TheBlindwatchmaker said:

- Correction, 'Some' have complained that they are complex, Others notice those that are peer reviewed and others that are simply 'in the works' so to speak.

- As a result, You continuously spam your personal opinions which rest on unfounded papers.
Such as your thought experiment that requires supersymmetry, which we've all mentioned millions of times, has no evidence to support it.

1.) On the contrary, history shows that you have wrongly injected your opinions several times (Wherein you mistook your opinions as valid evidence, and my objective expressions as invalid evidence). You appeared to recently come to know the difference between the teleological argument, and teleology in biology. (In a recent thread where we largely exchanged words)

In simpler terms, you strongly expressed your opinions/subjective feelings, contrary to purpose in the regime of objectivity.

1.b) Reference: Scenario where you blathered on contrary to purpose in the realm of objectivity.

2.) It is no surprise that people without PhD's or Masters will find my model strange. However, from my interactions, professors or PhD holders, tend to find my model straight forward/sensible.

3.) Sample discussions with PhD Holders:

• 3.a) Sample A, discussion with Garret Lisi, PhD Physics (inventor of e8 theory):

  A fun exchange between myself and Garret Lisi (PHd theoretical physicist, inventor of E8 theory, a grand unified theory of everything) wrt my "Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network": https://imgur.com/X6eZ5FC.png

• 3.b) Sample B, discussion with Eray Ozkural, PhD Computer Science:

  A discussion about my "Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network", with PHd computer scientist Eray, on a public facebook board. (Eray is winner of 2015 Kurzweil Idea Awards, for his contributions to universal induction): See the first post regarding the "Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network" on this facebook discussion.

CyberLn said:

It would also include him, then, as he is without a PhD or Masters.

1.) Is English your first language?

2.) Note that I didn't say that all beings absent PhD or masters don't disregard my model. In English, we use qualifiers such as "all" to classify stuff.

Sheldon said;

You didn't say some either, so the error was yours by being vague.

On the contrary, I specifically listed a few persons that don't disregard my model. (with PhD's). Is English your first language Sheldon?

You don't need all knowledge to know that gods are man-made superstitions invented by different cultures, living on different continents across different periods of time and whose fairytales were isolated to their geographic locations for more than 1500 years until the Age of Exploration began.

Flamenca said:

and this forum is full of brilliant women and men

1.) It looks like many of them don't study machine learning, if my posts mostly supposedly appear "muddled".

2.) As I said before, people with PhDs or masters in relevant fields have been observed to recognize my expressions as straightforward/sensible.

3.) Ironically, I am the only being here that tends to present expressions as organized, quickly digestable bullet points.

CyberLn said:
and you keep commiting fallacy after fallacy...

1.) Come, that you don't understand a topic, does not suddenly warrant that data in said topic terms is fallacious. In fact, your action above is probably fallacious.

2.) As per my invention "non-beliefism ", I don't subscribe to fallacy. Perhaps you need to reevaluate you're position.

Aposteriori Unum said:

You called yourself a "being" in your response to Flamenca. Are you not a human? Why do you use that word instead of person?

1.) I tend to call people beings.

2.) Refer to item 6 in the following url: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/being