by comparison, which is not at all easy.

    If you do not understand why I would mention Scott McClellan in regards to a supposed cover up, particularly when you suggest that the administration’s Iraq policy was a motive for, in line with and a product of the alleged 9/11 conspiracy, then I think that is all that is left to be said.

    As I alluded to earlier, here is the American government’s biggest fan’s opinion in regards to this question:


  20. If you have any evidence for foreknowledge of the attacks, I’d like to see it.  That the Administration knew of the threat in general, and did not follow up on information that could have blown Al Qaida’s cover, is undisputed, and constitutes gross negligence.  And it’s true that the 9/11 Commission Report could have had more bite.  But the Commission did not have the power to fire anyone.

  21. Only the speculation over what warnings were actually passed on from Tenet to the GOP and of course this document .

    Yes, so at most it is speculation. However, no investigation will actually ever be formed into what transpired. Nor will the GOP ever be held accountable for its failings or its downright manipulations to pull a country into war.

  22. I think I addressed your main points, if that is what you want to call them. As I say, the Bush administration was not competent enough to accomplish this and get away with it. Nor could “two people” keep such a secret; what absurdity. But, as for your other observations:

    It had been up for lease for over a year. And it is not as though Silverstein was acquiring an unprofitable item. I am quite sure that plenty of billionaires would like to acquire something that valuable, without the desire to blow it up for insurance money. And, right, I am certain that there was no investigation of this. No insurance company would be so distrustful, I am sure. You claim to be something a fence sitter, or that you are not implying that there was not a conspiracy but rather a willful allowance of these things to happen, but clearly your allegations in this regard would lead one to believe otherwise. Not to mention that your first objection was to Edward Current, who was addressing the controlled demolition/shadow government claim.

    If you do not know why I would mention Scott McClellan, considering that the administration was not particularly happy with his book, and considering your own claims that the alleged 9/11 conspiracy was motivated by, in line with and a product of the desire to invade Iraq, I think that is all that is left to be said. I could also cite the Downing Street memo, or whatever other evidence you would like that we have in regards to Iraq. The fact that they did such a horrid job in covering up any of these particulars when it came to Iraq makes it unlikely that they could manage to cover themselves for 9/11.

    I think one has to have their head firmly in the sand to be ignorant of this whole “Islamic terrorism” phenomenon. It has been with us for quite a while now, it is quite serious, and with quite a great deal of motivation. The idea that it could not accomplish these things alone, that it needed help, is one of the reasons why these 9/11 conspiracy theories are so ignorant. Having seen what they did in Mumbai a short time ago, one would have to be foolish to think that these people are not without ability or drive. If you do not understand the threat that these extremists pose, perhaps you have bigger problems than Larry Silverstein.

    Obnoxious? Yes. Since we are being so open and honest, I believe I can say quite bluntly that I do not like 9/11 conspiracy theorists. Fence sitters are not much better. I suppose it is not quite the same as Holocaust denial. It is a bit different, and the Holocaust was frankly much more tragic in the first place. But the same callousness, the same pettiness, the same sophistry and, yes, the obnoxious quality held by one is shared by the other. When dealing with a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, I feel as though I.D. advocates look good by comparison; not an easy accomplishment. And as someone who lives in New York, I do not have much patience for it. Surely there must be other ways for you to reinforce your paranoid perceptions of American society and government, you do not need to play games with an event that led to so much death.

    As for no one being fired for this; when was anyone fired for any mistakes by the Bush administration? Not many were. It was quite rare that they held themselves accountable.

    Anyway, I am sorry that the official story does not suit you. You can continue patting yourself on the back for being too smart for us poor Americans. But Mr. Current has the right to share his views on this subject, and his was indeed a valid comparison. Perhaps you yourself have some objections to macroevolution that you might like to share with us… perhaps the Nazi Social Darwinists who invented evolutionary theory had a hand in 9/11. Wouldn’t that be exciting?

  23. You can continue patting yourself on the back for being too smart for us poor Americans. But Mr. Current has the right to share his views on this subject, and his was indeed a valid comparison. Perhaps you yourself have some objections to macroevolution that you might like to share with us… perhaps the Nazi Social Darwinists who invented evolutionary theory had a hand in 9/11. Wouldn’t that be exciting?

    I will address some of the other statements you made, but first I just need to clear something up. I never made any claims of being too smart for poor Americans, nor do I think I ever bashed Americans. I did make exception with the political direction it has followed over the last 8 years and its subsequent fall in freedom. Props for cleverly poisoning the well. It would have probably worked better if you hadn’t gone on to compare me to an IDist and a holocaust denier. Or who knows, maybe not…

  24. Nah, I think Positive’s pretty much dead on.

    The problem with mindless followers is that there isn’t such a thing. It’s always tempting to think of fundamentalists as somehow incapable of changing their minds, but it’s lazy and untrue. The same lazy thinking goes into attaching significance to coincidence, and one’s emotional bias being used as a reasoning for acceptance of unproven, untested theories as instances of proof.

    Because I don’t trust your own logic, let me reinforce what I just said:

    Nearly a decade after the fact, even the most drone-like of “followers” gets lazy, changes their mind, gets promoted to a point of leadership, etc. Given the sheer amount of incidents that happen in Manhattan nearly anything could happen as a coincidence attached to nearly any event, especially in activities that are more common given the nature of the district. I’m not a fan of Bush either, but your giving him nearly mystical powers because he managed to send troops into Iraq doesn’t mean he walks on water or that he and the Order of Dorammu somehow sat around for a decade in Texas figuring how they could get their ninjas into New York and blame it all on some poor, feckless freedom fighter in Afghanistan.

    Seriously. This is the direction you’re headed, and you’re bitching because we’re all snickering and calling you retarded?

  25. Nice Mook. Real nice. I love you too.

    Anyway, as thick as I am, I can take a hint.

    Zilch, I have to say thanks for at least keeping it civil and taking the time to give me some feedback.

  26. Terrorance wrote…

    Go fuck yourself.

    Zilch, I have to say thanks for at least keeping it civil

    Right. Nice chatting with you.

    Sorry about the earlier double-post, it said that the first one did not go through so I sort of re-wrote it.

  27. Fair enough. Being called obnoxious sometimes makes me bitchy. I apologize that comment it was uncalled for.

    For the record I will concede I did a very poor job trying to discuss my concerns regarding the events surrounding 9/11.  I think I said some of what I was trying to get across. However I think I ruined myself at the beginning, I should of clarified that I don’t believe their was a conspiracy to demolish the buildings. Also some of my intro could very well be taken as condescending to Americans. I honestly did not intend that. I was simply trying to be dramatic to draw replies.

    I watched the Youtube Chomsky video and would like to say thank you for sharing that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.