[Lexinom]

I'll assume for charity's sake that you misread what I wrote. Therefore I should not need to reiterate the obvious fact that hypothesis are subject to testing, and leave you with a challenge to place the idea of the number 14 under a microscope.

So you're saying that transcendental laws and lawlike principles that govern the universe standing on their own, with no particular meaning or intelligence behind them is perfectly rational? Very seriously: Do you realize how absurd that sounds?

No, I'm obviously human trash fit for disposal. Thanks for noticing, and thanks for your input.

[tortoise]

I'll assume for charity's sake that you misread what I wrote.

I doubt I misread it. The logical fallacies rife in your reasoning exist regardless of how I read it, actually. The construction was sufficiently bad that the content was almost irrelevant.

and leave you with a challenge to place the idea of the number 14 under a microscope.

You apparently assume and attribute far more magic to "14" than I do. You are so caught up in your misplaced awe that it never occurred to you that reasonable people might not share it.

So you're saying that transcendental laws and lawlike principles that govern the universe standing on their own, with no particular meaning or intelligence behind them is perfectly rational? Very seriously: Do you realize how absurd that sounds?

Justify both the assertion and the reasoning. You once again display an ignorance of basic logic and principles of rationality. You seem to want to borrow mathematics only when it suits you. What, you've never heard of Occam's Razor? Newsflash: that some things sound "absurd" to you is a reflection of the limits of your knowledge and perspective. I do not care that neolithic peoples find the idea of humans landing on the moon absurd either.