[extropy-chat] Simulation Argument critique (was fermi's paradox:m/d approach)

[Harvey Newstrom]

Mike Lorrey wrote,
> Science is only useful for describing what is normal and 
> consistent for this universe. Its ability to predict what 
> exists outside this universe, or what may intrude here from 
> other realities (via singularities) is hamstrung by the fact
> that science relies on a body of data from observation,
> none of which we have regarding these things.

Agreed.  But in that case, we shouldn't be calling the Simulation Argument
scientific.  It is pure speculation of what might occur outside our
universe.  Any attempt to bring it into our universe with statistical
certainly enough to claim it "proves" that we are inside a simulation is
unfounded.

-- 
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, CISA, CISM, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
Certified IS Security Pro, Certified IS Auditor, Certified InfoSec Manager,
NSA Certified Assessor, IBM Certified Consultant, SANS Certified GIAC
<HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>