Kylie's GROWN IN JAPAN Challenge

[Kylie]

No.

Japan just got in the way, that's all.

Care to explain what that means? Because to me, it means nothing.

 

[Kylie]

You asked if it was a LIE ... remember?

Way to quibble over words instead of addressing the actual issue. Given that in my hypothetical situation, I made it very clear that I knew the truth and intentionally created something which gave false information, it's a lie, isn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

Given that in my hypothetical situation, I made it very clear that I knew the truth and intentionally created something which gave false information, it's a lie, isn't it?

It sure is.

And for the record, I thought you said a machine did it then self-destructed?

 

[Kylie]

It sure is.

And for the record, I thought you said a machine did it then self-destructed?

Yeah, a machine created by me. SO if the machine did it, it's because I intended for the machine to do it.

Can you stop playing word games and quibbling over details and actually address the question?

 

[AV1611VET]

Can you stop playing word games and quibbling over details and actually address the question?

"It sure is" means "yes."

Are there any questions in this thread I haven't addressed yet?

 

[Kylie]

So, let me get this straight...

You are claiming that if some entity (such as me) creates a particular thing (such as a bag of rice) using a particular means (such as a machine) in such a way as the thing that is created appears to have been formed by a DIFFERENT means (such as being grown and harvested in another country), then that entity is lying?

Is that correct, AV?

Just a yes or no please.

 

[AV1611VET]

So, let me get this straight...

You are claiming that if some entity (such as me) creates a particular thing (such as a bag of rice) using a particular means (such as a machine) in such a way as the thing that is created appears to have been formed by a DIFFERENT means (such as being grown and harvested in another country), then that entity is lying?

Is that correct, AV?

Just a yes or no please.

No

 

[PsychoSarah]

No

Explain how it isn't a lie.

 

[AV1611VET]

Explain how it isn't a lie.

Okay ... let's parse it.

You are claiming that if some entity (such as me) creates a particular thing (such as a bag of rice) using a particular means (such as a machine) in such a way as the thing that is created appears to have been formed by a DIFFERENT means (such as being grown and harvested in another country), then that entity is lying?

I see no lie here.

You are claiming that if some entity (such as me) creates a particular thing (such as a bag of rice) using a particular means (such as a machine) in such a way as the thing that is created appears to have been formed by a DIFFERENT means (such as being grown and harvested in another country), then that entity is lying?

No lie here.

You are claiming that if some entity (such as me) creates a particular thing (such as a bag of rice) using a particular means (such as a machine) in such a way as the thing that is created appears to have been formed by a DIFFERENT means (such as being grown and harvested in another country), then that entity is lying?

This one comes close, but given that things can look like they were formed by different means (remember my raisin bread challenge?), I give this passage credit for not being a lie.

In addition, just because Japan "got in the way," doesn't mean the rice is a lie.

Japan doesn't have a monopoly on rice production.

You are claiming that if some entity (such as me) creates a particular thing (such as a bag of rice) using a particular means (such as a machine) in such a way as the thing that is created appears to have been formed by a DIFFERENT means (such as being grown and harvested in another country), then that entity is lying?

Nope -- no lies detected.

What is a lie, however, is something in the OP that was left out here:

Remember that little tag that says: GROWN IN JAPAN?

There's the lie.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Okay ... let's parse it.


I see no lie here.

No lie here.

This one comes close, but given that things can look like they were formed by different means (remember my raisin bread challenge?), I give this passage credit for not being a lie.

In addition, just because Japan "got in the way," doesn't mean the rice is a lie.

Japan doesn't have a monopoly on rice production.


Nope -- no lies detected.

What is a lie, however, is something in the OP that was left out here:

Remember that little tag that says: GROWN IN JAPAN?

There's the lie.

However, here is the thing. An omnipotent being could make sure that there couldn't be any confusion between the observable world and how it came to be, if it created these things. There is no reason to make it look otherwise, or even consistent. Evolution as a theory would not work unless many observations over the course of decades worked together, without any contradicting them. One could not accidentally make it look that way, and with all the knowledge that people attribute to the Christian god, it would be an insult to suggest as much.

 

[AV1611VET]

However, here is the thing. An omnipotent being could make sure that there couldn't be any confusion between the observable world and how it came to be, if it created these things. There is no reason to make it look otherwise, or even consistent. Evolution as a theory would not work unless many observations over the course of decades worked together, without any contradicting them. One could not accidentally make it look that way, and with all the knowledge that people attribute to the Christian god, it would be an insult to suggest as much.

Meanwhile ... back to the bag of rice ...

 

[PsychoSarah]

Meanwhile ... back to the bag of rice ...

Yes, you want us to say evolution is the lie. But, lying requires intent. We observe, for all intents and purposes, evolution, so when we conclude evolution, we are not lying. But, would you deny that god would know that creating things to look this way would create confusion? Or would you say that this being lacked the power to make its own creation appear as it was created?

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, you want us to say evolution is the lie. But, lying requires intent. We observe, for all intents and purposes, evolution, so when we conclude evolution, we are not lying. But, would you deny that god would know that creating things to look this way would create confusion? Or would you say that this being lacked the power to make its own creation appear as it was created?

In ... the ... meantime ...

Back at the bag of rice ...

 

[crjmurray]

For this challenge to be more accurate, the rice should be a type that is only grown in Japan. The bag should be made out of a material used by Japanese rice growers. The "made in Japan" should be written in Japanese. But in spite of all the evidence suggesting that the bag of rice was produced in Japan, it was actually created ex nihilo. This would mean that whoever created the rice was dishonest. They would be making an active effort to deceive anyone who examined the rice.

 

[AV1611VET]

For this challenge to be more accurate, the rice should be a type that is only grown in Japan. The bag should be made out of a material used by Japanese rice growers. The "made in Japan" should be written in Japanese. But in spite of all the evidence suggesting that the bag of rice was produced in Japan, it was actually created ex nihilo. This would mean that whoever created the rice was dishonest. They would be making an active effort to deceive anyone who examined the rice.

And I submit that letting Japan "get in the way" is confusing you.

 

[crjmurray]

And I submit that letting Japan "get in the way" is confusing you.

I assure you I'm not confused.

 

[AV1611VET]

I assure you I'm not confused.

You're entitled to your opinion.

 

[crjmurray]

You're entitled to your opinion.

Are you going to address my post up there or just make snide little remarks?

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you going to address my post up there or just make snide little remarks?

You mean the one you Arab-phoned to death?

I'm having a hard enough time with the OP as written.

I'm sorry I don't feel like addressing a newer version of it and starting all over.

If someone can't understand the note is the lie, not the bag; I'm not going to address someone changing the bag to fit the note.

HOWEVER, if you wish to start your own thread, I'll do my best.

 

[crjmurray]

You mean the one you Arab-phoned to death?

I'm having a hard enough time with the OP as written.

I'm sorry I don't feel like addressing a newer version of it and starting all over.

If someone can't understand the note is the lie, not the bag; I'm not going to address someone changing the bag to fit the note.

HOWEVER, if you wish to start your own thread, I'll do my best.

I haven't fundamentally changed anything. All I have done is stress the fact that all the available evidence points to the conclusion that the bag of rice was grown in Japan. But we know that's not true. The rice was created instantaneously, maybe in Hoboken who knows. Along with the bag, all the evidence that points to a Japanese origin was also created. This evidence is deceptive because it points to a false place of origin.