AWKWARD ZOMBIE

Whole numbers only or are you also counting fractionals?

An infinite amount.

Which doesn't actually matter if the universe is finite. Infinite ideas can exist in a finite plane, believe it or not.

What are you saying

Your hand can move by a fraction of an inch, fractions can vary to an infinite degree of precision, your hand can exist in an infinite number of locations in any area large enough to permit your hand even just a Planck length of movement.
Why are you finding this so impossible to understand?

I mean you understand that infinite can exist in a finite place. That is a thing you are saying. Why on earth do you think that doesn't apply to possibilities? What are you missing?

I said infinite ideas can exist in a finite place.

Ideas are not necessarily things.

What are you saying? What on earth is an idea in this context? How do you convince yourself that makes sense?

Take a box. It has a capacity of one cubic foot. Put a marble in it. That marble's X, Y, and Z coordinates have an infinite number of possible values. 2, 4, 5 inches? Cool. 2.5, 4.5, 5.5 inches? A-ok. 2.25, 4.25, 5.25 inches? Perfectly reasonable. You can continue this FOREVER.

Edit: oh wait wait I get it, you're trying to counter my little number quizzes by saying numbers are just ideas? That is precious. Never talk about science again in your life.

I think Ycobb was just using the number thing as a metaphor, to say that just as iterations of numbers can be infinite within finite boundaries, the differences between entire universes could also be infinite by accounting for infinitesimial fractional differences, such as a particle being a Planck to the left, or half a Planck, or 1/4, or whatever. It's kind of a Zeno's Paradox-like situation, but you can't really divide space up into a nice grid where some amount of space is so small that it couldn't be divided further.

Ultimately, though, I'm with Vax in saying that this discussion doesn't really go anywhere, or prove anything. Even if there were a finite number of possibilites for a given universe, the number of permutations, even for a single particle, would be so great as to be functionally infinite, as in, the finite number wouldn't matter because we wouldn't even be able to comprehend that number.

And regardless of whether the number of alternate universes, if they exist, is finite or not, an omniscient God would be able to understand all of them by definition.
Even when you return back to this point, we're really just arguing about the definition of omniscience. God could have any level of power for all we know (yes, including zero). If someone says the God they believe in is omniscient, I don't see how it'd be easier to disprove than the idea of a God who isn't.

If someone has an view that's objectionable about something you feel strongly about, like abortion or same-sex marriage or religion, would you rather confront them about their views while hoping to change them, or wait for them to die off with their views if your views are superior in the end?

Call me jaded, but I learned a long time ago that 9 times out of 10, if that person holds that opinion in the first place, I'm not really going to change it. Arguing with those people proved fruitless to me, regardless of how well I presented my points or even how civil I was.

Whether or not I do say anything to them really depends on their willingness to talk about it, how much of a douche they are (very important; an intelligent discussion where nobody changes their minds is much better than a series of angry rants), how much they know factually about the subject, and whether or not I think I can get them to see some small thing about the topic differently, or at least understand my side a bit better.

I know I used to strongly hold some opinions that have since changed (I used to think gays shouldn't marry for example), but they never changed due to one discussion alone. What did it was that some people brought up some good points on the matter, discussed it respectfully but still confidently, and I worked out the nuances of the argument on my own to come to a conclusion.

Of course, not everybody is going to be willing to change their mind about their opinions. The ones willing to listen are best-case scenarios and are somewhat rare, in my experience anyway. The best you can do for the more "stubborn" ones is be patient with them, don't get frustrated with them, but try to see their point of view and explain why you believe what you believe. They'll probably never change their mind on the spot, but it can be worth it to at least get them to think.

Ive learned that debates are generally a waste of time, and just an excersize in who can yell the longest. I still tend to particpate, because fuck those other guys with their wrong opinions. Its entirerly possible that this is the wrong mindset to have, likely even, but when every cell in your body screams for agression, its getting increasingly hard to ignore.

Stranger, if you post in Taboo Topics out of a sick compulsion for attacking other people, I suggest you never post in this thread again.

Have I ever attacked anyone in this thread?

Do you really want to hear the answer?

Your behaviour isn't something that should be discussed in this thread and I apologize for bringing it up here.

Let's talk about something that isn't about phoney baloney timey wimey crap

Fat acceptance people weird me out. I feel like they're promoting a generally unhealthy lifestyle. But I've always been pretty skinny so I'm sure I have a poor perspective. What do you guys think?

Fat is really vague. Weight isn't the only factor in unhealthiness either. I don't like it when people call overweight people gross, unless they're like this fat (nsfw for JESUS CHRIST THAT FRONTAL-FAT)