When employees arrive at a brainstorming meeting at MBooth, a communications agency in Manhattan, they see confetti strewn across the table, posters with prompts like, “Tell me an idea inspired by the word electricity,” and a picture of Ryan Gosling with the caption, “Hey girl, what would get me to shop here?” They are given a marker and ten minutes to write ideas on the walls.
The unusual experience is carefully designed to help them think outside the box.
Andrew Rossi, MBooth’s creative director, is responsible for making the agency a hub of innovation. He stepped into the role in 2009 when fresh ideas were starting to run dry. “Clients stay with us for a long time,” he says. “We were thinking about the same clients over and over and (our ideas) were just getting stale.”
Rossi started researching how creativity works and overhauled MBooth’s creative process, earning an award for ’2012 Creative Agency of the Year’ from the Holmes Report.
Here, Rossi shares three tips that can help your company come up with original ways to reach your business goals:
1. Set parameters to focus your ideas. Ironically, too much freedom can hinder your creativity. Boundaries help your memory function, giving your ideas more depth and breadth. “Too many times, people start off really broad,” Rossi says. “That’s a lot of pressure. It’s easier to anchor an idea somewhere.”
As you brainstorm, focus your thinking by asking specific questions. For example, if you’re looking for new marketing strategies, list ten things you could do on Facebook or five ideas that involve crowdsourcing. Play with a variety of prompts and write down whatever comes to mind, no matter how loosely associated.
Ok. Preciso aumentar a auduência para Matrix/DNA no Facebook, Twitter, Google+, etc. O que eu poderia fazer nestas redes sociais?
1) Todo dia iniciar Internet por elas;
2)
2. Search for random inspiration. To think outside the box, you need to trigger your brain to make connections it normally wouldn’t make. To do that, look for inspiration that seems entirely unrelated to the problem.
Rossi often prompts his team with unexpected words, like pineapple or sparkles for a car company. “Nine times out of 10, the ideas people are excited about are generated by the ridiculous random prompt,” he says. To find prompts, look at popular photos on Pinterest and trending words on Twitter, or click ‘I’m Feeling Lucky’ in a Google search.
3. Aim for quantity, not quality. While you’re generating ideas, turn off your internal editor. Exhaust your good ideas and start throwing out suggestions that seem absurd or wrong. Remember, you can always make a bad idea better after the fact.
Rossi finds that speed and friendly competition help people churn out ideas without judgment. Once, he put 100 one dollar bills in the center of a table and told his team they could take one every time they said an idea. “In 15 minutes, we came up with 100 ideas,” he says. “Fifty of them were really interesting.”
She is a bitch, even thought I’m an atheist, I believe that the basis of morality is religion. Evolution doesn’t support the logic behind chastity or modesty. Hell, if we completely followed a Darwinian society, we would have people naked and fornicating in the street. Now, I’m not saying that Humans came from Adam/Eve or any of that crap. I’m simply stating that qualities such as chastity, modesty and other principles could not have conceivably come from evolution.
You have a good point. Chastity, modesty, altruism were not observed at other species than human specie. It is rational to suppose that they are humans creations. And what could be the cause acting over humans for creating these things, if the supreme goal is the same of animals? But the answer is not religion. Should be “cooperation inside species”? Yet, no. We see cooperation at the society of aunts and bees. Before that we see it at genes. societies. Anybody has the answer?
“Ego complex” makes sense to me, but “to make ouselves seem better then all other animals” does not makes sense because people are not usually comparing them with other animals. This issue is very difficult and complex and I am search the answer in the models of closed and opened systems. Altruism I have already found the explanation: each part belonging to a closed system is obligatory altruist in relation to the system, but the system is selfish. Like the Roman Church or any other mafia.
(Vai lá e clique no botão com o polegar prá cima – claro, se você concordar com meu comentário) Esta é a sexta parte dêste artigo, vide as cinco anteriores, numeros 5,4,3, 2 e 1 tôdas aqui nêste blog com o mesmo titulo) . Foram perdidos muitos posts da Matrix devido uma revisão que desapareceu do blog ( principalmente posts do dia 08). Meus posts estão em três nomes devido problemas na conta do Youtube: Louis Charles Morelli, TheMatrixDNA e Austriak1)
( Deletar PC Cleaner Urgente! Perdí Todos os posts entre 11 e 13)
XXX
Posts modêlos para entrada todos os dias:
All posts here by Matrix/DNA seems “away off the beam”, it makes no sense, the words are out of order, phrases are not connected in comprehensible way. It “seems” because Matrix/DNA is a narrative of this world by a never knew before way for connecting all real natural facts and events observed here and now. Is not the words out of order, it is your way of connecting real facts that is out of order. We need give to our children more power than we had, which is the right naturalistic knowledge
The fundamental problem with the observable universal history of evolution is that evolution is product of matter, and matter, we know, has the supreme tendency to get eternal thermodynamic equilibrium. So, must have a force among matter that is odd to matter. How to find it ? Nature must answer this question. And I see the matter inside a fecundated ovule not going to inertia, but moving under evolution. DNA contains this force here. And now we discovered the DNA of Universe: the Matrix/DNA.
Question: If the supreme tendency of matter is to accommodate at eternal thermodynamic equilibrium state, which non-material force could exist against this tendency, forcing matter towards complexity and evolution? If there was a God creating this world, why he made matter with this tendency for being the structural substance of this world and the substance of bodies of living beings with the opposite tendency- the tendency for eternal dynamic movement? Atheism and creationism makes no sense?
I know the answers. Atheism will say that the Big Bang produced chaos, after that matter is searching its ordered state, and that’s why we see evolution just now. And creationist will say that God created the world in perfect state ( this was not the tendency of matter or living beings) but the sin of Adam/Eve broken the perfection. But, I think that an infinitelly perfect and not mutable world, at ordered state, is the same of “nothing”. It should be a closed system, the supreme selfishness.
Why not asking these supremes questions to Nature? Who else could be more faithful professor? That’s what we did. We spent 7 years at the heart of Amazon jungle asking nature, because there is the last untouchable land that still has the witness of life’s origins. And we got a third alternative, not atheist, neither creationist, but 50% of each one. This Universe is a kind of cosmic egg, the galaxies are the fossils of our ancestors, and the History is “from the Big Bang towards a Big Birth”.
Inside this Universe is occurring a kind of genetic/computational reproduction of that unknown system existing before and beyond this Universe. It is all about the embryogenesis/evolution of a unique natural system, which has a Matrix/DNA. We, human beings ( and maybe a lots of another extra-terrestrial lifeforms), are the genes being expressed just now for building the brain and consciousness of this universal system. We need loving and helping each other, because we will be one.
Saying that God creates Universes and man that seems like him inside it is not problem because humans also creates eggs and men inside it. Saying that Universes becomes a hot and concentrated small dot and explodes becoming again Universe is not problem because a big adult human becomes small egg and after the sperm “explosion” becomes adult again. But saying God lives inside Universes and Universes evolves without purpose are problems because I can’t see these things in Nature. What’s up?
As an agnostic and defending a new and unknown evolutionary theory different than ToE, I want for my kids ToE in science classrooms and ID obligatory in social/philosophical class. Evolution is not understood if only based on biological history, so, ToE is non complete “theory” and is necessary that it be criticized and checked by ID. ToE has no intellectual support for a meaning of our existence as religions does for avoiding kids falling on drugs, and ToE alone will not keep free thought.
I think Bill Nye is the expression of a second wave of Enlightenment, as happened at 18th century, due human Reason reaching a new shape in its vital cycle. Philosophers joining to scientists and atheists against those fantasies of Reason’s baby times, promoting science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition, intolerance and some abuses by church and state. If the first wave was based in Newton ( after Copernicus and Galileo), now it is largely based in Darwin and Astronomy.
Creationist “faith” can not be explained rationally based on current scientific view of the world. But, at same time this faith is an aberration produced by Nature, this aberration can not be explained because the scientific current world view does not translate the real world. This faith is product of expression of data storaged in the wrong called junk/DNA, real data about real world of times beyond 4 billion years. People with this faith has hard-wired brain confused by these memories.
TrueVerdicts: You haven’t criticized my post: “Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities “per se”, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universe as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time in between? Zero…
Here are creationists and immediate naturalists debating. They want to model the formation of children’s minds of the world. But, there are a minority – the cosmic naturalists agnostics – that also has its own model. We want our voice be heard here also. As said “illegalconspiracy”, a child with mind structured upon lots of evidences of a natural process of biological evolution interpreted by modern Darwinism will be a believer in an almost magical blind God acting without any guidance (cont.).
For us, biological evolution, the change into news species over long time, is obvious. In another hand, although we consider the indoctrination of children by a doctrine expressed in Bible is a prejudices to their healthy, we try to see the world from a cosmological point of view, and our suspection is that this process is not blind, what leaves opened to possibilities, included a non-biblical kind of “god”. So, although evolution must be a fact, the Darwinian interpretation must be a theory.
The monstrous, sanguinary, enemy number one of human specie, terrorist, god of the Bible, was merely projection of human ancient almost salvage personality to the common humans’ dream of ideal supermen. But, every human is different from all others, then, the ancient debate about the ideal god was worked by writers. It was a projection of this earlier fetal evolution in shape of blastula, where billions of diversified cells should converge and be resumed into the first initial cell. Irony!
From Matrix/DNA Evolutionary Theory: “Natural Selection is the immediate environmental selection acting by stress guided by natural designers which are non-immediate natural systems, occupying the systems’ hierarchy at sequential inferior and superior levels.” This process goes back and before the Big Bang, triggered by an ex-machine natural system that contains consciousness. If you are a theist and want to call this natural system “God” know that it creates as do humans’ father and mother.
It is not rational that people does not accept the visible process of embryogenesis and the whole life cycle of a human being as the exactly mirror of universal evolution. One motive of this deviation of Reason is the missing knowledge that universal evolution is all about the evolution of a unique system that began as merely vortex/matrix, evolved to atom, star system, galaxy, cell system, human, mind, and next… These are different shapes of any natural system under the process of lifecycle.
Alan Clarke: “What’s more amazing is that if Genesis was derived by a dream, it was a dream like no other”
The same “dream” occurred to the creators of I Ching, as to the visionaries of chakras, as to those black holes like vortex related in Secret Doctrine, and they can occur today to natives of Amazon jungle. All of them are flashes of a single pair of nucleotides, which are DNA’s bits, because these units are bits of information for galaxies and atoms also. Kekule’s ring was the same dream
I was thinking about it just now: teaching kids that a supernatural assassin of human beings, causing wars and killing whole tribes, causing floods and killing even the lovely squirrels and butterflies; approving slavery, etc, as a humans’ hero, is just the kind of doctrine that produced the Inquisition, the killings of september 11. If this being exists, he is enemy Number One of human kind and all life, he should be bring on to Justice as terrorist. That’s a bad moral education. Or not?
If anyone here wishes to debate me, learn from Louis Charles Morelli or Kenith Adam and see how we debate. The rest of you, four-letter-word lightweights (deemed below my pay grade) whom I’ve asked to GO WAY, please can continue to do so.
If you wish to re-insert yourself in my debate, say something constructive with no profanity!
Ok, Parsival. Please, see this: “I found the number 1,618 when searching for a number for the point in time/space occupied by the piece of the perfect closed system circuitry – the Matrix – that has the function of systems’ reproduction. But, then, this number remembered that is very known and famous as “the number Phi”. Sacred geometry, bi-lateral symmetry are some of its names. Why? Then I discovered that the left face of Matrix is reproduced by Phi making the right face. That’s bi-lateral
symmetry! Since that Matrix is a kind of universal fractal, repeated everywhere, was explained why people see beautiful and wonder about this number.” This piece with this number is spermatozoon at sexual level, RNAm at cellular level, the base Uracil at DNA level, comets at astronomical level, and particle pion at atomic level. But Phi must be also the force that trigger DNA replication and now I am searching what is this force” I know you will see no meaning here. Due an unknown worldvision
I have to agree with parsivals horse. Your use of the language appears to be no more than a collection of words without any meaning. Certain sentences do make sense by themselves but they appear to be floating without a context.
No, that’s happen also with people that talks my native language but does not know the Universe I am describing. But I am sure that all words and all sentences are perfect connected and located and at the right sequence for any kind of apresentation. And I know how to express ideas, since that at my childhood I got the first place at scholar concourses for writing. I think this strange odd effect that everybody feels would happen when listening the author of I Ching explaining the symbols.
“[Natural selection] may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.” Daniel Brooks, as quoted by Roger Lewin, “A Downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240.
Brooks was right. There is no creative force, in the meaning that this Universe could have forces able to creating new information from nothing. But, still, speciation is merely reproduction of natural mechanisms, systemic functions, geometric shapes, existents since the beginnings of this world, that were expressed by natural systems unknown to us, and since these systems are hidden from our understanding, the mechanisms were unknown also. We’re discovering them by Matrix/DNA methods
It is not an assertion fallacy, you just failed to reflect on it deeply enough. If we break down everything we know to exist into the smallest form of matter possible, physicists still cannot explain its origin. This is a very basic principle, or the law of conservation of mass. Assuming that our scientific understanding applies universally, it is evident that we cannot find an explanation for our existence in its entirety. The same concept applies also for time, space, etc.
But we can elaborate falsiable theories that makes sense. it is enough that you has the right knowledge of universal evolution and projects its logics upon the existence before the origins. Because these origins must be a natural and logic effect of that chain of causes and effects that must happened before the origins. That’s what Matrix/DNA Theory did for finding a natural system existing before Big Bang and finding a half-biological/half-mechanical system before life origins.
What you are saying is reasonable, and I agree with you. I am just addressing the basic premise that something cannot not originate from absolutely nothing.
The curious thing here is that the law of conservation of mass seems be applied also as “the law of conservation of knowledge”. Remembering Godel’s theorem ( nobody can know the thru of a system – which in this issue is the universe – standing inside this system). That’s why I suspect that the human shape will be transformed into new shape/substances for to be able to extrapolate the universe and able to know the thru about it.
“Because our brain can not process the information of this world as having a beginning, neither the information of this world as having no beginning.”
That is just reasserting your assertion fallacy, all you are doing is doubling down on the same flawed premise. The human brain processes information that much we know, you have yet to show information it can not process. Your premise is an illogical paradox since you are limited to a human brain yourself.
My brain knew the information coming from some theorists (as Hawking, etc.) that the universe could self-assembling from itself. There are several theorists talking about vibrations arisen from absolute vacuum. All these things suggests a beginning from nothing and my brain could not process it. By other hand theism has spreaded the information that has gods and worlds with no beginning, infinite. My brain could not process this information also. An I can’t see a third alternative. Not fallacies
Billions of women give birth yes, but they don’t have virgin births…lol
There is no evidence that a rib can make a person, nor that a snake could talk. I don’t make the claim the bible does.. Whether that’s through speech or mind control..
Yes, there are evidences, metaphorically. But explanations requires a deeper understanding of universe’s pastimes and cosmological evolution. The metaphor of “woman made off man rib” comes from the ancestor mechanism of this process we see here today called “DNA replication”. Imagine the right strand of DNA alone and it appears a vertebrate column with two ribs. That’s the man. For making the left side (woman) need reproduce the first rib. This happened with LUCA billion years ago. Snake also..
was there, inside the body of LUCA. If you look to the photo of LUCA it seems a snake swallowing its own tail. So, the snake is the systemic circuit, which means that it has the identity, the personality of the system. LUCA was a perfect closed system in itself, the extreme expression of selfishness, from who we inherited the selfish gene. And the Fall was due Eve built the system/snake and occupied the place of queen, which is mimicked by any insect society today. Unconscious remembering…
@Terncote “[Darwin] let the cat out of the bad and it’s never going back in”
1) That’s a little overstated since natural selection was described by creationist Edward Blythe in two papers (1835 & 1837), years before Darwin published Origin of Species in 1859.
2) Portions of creation theory overlap with Darwin, namely information loss by mutations & natural selection, genetic variation, and changes within species, but not common descent were bacteria can turn into people given 3-4 billion years.
“not common descent were bacteria can turn into people given 3-4 billion years.”
You are saying that a blastula can’t turn into a human baby given 9 months because his parents are blastulas! Bacterias were merely a reproductive shape intermediary step between the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA), which was not biological and not living at earth surface. If you see the picture of LUCA model from Matrix/DNA Theory you will see the human face previously designed in the sky.
FROM THE LATEST EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED FUSION SITE IT’S CLEAR THAT THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT A HEAD TO HEAT TELOMERE FUSION OCCURRED WITH EVOLUTION GRADUALLY ELIMINATING THE RECORD OF THE FUSION BY N.S. SINCE TELOMERES WHICH ARE DESIGNED AS TERMINATION POINTS WOULD MITIGATE THE EVENT. THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT 2 CENTROMERE CO-EXISTED WITH N.S. NULLIFYING THE NEGATIVE INFLUENCE OF A SECOND CENTROMERE THAT WOULD MAKE THE CHROMOSOME UNSTABLE.
Don’t worry with this rationally acceptable theoretical event because it does not denies your theoretical ID. The final result we see at chrom 2 is just the way Nature records mechanisms and process into matter for this material structure works. A sample of this process is the case when nature discarded the top of reptile evolution – dinosaurs- and went back in time catching the smaller cynodont for continuing evolution to mammals. The ape was discarded as the dinosaur. Previous design.
LMAO. You just told a fairy tale story. The scientific method of the evil lying atheists/evolutionists is to tell “Lamarckistic” stories. Sorry evil lying deluded atheist, the Real Scientific Method doesn’t use just-so Lamarckistic stories it uses empirical methods. The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation. Loosing DNA you say, that would be devolution. Information can only come from a mind i.e. of God; Mindless and lifeless elements can’t.
“The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation.”
Ok, I am going back to Amazon jungle next month for developing my researches, you are invited. I will introduce you to Marilyn, a female orangutan that’s my friend, you can leave with her for two weeks because, for sure, you will die (if not by a snake, at least by malaria) and she will continue alive. Than, from the hell, you will phone to me saying: “Yes, you were right…”
LMAO. You just told a fairy tale story. The scientific method of the evil lying atheists/evolutionists is to tell “Lamarckistic” stories. Sorry evil lying deluded atheist, the Real Scientific Method doesn’t use just-so Lamarckistic stories it uses empirical methods. The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation. Loosing DNA you say, that would be devolution. Information can only come from a mind i.e. of God; Mindless and lifeless elements can’t.
Ok, now we can change our ideas. Maybe you are right saying that information can only come from a mind. The Matrix/DNA Theory has calculated Universal History in the reverse way, from here and now towards the Big Bang. At the Big Bang I stopped because I know my little brain can not go ahead, rationally. But wasting time, projecting the natural logistic saw here for calculating what’s was going on before the Big Bang, the results suggests a natural system with consciousness. Is it yours God?!
The Maxwell Demon is a discovery that it is easier to get new good information than lose the bad ones. DNA is full of repetitive not useful information inserted by retrovirus and inserted by wrong pathways of ancestors that were discarded by evolution. Cleaning these bad informations is not devolution, is the way for the best use of its energy.
“The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation.”
Ok, I am going back to Amazon jungle next month for developing my researches, you are invited. I will introduce you to Marilyn, a female orangutan that’s my friend, you can leave with her for two weeks because, for sure, you will die (if not by a snake, at least by malaria) and she will continue alive. Than, from the hell, you will phone to me saying: “Yes, you were right…”
You mention research in the Amazon but have you ever been published in a peer reviewed journal? Has your research ever been able to withstand scrutiny?
How is an animal being better adapted to it’s habitat than a human evidence for overall health? Health is not a measure of ones ability to survive a foreign and hostile environment. Contrasting the Orangutang with local tribes of humans that have also adapted to those surroundings is a much fairer comparison but still doesn’t address health.
“You mention research in the Amazon but have you ever been published in a peer reviewed journal?”
My website says at the first page an advice: this job does not pretend to be scientific. Because, the method of comparative anatomy was practiced by Greeks before the emergency of scientific reductionist method and modern Science has rejected my systemic method initialized by Bertalanffy “General Theory of Systems” and the works of Capra, Margullis, etc. It is my right to tell about any theory.
My friend, the most healthier does not need medicine and evidence for overall health. It is a product of the environment, well synchronized, that’s it. But my saying that the ape’s bodies is most perfect machine than human body is based also on my models of LUCA, which is the creator of this biosphere and apes. I am seeing in the models that evolution was driven till apes for reproducing LUCA which is the most perfect machine. Humans are out.
IT SURE IS LAMARCKISM. IF YOU LISTEN TO THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY EVIL EVOLUTIONIST IT IS LAMARCKISM I.E. THE IDEA THE TRAITS WILL PASS ON TO THE OFFSPRING DUE TO USE OR EXPOSURE I.E. THE GIRAFFE HAS A LONG NECK FROM PAST ANCESTOR STRETCHING TO REACH THE LEAVES HIGHER IN THE TREE AND THE LONGER NECK WAS A SURVIVAL ADVANTAGE THAT ALLOWED MORE OFFSPRING THAT THOSE WITH SHORTER NECKS. THIS WAS NICELY FALSIFIED BUT IT IS STILL USED TO DECEIVE THE PUBLIC.
My friend, giraffes has long necks because Nature ( created by your God or other way) permits it.There is a mechanism at light waves electromagnetic spectrum level, which we can see also at systemic astronomical formation level, that is a circuit through which flows information. Any natural system can use this mechanism, can cut it for becoming shorter, or expand it for to be longer. I am telling you: while we can’t go outside this Universe, don’t worry with evolution, ID is safe, Bible not.
I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.” Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859; 1984 edition ), p. 184.
I can see no difficult either. One problem of yours is about not thinking in relativistic way. Why the emphasis in the word “montruous”? It is due its size. But it is considered big in relation to what parameter? In relation to a galaxy, whales are microscopic. Perfect suitable for existing as not “monstrous”. So, wales are not montruous bears. And this “Natural Selection” working here is the agent of an environment that was produced by a monster system produced by Eve before the Fall. Right?
You are indoctrinated with all the atheistic pseudoscience of evolution.
Evolutionist falsely claim a chromosome fusion to make it appear that a human chromosome fusion lead to and is evidence of evolution. “[There're] Millions of differences between human and chimpanzee DNA”. In the Y chromosome, chimps have only two-thirds as many distinct genes or gene families as humans. Also, more than 30% of the chimp Y chromosome lacks an alignable counterpart on the human Y chromosome and vice versa”.
That’s the way evolution works. The chimp’s body is healthier than human body, it is almost a perfect biological machine for facing the real virgin Nature that’s the jungle. So, from the phenotypic aspect it is going “degeneration” which means “losing DNA material”. But we know that from apes to humans DNA has increased its material. Why the paradox? Because since first humans evolution is working at brains and its sensory levels. So, it lacks alignable counterpart and vice versa
@parsivalshorse “There simply is no competing theory”
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck
This is food for tought and remembers the same great Teilhard that you mentioned in other post. I noticed that suddenly, at the generation of 1970/2000, lots of people were talking the word “matrix”. That’s never had before. Why? There was anything new discovered about matrixes. I required copyrights of my book “Matrix/DNA” at 1980 and 20 years later they did the movie with almost similar idea. It seems that a collective consciousness (Teilhard) wake up for a new fact. People around the world.
It seems that this unconscious collective mind of Chardin meets the “meme”of Dawkins with the punctuated equilibrium of Gould at same time. Very curious, don’t you think so?
Secondly, (this is crucial) we must assume that everything has an origin, including our reality as a whole. Once we accept the premise that our existence cannot explain itself or account for its own origin, it follows rationally that something outside our scientific realm of understanding must account for its creation. Hopefully I explained this well enough, I apologize if its not clear.
No. Let’s see a sample of self-organization: Chinatown. People arriving from all different places of China to a same point in spacetime trends to meet, to stands next, to organizes and transforming the environment into a new shape remembering China. So, Chinatown was not self-organization of Chinatown, it was re-organization of informations coming from a past organized system. That’s the way that informations coming from an astronomical organized system has organized the first cell system
That is an assertion fallacy with no basis in reality. Why can’t we understand the existence of our reality?
Because our brain can not process the information of this world as having a beginning, neither the information of this world as having no beginning. And our brain can not grasp a third alternative. So, we need wait the evolution of our brain.
It is not an assertion fallacy, you just failed to reflect on it deeply enough. If we break down everything we know to exist into the smallest form of matter possible, physicists still cannot explain its origin. This is a very basic principle, or the law of conservation of mass. Assuming that our scientific understanding applies universally, it is evident that we cannot find an explanation for our existence in its entirety. The same concept applies also for time, space, etc.
But we can elaborate falsiable theories that makes sense. it is enough that you has the right knowledge of universal evolution and projects its logics upon the existence before the origins. Because these origins must be a natural and logic effect of that chain of causes and effects that must happened before the origins. That’s what Matrix/DNA Theory did for finding a natural system existing before Big Bang and finding a half-biological/half-mechanical system before life origins.
I am stating that ENCODE is jumping the gun on thier claims and that, based on what we already do know, thier claims of that much DNA being functional vs simply interactive is premature and I highly doubt it will pan out being correct.
Why are there long chains of repetitive “letters”? Considering that DNA is the chemical counterface of biological architectures, every letter must be a chemical record corresponding to a real architeture. So, why the long repetitions? Answer: it means extended evolutionary periods of stasis, without significant evolution. So, billions of years can run without any significant change but time does not stop because at any place something is moving and added to time. That’s cosmological evolution.
Never I said that. DNA is not a building block. It is the biological counterpart of a universal Matrix that we can see using our intelligence at every natural system, from atoms to galaxies. You misunderstood it, idiot.
I ammmmm sssssayiiiiiing thhhhhhe sammmmmmmmmmme thiiiiiiing. Excuse-me, these repetitions of letters is because I am written relativistically in cosmological evolutionary time which is ways more longer than your time. Do you understand, idiot?
And I mean the something. These molecules at nucleotides are material tools made by natural forces called “universal functions” because these forces are the motions that organizes inertial matter into systems. What he is suggesting is that the building of 3.200.000.000 letters represents things, substances, that were out of the long universal chain of causes and effects ( aka “evolution”) He is saying that this building is made of iron and cheese.because probability does not forbidden it.
Very good, I agree. It makes something that your computer do when you are writing a text in Word. But chemical chain alone as the computer’s hardware alone couldn’t do it. Both needs a software. See the diagram of this natural software at Matrix/DNA Theory.
That’s not DNA as building block, stupid! Horizontals laterals pairs of nucleotides are biological building blocks as unit of informations because they are the same configuration of those seven astronomical bodies organized as systems by the vital cycles process which is triggered by any electromagnetic spectrum of light wave…, my brother so stupid like I am because we, both, don’t know the Truth. Piles, like DNA, are mass of systems, not systems itself. And biological information are packets
1) You draw a bad annalogy that DNA is like a Building
2) You draw a bad anaology to language… 2a) Because the 4 letters in DNA are not the same as using the 26 letters in the english alphabet 2b) Because it isn’t actualy a language, it is chemical reactions that some idiot compared to a language in the same type of bad analogy you just did
1) Not if you see the human body as a building; 2a) it is not the same when you are talking metaphysical ideas. Those chemical basis are real tools performing real actions; 2b) It is not a language as the misunderstanding that DNA should be a code expressing a message. Each nucleotide-pair derives from a universal perfect closed system formula as fractals that are diversified for composing new larger fractal.
Birney was right about the scepticism. Gregory says, “80 percent is the figure only if your definition is so loose as to be all but meaningless.” Larry Moran from the University of Toronto adds, “Functional” simply means a little bit of DNA that’s been identified in an assay of some sort or another. That’s a remarkably silly definition of function and if you’re using it to discount junk DNA it’s downright disingenuous.”
That 80 percent covers many classes of sequence that were thought to be essentially functionless. These include introns – the parts of a gene that are cut out at the RNA stage, and don’t contribute to a protein’s manufacture. “The idea that introns are definitely deadweight isn’t true,” says Birney.
We know that 1.5 percent of the genome codes for proteins. That much is clearly functional and we’ve known that for a while. ENCODE also looked for places in the genome where proteins stick to DNA – sites where, most likely, the proteins are switching a gene on or off. They found 4 million such switches, which together account for 8.5 percent of the genome.* (
(Birney: “You can’t move for switches.”) That’s already higher than anyone was expecting, and it sets a pretty conservative lower bound for the part of the genome that definitively does something.
In fact, because ENCODE hasn’t looked at every possible type of cell or every possible protein that sticks to DNA, this figure is almost certainly too low. Birney’s estimate is that it’s out by half. This means that the total proportion of the genome that either creates a protein or sticks to one, is around 20 percent.
To get from 20 to 80 percent, we include all the other elements that ENCODE looked for – not just the sequences that have proteins latched onto them, but those that affects how DNA is packaged and those that are transcribed at all. Birney says, “[That figure] best coveys the difference between a genome made mostly of dead wood and one that is alive with activity.” [Update 5/9/12 23:00: For Birney's own, very measured, take on this, check out his post. ]
I think that scientists of ENCODE and elsewhere are not thinking rationally about DNA and Nature as a whole. That’s the reason that is keeping very slow those researches and experiments. Matrix/DNA Theory is a new and novel naturalistic thinking that suggests a different picture. What’s DNA? Merely a pile of a simple system (nucleotide-horizontal-pair) diversified into millions of different shapes connected into separated groups (genes) that resembles the same system-formula, that are
aligned as two helix because they are assembled over a template: a simple wave of light. This “pile” is the record of events that were the experiences of this systemic formula through time and space. But this history did not began here and biologically, it began at the Big Bang. So, the atomic and cosmological evolution are recorded in that region we call “junk-DNA” in a time that DNA was not biological but a kind of physical Matrix. Here we see why proteins stick to genes also.
Evolution is both a fact and a theoryThe fact is that it has happened. See the fossil record and also see Stephen J Gould’s paper, Evolution as a Fact and a Theory.The fact is that it has happened as per the fossil record.The theory is the mechanism for how it has happened. That is natural selection, sexual selection, etc.Creationists like to mix these two points up..The scientific community considers evolution a fact.The only people who reject evolution do so for reasons that are not scientific
Great post! The difference between the real and observed natural process of evolution and the theory called “Darwinian”, or even the Modern Synthesis. Congratulations you have written in good English what I was trying to say. The real mechanisms seen today here and now that constitutes the interpretation of Evolution are not the whole mechanisms that acts over evolution. So, there is a distance between evolution and modern interpretation of it ( called “theory’). Astronomy will solve it.
You are right in relation to shorter times. But Astronomy has alterations that are altering our astronomical systems that are altering our environmental biosphere that are causing mutations at genomes by a kind of punctuated jumps See the mechanisms of alterations at matrix/DNA cosmological models) . So, you are wrong at longer times, that’s why modern evolution theory is not complete and can not shut up the arguments from creationists that are bringing on gaps seen in this theory.
GOD INSTRUCTED HIS PROPHETS TO WRITE WHAT HE SAID IN A BOOK, OR MEN WROTE WHAT THEY SAW, HEAR, AND EXPERIENCED IN A BOOK WITH THE INSPIRATION FROM GOD.
So, is God inspiring salvage natives of the jungle till today? Because the scenes and symbols that were the sources for genesis narrative are talked by those natives as were talked by orientals thousands years ago when they elaborated the narratives of I Ching, chakras, etc. These sources are images end events about the software aspect of matter/energy that pops up as fast flashes into primordial minds remembering their ancestry when we were non biological system. See sources Matrix/DNA models
Everyone believes in God, but not everyone believes in the His Free Gift. Everything is clearly seen… “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse…” (Romans 1:20) People that claim to not believe in God actually do believe, but they try to persuade themselves that He doesn’t exist. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” Rom 1:22
Maybe you are right, all of us should appreciate that should be a God, souls, we should be eternal, etc. “Yours “Romans” citation is very smart and appropriated here. It is an advice against the creationism expressed by texts in the Bible. Why? For the invisible things of him are clearly seen… but…where are they seen? In the reign of imaginations of those Bible’s writers? No. It is clearly seen in Nature. Genesis is a not honesty try to jump the observation of Nature as Science do it.
” Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” (Romans 1:25) Nature is not God. God is a Spirit.
If God wanted that you – human creature – know him as spirit, he should not create you as fresh meat and this material world for you to discover him. He did you and nature in this way for you studying here, learning here. Trying to escape from here and going straight to the spiritual realm is escaping from the classroom. Scientists are more god sons of God than creationists.
And Jesus Christ, like John, learned that it is not good deviating humans minds towards spirituals imaginations through the hard and painful way. This is phrase at the crux: “Yahveh, Yahweh, why had you abandoned me?” Answer from Yahveh should be: “Humans’ brains are not made and not able to grasp the infinite dimensions. You were lying and prejudicing their evolution. As are you doing now when teaching creationism to children that will face evolution at school. Just my humble opinion.
““We talk about the ‘march from monad to man’ (old-style language again) as though evolution followed continuous pathways to progress along unbroken lineages. Nothing could be further from reality…..Moreover life shows no trend to complexity in the usual sense — only an asymmetrical expansion of diversity around a starting point constrained to be simple.”
Gould was very smarter discoverying puntuacted equillibrium, but he had no knowledge of data for understanding how and why evolution makes biological system to progress towards complexity. In fact there is a parameter for approving Gould: division of DNA. When the left side builts the right side. The new right molecule seems an asymmetrical expansion of diversity around a starting point, simple, as is the chemical soup. But, as science can change pigments and making pink babies, Nature does it.
Gould was right referring to biological systems if they were the drivers of their evolution. The complexity is in the environment, the informations for complexity are in the air, coming from the Newtonian cosmological mechanics. Everything here are forced to mimicks the sky, the larger system that Earths belongs to. That’s why organisms works as machines, insects societies works as machines, and we are building the mechanical social system of “The Brave New World”. But “mind” is a mutation.
““There is no progress in evolution. The fact of evolutionary change through time doesn’t represent progress as we know it. Progress is not inevitable. Much of evolution is downward in terms of morphological complexity, rather than upward. We’re not marching toward some greater thing. The actual history of life is awfully damn curious in the light of our usual expectation that there’s some predictable drive toward a generally increasing complexity in time.”
Gould was analyzing biological evolution as a biological observer located at this biological biosphere. No such observer will grasp the final results of evolutionary process, because, as established by Godel’s theorem, nobody can understand a system or process standing inside it. And this is just the biggest mistake of all evolutionists, when separating biological from cosmological evolution. You see progress in evolution if you go out from here as observer, as did Matrix/DNA Theory
“Your world gets complicated when you don’t believe in evolution” Ok, “science” is observation. We never observed dinosaurs, so we have to take REAL science and use it to support our faith, whether it be in a big bang or a big flood. But mr Nye, you would accept math as a nearly immovable science. It is a constant; equasions don’t lie. Look at the probability of a big bang jumpstarting life, and then you shall have your answer. Your belief is just as much a faith-based relief as us “ignorants”
Mr. Shunk, you are right saying that Math is linear, constant. But Evolution is not, it is curve. The line of Evolution of matter organizing systems since the starting point of a Big Bang in a Cartesian Graphic having times and space as coordinates draw a final design. just the image of DNA. At short spaces it seems straight (phosphorus strands), but at larger spaces you see the whole being curved, till reversing, as the strands of DNA do it with its sugars. Math does not interpret evolution.
“Look at the probability of a big bang jumpstarting life”
Mr. Shunk, please, look at the probability of that microscopic lump at the middle of a “giant”ovule, which lump explodes like a big bang, genes are free and begins the works for producing a new life. The probability should be zero, but you know it happens. If Nature is showing here that it happens ( and if you believes that this Nature was created by a God, it means that God is showing it) why don’t you believe in Nature?!
Ok, my conrade emfederin, brother in the faith of the lovely, tiny, lord PinkUnicorn. Try this:
Draw a single cartesian graphic where a vertical line is transversed by a horizontal line. At the vertical put the name “time” and other will be space. At the exact point of the axis, writes “Big Bang”. Now, begins a third line starting at the point of the axis and applies everything you know about quantum, relativistic, genetic, etc, aspects of matter. You will discover big secrets.Pink bless you
The movements of animals are interpreted as random by those that does not know the movements and forces of particles of atoms that composes the body of animals. Different from random Brownian motions. Brownian motions is part of particles theory which will be, also, known not be random when Science will know better the quantum dimension. But it is not enough to know atomic theory for understanding animals at Amazon jungle: You need know the shower of new laws that these atoms take from Milk Way
The truth fostered by the Holly Scriptures has produced the monstrous Christians crusades and Inquisition, the maintaining of social systems based on slavery because those scriptures, for five times, says that slavery is God approved, etc. No, my friend, I love my brothers of my species and I want the best for all without any racist discrimination, so, I need another source of truth that fits humans conditions. This source is Nature, but not the chaotic and salvage face of Nature here.
Are you suggesting the ‘everything’ follows the same patterns? Patterns revolving around Phi? Like flowers on a plant that can be reduced to an intricate repeating pattern? Like the face of the Matrix!
That’s why the method of comparative anatomy among living and non-living systems are suggesting to me. As merely a theory, I could be on the wrong way. If the Matrix formula I had showed at my website is right and really existent ( I am testing against facts) DNA is merely the biological shape of a more deeper universal system (Matrix) that has organized matter into systems applying electromagnetic spectrum of light waves. The problem of these patterns – this formula is under evolution, mutating
@”There is another approach for trying to understand the connections, interactions and variations between magnetic fields of planets and stars – projecting what we know about interactions between nucleus and electrons of atoms, but calculating the interferences from Milk Way”
WTF does that even MEAN??? It’s nothing but gibberish. Are you an author who has a book to sell by any chance?
You can’t understand a talk about Orion’s lifeform and civilization without seeing pictures and graphics for clarifying the concepts. It is so different, never imagined before. So, why I am here talking about Matrix/DNA worldvision if I can’t bring the pictures and graphics? Because, like one day you will be obligated to survive with the Orion’s lifeform, and it is better staying prepared for, also at the next corner of paradigms shift, you will be obligated to survive in this Matrix/DNA world
That’s funny! Creationists says that atheists must bring on evidences. Atheists shows millions of evidences and creationists repeats that atheists must bring on evidences. But atheists does the same thing about others theories. They repeats at nauseum asking for evidences, Matrix/DNA Theory brings on thousands of evidences, and they says it is as-hoc arguments without rationally debunking these evidences. War of worldvisions! Beautiful!
“NASA has renamed twin satellites, originally known as the Radiation Storm Belt Probes, to the Van Allen Probes in honor of James Van Allen, the scientist who helped launch the field of magnetospheric science. The Van Allen Probes have turned on and tested all instruments and are beginning their prime science mission: observing the giant belts of radiation around Earth in order to understand what causes them to swell and shrink in response to incoming radiation from the sun.”
There is another approach for trying to understand the connections, interactions and variations between magnetic fields of planets and stars – projecting what we know about interactions between nucleus and electrons of atoms, but calculating the interferences from Milk Way. The problem for Science now is that they does not know the Matrix/DNA theoretical model of this galaxy for grasping those influences.
“evolution as a whole doubtless had a general direction, from simple to complex” – T. Dobzhansky
500 MILLION YEAR OLD BUG BRAIN FOSSIL — “the 3in long fossil shows that insects evolved to have complex brains much earlier than previously thought… The discovery, which is reported in the October edition of the journal Nature, suggests insect brains evolved from a previously complex structure to a more simple one, rather than the other way round, researchers said.”
This is more one evidence for Matrix/DNA Theory. In fact, insects had evolved brains due grasping more bits-informations from environmental photons coming from LUCA, the whole astronomical system here. Why the reversed evolution? Because insects went the wrong way, repeating the sin of Adam/Eve at the Garden Paradise. They became a closed system, the extreme expression of selfishness, and we can see it at the automated social systems of bees and ants, which are exactly copies of LUCA.
Wiki; In western Classical Antiquity, theism was the fundamental belief that supported the divine right of the state (Polis, later the Roman Empire). Historically, any person who did not believe in any deity supported by the state was fair game to accusations of atheism, a capital crime. For political reasons, Socrates in Athens (399 BCE) was accused of being ‘atheos’ (“refusing to acknowledge the gods recognized by the state”).
Yeah, probably not a good idea to write anything down lol.
Yes, but then, creationists uses this history for argument that religion from Gods words and rules expressed in the commandments were the source for that morality applied by kings that socialized salvage people into social systems. But how the salvage kings and illiterates bible’s authors had the intelligence for elaborating systems’ rules? Matrix/DNA found an explanation when discovering that salvages natives in jungle ” see” flows of natural systems organizations and applies them socially.
That’s a valid point, Nugget, against the creationist theory. But this broad array of not enough conditions for starting and maintaining/catalysing the primordial processes required for starting life needs a lot of calculations for “how Earth’s primordial soup got all of them”.
But, the rational way is observing how Nature works. Every time she produces a new life she produces an egg inside a womb and inserts seeds. For abiogenesis is missing the knowledge about the seed… the Matrix/DNA
What really is the Matrix/DNA theory? Far as I’ve heard it doesn’t sound coherent at all.
My point is valid, since it helps disprove creation because, if the Nebula Theory is true, then it would make sense that there are other worlds that can be hospitable. If the seven days theory is true, then we should see signs we were created, like: We’re the only hospitable place here, Saturn’s rings should be be the same age, etc etc.
I am suggesting that the egg could be Earth, the womb could be the solar system. If so, what’s and where is the system, the species, the father/mother, that furnished the seed, where the solar system ( the womb) is located? These questions makes us lifting our eyes and see beyond: the galactic system. But how and why this astronomical system, this hypothetical last non-living ancestor could be similar to the first living being ( a cell system) and how it was transmitted to here? That’s Matrix.
The first living being was a complete system with certain properties, as genetic code, reproduction, metabolism, homeostasis, etc. What has produced this system? Since that this system makes news systems using himself as template, he must be produced by the same process. Then, which was the template that produced this first living system? The template needs to show all those properties, everything less evolved. Then I designed the template: it is a new cosmological theoretical model.
Because the teachers of Biology and Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution didn’t have answers for my questions. One does not need be a creationist for not agree or not see sense in those explanations. So, I went searching better answers for myself. And I found then at the level where Biology was created: the astronomical level. You never will understand Biology, DNA, life and evolution if you ignores their creator. And with this fault, you never will be able to convince creationists.
This is not a honesty tactic. You know what I am talking about. Names does not matter, facts, yes. If you are supposing that I am not actually informed about every aspect of this scientific theory today you are wrong. Included I have noticed that the interpretations of this natural process called evolution was broken into two parts: cosmological and biological evolution. That’s very wrong because you can’t explains biological evolution without the mechanisms and effects coming from the whole.
( êste debate foi o mais interessante e perdí todas as cópias quando caiu a luz. voltar a copiar)
XXX
DO YOU EVEN TRACK WHAT HE HAS DONE? DO YOU SUPPORT PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION, ABORTION FOR ANY REASON, OR HOMO UNIONS? ONLY THE SPERM OF THE BIOLOGICAL FATHER AND THE EGG OF THE BIOLOGICAL MOTHER CAN BE MARRIED AS GOD DESIGNED. ONLY THIS MARRIAGE IF NOT KILLED IN THE WOMB PRODUCES/MAINTAINS THE HUMANKIND/SPECIES.
TWO OR MORE MALES SHARING BODY CAVITIES, GENTLES AND FLUIDS WILL NOT PRODUCE A HUMAN AND THE SAME IS TRUE FOR WOMEN.
NO CHILD SHOULD BE SUBJECTED TO THIS IN THE WORLD OR SUCH AS PARENTS.
Nope. Yours “God” has designed hermaphrodites too, where there are no biological fathers/mothers and still can produces/maintain the species. But this is an interesting issue. The creators of biological systems at Earth had a hermaphroditic configuration and working mechanism that self-recycles them, which mechanism is the ancestor of sexual reproduction. See Matrix/DNA “photo” of that creators.
@”My guess is you didn’t read any of the 61 arguments”
Answering for myself, you’d be right.
Creationist sites offering evidences against various scientific establishments is about as believable a source as “free energy” websites offering evidences against thermodynamics.
When these articles hit the pages of Nature or Scientific American, then they would be worthy of investigation.
Until then, if there’s any real evidences revealed, they’re buried under timewasting crap.
That’s very bad! What is happening today with the dictatorship of scholar worldvision. This modern mindset that took the controls of human scientific enterprise will leads Humanity to the repugnant “Brave New World under the rules of Big Mother”, like the ants and bees societies, because the scholar staff does not know the natural system that is still driven evolution here, which is like the Newtonian cosmological machine. Creationism makes no sense today but our brain can’t grasp the Truth yet
@TheMatrixDNA “core of Genesis has the same source of Kekulé inspiration”
What’s more amazing is that if Genesis was derived by a dream, it was a dream like no other:
GENESIS BASED ON A DREAM? (1 of 3) — These are the names of Esau’s sons; Eliphaz the son of Adah the wife of Esau, Reuel the son of Bashemath the wife of Esau.And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz. And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek: these were the sons
Alan, that’s non sequitur. The humans interpretations based in that “dream” were the source for the imaginative effort trying to understand the mysteries of past times, like the creation of the world and men.Since that the flashes flowing in their minds were about ancestry registered in DNA memories, and relative to past dimensions (astronomical, atomic, etc) this stranger worlds leads to magical thinking. You are sharing genesis into two: talking about real people at Earth, not initial Genesis
Adam/Eve were the illiterate interpretations of ancient men still with fresh brains that can bring to memories the ancient times of ours non-living ancestors ( astronomical systems, atoms systems, etc.) Natives in Amazon jungle has the same visions today, as had the hindus/chineses with the same images used for to elaborate the symbols of I Ching. Go read the Secret Doctrine, about Schion ben Jochai, thousands years before the Bible, and see the models of Matrix/DNA, who were Adam/Eve.
I understand that you are not arguing for creationism or ID, but why is it that your posts always seem to confuse and conflate cosmological notions with biology?
Because the teachers of Biology and Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution didn’t have answers for my questions. One does not need be a creationist for not agree or not see sense in those explanations. So, I went searching better answers for myself. And I found then at the level where Biology was created: the astronomical level. You never will understand Biology, DNA, life and evolution if you ignores their creator. And with this fault, you never will be able to convince creationists.
Well you could argue that there should be millions of transitional species in the fossil record but we see none. Of course evo/bios claim there are and put up a few dozen examples but they don’t hold up as proof because of the lack of genetic lineage. The greats facts evo’s use to support their views is the one you’re using and that is “it is fact” and there is no disputing it which is laughable at best.
Is that true? Are you saying that the transitional fossils are enough for believing in evolution, but at genetic level it is proved that there is no genetic sequence? If so, the explanation is clear: there is no genetic lineage in relation to biological systems because they are related to LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor, as described in Matrix/DNA models. Mutations are caused by insertion of new shapes of nucleotides which are LUCA’s related and punctuated.
how can diseases evolve if they are not on there host
patuer disprove the theory of spontaneous generation because darwin thought putting a piece of raw meat into a container and he thought that was proof for spontanius generation.darwin thought insects evolve from bits of food.
Comets are not created as the Modern Astronomic model suggest, by the oort cloud. They are produced by any old planet becoming a pulsar that has giant volcanoes and no gravity for hold on the magma expelled. Diseases by viruses: virus are a bit of Matrix/DNA genome, corresponding to Function 5, the function of reproduction, they emerge due sun’s energy and if pulled from their environment they attacks cells. Pasteur killed the photons of life in his experiment. ( Answers from Matrix/DNA models
An article in Nature talks about the possibility of the speed of light changing over the history of the universe. Where this stems from is observational evidence that the “fine structure constant” has changed. The fine structure constant determines the exact wavelength of fine structure lines in the spectra of atoms, and measurements of the spectra of quasars suggest that it many have decreased by 0.00072 +/- 0.00018 % over the past 6-10 billion years (ref the Nature article)
That was suggested by Matrix/DNA Theory 30 years ago and the explanation is very clear. Any wave of light has seven different frequencies. When a wave is absorbed by a inertial portion of matter (like this universe), each part of that matter moves and dance accordingly to its local frequency. But, the whole wave spectrum is just a life’s cycle, so, light brings movement and life to matter. Universe is evolving under the rules of a life’s cycle. The velocity of frequencies decreases over time.
Pigliucci, Gould, Long and Eldredge are on a list compiled for ICR by Henry Morris PhD (in hydraulic engineering and he pumps the BS out!). A quick search into talkorigins gives refutations of all these tired creationists talking points.
Gould said the equilibrium was more punctuated than Darwin supposed, so creationist scream “Evolutionists at war!” and “Gould discounted the fossil record” and so on and so forth, ad nauseum. Gould was justifiably pissed off at all the laughable quotemining.
For understanding why evolution shows long times of equilibrium and sometimes sharp changes is necessary to know that:1) There is the hierarchy of systems; 2) This hierarchy makes that invisibles systems are interfering upon biological evolution ; 3) The terrestrial biosphere evolves designed by a template, which is an astronomical system ancestor of biological systems; 4) This invisible system is a closed, perfect machine. If does not happen beneficial mutations by chance, the template do it.
Couple of questions… 1. Do you seriously think that teaching Kids that they are simply a trillion year old lab experiment and have no purpose in being alive is somehow going to keep them paying attention in school and give they a desire to learn more??? 2. If evolution is true… Shouldn’t there be thousands of transitional fossils all over the world?? Not just one or two apes with human teeth here and there?! I’m just saying you might want to look at this a little more fairly
You are right, we can not agree our kids being exposed to such “science class”. But the hypothesis of we being 13,7 billions years old and the purpose of life is not the purpose suggested in the Bible are well substantiated by factual evidences. Then, what we should chose to our kids? The right teaching: “we don’t know how this Universe began ( it it began one day), and we don’t know what kind of forces leads aminoacids to develop the first living being. I will talk about several theories…”
question … they say God just is, and some laugh, and I’ve listened about the Big Bang, and wonder where did the hot and dense state which expanded come from? or was it just there? Much like some feel God is? What if, there is a whole other level of being and our God is just one of many in his realm,and we are just his ant farm and this universe is just his school project? I’m going to go with following Christ just to be safe, because forbid it that man made an error in their thinking
“I’ve listened about the Big Bang, and wonder where did the hot and dense state which expanded come from? or was it just there?”
The unique faithful and best teacher we have is Nature. Ask this question to Her. I did it and She showed a hot and dense state of a genome coming from my parents and initializing the construction of my body. What it would mean? That’s this universe is like an ova, the Big Bang is like the explosion of envelope spermatozoon at the center of this ovule… No need gods.
Just my opinion on the religious dying to express themselves without being asked:
There’s a little guy at the gym I go to every morning that’s the official greeter. He professes to be a devout Catholic and must know everything about everyone – all the time – every time. Inane questions for everyone. If you get new socks – nobody else will notice, but Pepe’ is right on the story. He tells you about the socks he’s purchased in his life, prices, stores he’s shopped for socks in, and every single one of the people that he’s encountered going there, while there, and everyone he saw and talked to on the way home.
Really? Is that living?
It’s just a question, but Pepe’s routine is alien to my species (coherent – productive – time conscious human being) and I view him as an emotional vampire.over-emphasizes little things that happen to them all the time, but some folks, like my little gym buddy, make a science out of it.
Now when he approaches – I send him immediately on his way to his next victim. He never works out – he just talks, and talks and talks. That’s what his belief system has given him.
(This old bastard says “Fuck That.”)
Is that what true Communism is all about? Being totally obsessive about saying hi to everybody like a Wal-Mart greeter, asking them how their doing, how their dog’s toenail problem is coming along and sharing every thought (like I’m doing now?) that comes into tour scull? WTF?
My sorry, you are in bad situation at your gym with such guy. I can’t support them, either. So, since I am reduced to live outside academic environment, I went losing all friends. And I arrive to a point that I can’t support friendship with women also, because they never talks an issue that I am interested. That’s bad, I went to a wrong way. The human intellect has two first ways: extreme expansion or extreme introspection. The right one for surviving better should be a middle term. Right?
My bitch is that some religious folks have zero boundaries.
Even common wolves have boundaries. They’re conscious of borders they don’t cross – territory that’s forbidden. Step across a certain line – get bit. I was raised to respect others space.
I’m not promoting being anti-social, but walking up on me with your gigantic bullshit line is just fucking rude.
So, it seems we have a new theory: Every person has the tendency to expands towards two extremes. If one does not control the expansion of an imaginary supernatural worldview ( like creationism, bible) it can not control the belief that he knows the truth about each factual detail, which means no control of introspective tendency. If one ( my wrong experience) can not control the expansion towards macro and micro dimensions of Nature, he can’t control the escape from factual immediate details(?)
DNA is not a code, in the sense that genes should be operating symbols of a living message. DNA is merely a pile of building blocks (horizontal par of nucleotides) which is merely the material configuration of a universal formula for natural systems. Each nucleotide-pair has something different, derived from the first, like happened in cell’s diversification starting with a single cell. The first came from Earth and the system it belongs to. And there is lots more wrong concepts about DNA.
@whiteowl “[Genesis should not be taught] in a science class”
I don’t disagree with that. However, if a person gets a scientific idea from the Bible, or a dream (Friedrich Kekulé, principal founder of the theory of chemical structure, discovered the ring shape of the benzene molecule after having a dream of a snake seizing its own tail), he should be allowed to present & test his hypothesis in a science forum without having his source of inspiration ridiculed.
You got a point. The fundamental ideas-core of Genesis has the same source of Kekulé inspiration and I discovered it after watching natives in Amazon. Kekulé had not a dream: the formula came as flash of images to his consciousness produced by DNA at his brain after extreme effort searching it. Benzene is a ring with 6 carbons that is just the configuration of a nucleotide which is the configuration of the world before life’s origins. Jochai, the Bible’s inspirator, had the same experience.
SECULAR RELIGION — “ideas, theories or philosophies which involve no spiritual component yet possess qualities similar to those of a religion. Such qualities include DOGMA, a system of indoctrination…designated enemies… The secular religion [fills] a role which would be satisfied by a church or another religious authority.” – Wikipedia (emphasis mine)
DOGMA EXAMPLES:
@XGralgrathor “There is only one scientific theory”
@jjukil “there is only the one theory, and no competing explanations”
Stating facts saw here and now by human beings as observers as foundations for general theories, natural laws, creates dogmas. For instance, we know here the chaotic state of Nature, its production is this salvage, bad-designed biosphere. But, Reason suggests that this is only 33% of the final Truth, because must have the state of order and the third state, which is the result of interactions between the two extremes. And we can see only from the perspective of two frequencies of light.
how nice you cut out the middle portion. but like we keep saying by all means. jjukil say there is the one theory and no competing explanations. but there COULD be. please provide evidence for one!
Any new theory that will revolutionize the worldview suggested by Modern Darwinism will be rejected by you and all scholar staff. It will take one hundred years accumulating evidences and will wait a big discovery that will make to notice the theory. There is now the Matrix/DNA Theory: “The configuration model of the building block of primordial galaxies, considering astronomic bodies under life’s cycles, is just the ancestor of the configuration of nucleotides, so, DNA is a universal Matrix.”
Since there is no such thing as a Matrix/DNA theory but a mere hypothesis that no one takes seriously and has no evidence to back it up, why are you making a false claim?
That’s just what I am saying: a new theory, without accurate analysis, will be rejected by the academic staff. Example? There is a website for this theory with hundreds of deeper insights as evidences and hundreds more for being added, every day a new scientific paper or a Hubble’s photo is revealed as new evidence. The indoctrination by the reductionist method is such that you forgot that the word “theory” outside this method has other definition: keep the original Greek definition.
Your whole comment is nothing but a giant assertion fallacy with no foundation in reality. None of your claims are backed by evidence ergo reason does not suggest any of it.
This is just a “creationist religious response”. It is not different the way Tom Adams are here criticizing the worldview created by Darwinism. Our “reality”is merely a fraction of the whole and if you can not see it, that’s indicative some fantasy is working your mind. This chaos around “human reality”is just what is being projected by people like Hawking upon Nature in the ordered cosmological state and theorizing ghosts black holes, cannibal galaxies, explosive Big Bangs, etc. Wrong way…
Look, your hypothesis has no relevance to reality, it’s alright.
A website do not constitute a peer review basis. Hypothesis are shred all the time in science when they cannot stand the scientific method. It’s alright, it was an idea, but it failed, that is all.
The “peer review system” is based upon the reductionist method, which reaches only 33% of real Nature. For instance, the “systemic method” was killed after Bertalanffy “General Theory of Systems” by theoretical Mathematics. The staff of medieval Church was applying the same peer review biased system over Science. But the Matrix/DNA idea is also theoretical, so it could fail. Not while it is becoming stronger every day based upon peer reviewed papers, despite they are limited to reductionism
Nope. It is several examples of approved peer-review that later was proved to be false, and lots of rejected peer review of studies that later was proved to be correct…Don’t you know that?!
So? It’s still the best way to test the different hypothesis. Sorry, but no one takes seriously your idea due to it’s lack of evidence and explanatory power of observable phenomenon, get over it.
So that the peer review scholar system is not the parameter for analyzing new theories and those occurrences prove it. I am waiting in the last 30 years any observable natural phenomenon that could not be explained by Matrix/DNA models. Bring on one, please… and then, no problem, I will trow them to the garbage.
So ID failed before it established a single example of irreducible complexity, or even got as far as formulating a testable hypothesis. There is no ID theory, there never was an ID theory.
Science Daily – Avalanche of Reactions at the Origin of Life
The scientists says:
“Life arises when, subsequently, a whole cascade of further couplings takes place.
As opposed to the notion of a cool prebiotic broth, the first metabolism was not dependent on accidental events or an accumulation of essential components over thousands of years.”
Ins’t it irreducible complexity? Vulcanic flow + minerals + organic elements. Reduced to Earth?
No that isn’t irreducible complexity. Nor did scientists ever argue that organic chemicals form by accident in the first place. Neither chemistry nor evolution are random processes. Most of those reactions in the cascade you refer to have been observed to occur naturally.
At earth, for life begins was need: vulcanic flow, water for producing minerals from rocks, the exactly mineral catalyst, carbon… A star at the right age, a planet at the right distance and orbit… Several details coming convergent to the same point at time/space. And maybe the right location of solar system in relation to the galaxy. So, it is reducible to what? The Universe?
For getting the final result ( aminoacids and ability to replicate and diversifying) you need a cosmological configuration. That’s why Oparin elaborated the theory of reduced environment and Miller tried to compose it. But the pieces that composes this configuration comes from different parts, so far away as terrestrial vulcanic flows and stable/old solar system, which is determined by galaxies. If there is no ID you need to show the element beyond the galaxy that can produce this configuration
That’s not irreducible complexity – that’s the ‘fine tuning’ argument. And given the size of the universe the probability of all of those conditions being met at some point over the last 13 billion years is very, very high indeed.
I have not understood the difference between ID and fine tuning argument (FTA) . FTA is the supposition that all those conditions are derived from elements that were present one minute after the Big Bang. The Big Bang was an event that separated everything condensed in a dense point. If those conditions developed separated and converged here for production of life, and you try to reduce those aminoacids to ancestors, everything is irreducible. Or not?
Parsival, this is not a creationist argument, neither I belief in ID. I am only trying to justify that my theory, which suggests a LUCA as being the building block of astronomical systems, makes sense. Thanks by this kind of testing the rationalization of this theory.
Jesus was Jewish, all of the apostles were Jewish. The bible is a Jewish book. People have always had false notions that are not in the bible. Christianity can not take responsibility for false assumptions. No man could take Jesus life he laid it down willingly. That is why he came, to die for mans sins. That being said, evolution is still just a false religion, and not a science.
If you have power, could you permit the drug dealers around the school of yours children? God permitted the serpent around his sons, so, he has no power. Would you have the courage for sending your son to be tortured and killed by salvage tribes? God did it, so he is a monstrous. That’s why a book written by hewish and from salvage times does not can be accepted by western mindset: its different moral, ethics, culture.
God allows free will, just like he allows you to believe the farce of evolution… He will not force you to believe anything. It is your choice, and mans choices that we will be judged for. That is what scares evolutionist they don’t want any kind of accountability.
It is the same saying that you permit the drug dealers around the school of yours children because you allows free will… I don’t. That’s why you believe in the bible and I will never be able to accept it.
You accept that NOTHING CREATED everything you should be able to accept just about anything, but the truth. That is your right. God will not force you to believe anything. That is your choice. Notice how you choose to believe what you will.
No, I am agnostic, I don’t believe, I have no believes. My brain can not process a world that had a begin or a world that had no begin. Same for gods. And there is no third alternative. So, I am convinced that I will die without know the thru, if there is one. Now, that someone comes to me saying that talked and saw gods… that’s absurd!
My Dog! Tom has enunciated a deeper secret of Nature, which neither Science knows yet! How Tom got it?! That’s revelation? God is talking here through Tom Adams? Really, in the Universe there is an astronomical system with a network that is the ancestor of the first cell system. And that network is irradiated towards planets’ surface from stars. At least is what are suggesting the models of Matrix/DNA Theory.
As the world started to oxygenate plant life took hold on land. Since there were no predators life started to branch out to exploit the plants on land. Dew to stronger effects of gravity animals evolved vertebrate and lungs.
People are made of mostly water, and water is the most vital source of life, not to mention all the diversity in the oceans.
Animals are’t made from stone, they are made of soft tissues that can acclimate to the forces at work on
That’s a theory. Since there were no vertebrates neither fossil of those primordial plants in the ocean, there are no scientific statement, yet. Matrix/DNA Theory suggests that life began somewhere at the beach, just upon the frontiers of rocks/water. Some kinds went to land, others to water, others. like amphibians stood at the same point. For life begins is necessary the convergence of all physics/chemistries forces of the Universe to a unique spatial/temporal neutral point.
1. Mutations happen (as well as natural variation) but this is not evolution. Mutations cannot cause a creature to gain new genetic information that wasn’t already in the overall genome to begin with.
2. You can prove scientific theories by experiment and observation. ideas alone are not science.
3. Donkeys and horses are different species but they’re still the same kind. no experiment has ever shown one creature turning into a new kind.
4. Evolution is a very intrinsic yet impossible idea.
1. Mutations happen (as well as natural variation) but this is not evolution. Mutations cannot cause a creature to gain new genetic information that wasn’t already in the overall genome to begin with.”
You are right, this Universe can not create information from nothing. But the biological genome is not the complete universal genome, then, still there are informations disponible in the air, for new beneficial mutations. See the univ. genome at Matrix/DNA Theory.
@XGralgrathor “Gould was wrong about that. His understanding of the evolutionary model was less complete than that of an evolutionary biologist today.”
Then let’s look at a more up-to-date understanding:
‘The Movies in Our Eyes’, Scientific American, Mar 2007
“For decades, scientists have likened our visual-processing machinery to a television camera: the eye’s lens focuses incoming light onto an array of photoreceptors in the retina.
These light detectors magically convert those photons into electrical signals that are sent along the optic nerve to the brain for processing. But recent experiments by the two of us and others indicate that this analogy is inadequate. The retina actually performs a significant amount of preprocessing right inside the eye and then sends a series of partial representations to the brain for interpretation…
Preprocessing! That’s just the prevision suggested by Matrix/DNA formula 30 years ago, before this paper. But, the preprocessing process does not sends different interpretations of wholes, only partials (like 44 chromos?). So why reprocessing if there is no variations? Because the whole process uses the same mechanism of recycling and embryogenesis used in that formula. ( See the systemic circuit between F7 and F2). The image may have the same distortion between parents and a new baby
The image “dies”at the retina, due entropy attacking the light wave carrying the image. These are the processes at the retina. Then its “cadaver fragments” are transported as electrical signals to the brain. At the brain occurs the process of recycling, when the image borns again. It is the same process by which stars and babies are born from previous similar templates.
@whiteowl1415 “We have an evolutionary path for the eyes”
I noticed you used “path” in the singular. Wikipedia says, “complex image-forming eyes evolved some 50 to 100 times.” Nature can build crystals but the idea of non-directed, non-intelligent processes (following physical laws) building an eye from scratch out of earth’s elements seems unlikely. To say it happened 50 – 100 times strains the limits of credulity.
CREDULITY – a tendency to be too ready to believe that something is real or true
Alan, the evolution of biological eyes becomes clear and acceptable if you know the evolution of a universal natural system since the Big Bang. Aren’t you a builder of electronic sensory systems? If you know the universal formula for natural systems (see it at Matrix/DNA Theory) you can have good ideas for innovation. 10 billions years ago there were astronomical “bodies”performing the function of primitive eyes or vision: all information and images of a system pass inside the big eye at F1.
here’s why evolution is false. its simple. ready?
at the heart of evolution is this basic, irrational claim.
“randomness produces increasing order and complexity.” in order to prove this statement true, intelligent people set up very structured, (non-random), experiments to show that it required no intelligence in the first place. I’d say that at the best that is circular reasoning and at worst its pretty close to the definition of insanity.
“randomness produces increasing order and complexity.”
If someone said that based in neo-Darwinian theory I agree with you: it seems highly improbable when facing evidences here and now. But it does not mean that the natural process of evolution does not occurs, it suggests flaws in those theoretical mechanisms. The Matrix/DNA evolutionary theory is suggesting others mechanisms that shows, when a random mutation occurs it is selected or discarded accordingly to cosmological reproductive purpose
Ok. Is this answer a proof that had no previous design for different shapes? Still not because there is a most real evidence suggesting previous design. Embryogenesis is an accepted natural real parameter happening in short time that could be the copy of a process happening at longer time. At blastula we see different elements ( proteins, chemicals reactions, etc.) emerging from particular environments (cells diversifications). It is due a previous design hidden in the genome. Why not?
Go to Wikipedia and type “Miller–Urey experiment”. But don’t worry if you prefer the idea of previous and non visible design driven the experiment, still it is possible. And the real scientific facts leaves open the possibility that this design is coming from before the Big Bang from an unknown source. The problem is for biblical creationists and for Intelligent Designer, because evidences suggests it has been a natural process of cosmological evolution, no evidences of intelligence and magics.
All right. In that case, what is your refutation of *all* the evidence that has been adduced to demonstrate evolution and common descent? In order to demonstrate that evolution is a “fallacy”, it seems like this is a necessary prerequisite.
I’ll give you a head start: how do you explain the 100,000 base translocation from chromosome 1 to chromosome Y that is shared between chimps and humans, but not gorillas, macaques, monkeys, orangs, etc. (who only have the sequence on chromosome 1)?
Great, Mr. Nullifidian! Yours question produced another question and I did again a quick view in those chromosomes and elaborated more one hypothesis inside Matrix/DNA Theory, about the emergence of human consciousness: this fusion means that, first time in all universal evolution, the aspects of software and hardware presents at any natural system were most fused, most closely mixed, and this event made that the software became almost material like the hardware, being strong expressed. Great!
Nooohhh… if this hypothesis is real fact, it means that the aspect of software was “sleeping” all past time in those primates with 24 chromosomes. Just at the 24th. Comparison with our computers, the 24th chromosome should be the piece of hardware where the diagram of softwares are projected. And suddenly, this computer’s software piece splits among all pieces, It does not needs any more the mind of Bill Gates for evolving. If this event is possible, will be here the starting of AI? Hells…
Evolution understands life in a whole different way; and in an effort to legitimize the original mistake, scientists continue to make claims that are extremely nonsensical. There is not ONE WAY of understanding the Universe, and science’s original evolutionistic approach to it is not THE uncontested truth of The Universe told us by s/he/that/those who made The Universe (if any) — Evolution is quite flawed.
You said. Evolution understands life in a whole different way? Different than what?
Science is a roll up your sleeves endeavour. That’s why religion and philosophy have been so inadequate at explaining the true nature of reality. You can’t understand reality just by sitting in your comfy chair and imagine it all into existence.
Eventually your going to have to get up of your arse and go and search for the answers.
Arguments from ignorance are for the lazy and the weak minded.
You said: “Evolution understands life in a whole different way?” And a user asked – ” Different than what?”
My answer would be: Different from the real life, which is not different from the Cosmos that produced it. ToE has shared Universal History in two separated blocks without any evolutionary links between two blocks. The abyss between Cosmological Evolution and Biological Evolution that ToE created has been fulfilled with mystic, like absolute randomness and blind evolution.
That’s funny! Are you suggesting that this Nature we see here is not the job of God? And that the job of God was the perfect garden of Eden? And you conclude that I will never understand god ( if he exist) studying Nature here? You are almost right because Nature here is half-Nature, his face’s side of chaos> There is another half face – the state of order – we can’t see here. Maybe this hidden face is the garden, why not? If you read Matrix/DNA models you will see the garden and what it means.
You and I have been able to genuinely debate, and agree to disagree. Which is great. My premise is that Humans are beyond just biological; and evolution does not begin to explain the intangible capabilities of Humans. Thus, one is within his/her right to entertain different possibilities. And, I reject the notion that one who does not subscribe to Evolution is an imbecile; because it’s quite imbecilic to say that ‘atom’ causes one to ‘envy’? <=That’s just one example.
Yes, and thanks because I have learned with you. When you say “I do not subscribe to evolution” we disagree. I subscribe to the process of natural evolution, but does not in relation to neo-Darwinian theory about this process because I think that my personal investigation studying natural systems in Amazon jungle for 7 years with the modern scientific knowledge about genetics, cosmology,etc. that Darwin did not have when in Galapagos, suggested a more complex theory and deserves be tested.
You said: “My premise is that Humans are beyond just biological”
It is just what are suggesting my theoretical models and results. But when a new human being is developing inside a womb, the shape of embryo shows properties and elements( as brain and wishes) that its own shape as blastula did not showed. From where the fetus got the ability of intelligence? From a superior ex-machine system that is not visible inside the womb, but is encrypted into fetus’ DNA, which has evolved from a matrix.
I unequivocally disagree. It is simple reasoning… and any study which attempts to prove that they are, is bias and in error. ‘Atom’ has no bear on ‘morals’ or ‘greed’ or ‘hatred’ or ‘laughter’. Absolutely none!
It’s a simple equation: If all things are physics/biological, then why do all things NOT display these attributes but Humans? Do you see the discourse? There is an intervention which took place allowing for these abilities in Humans.
“If all things are physics/biological, then why do all things NOT display these attributes but Humans?”
When I have a question like that, my best and faithful professor is Nature. Ask it to Nature. I did it and saw new attributes being displayed facing my eyes, inside the womb of a pregnant woman. Who else I could believe if not on Nature? In the fetus emerges consciousness, but the parents are not inside the womb doing interventions, neither used intelligence for making babies. Wombs=Universes
Once time I read a phrase, I think that it is in the Bible: “If you want know Me, study my job because the personality of an artist is projected over his creation”. I am seeing Science studying Nature and my creationists friends neglecting Nature because they have all answers. If is there a God and if this Nature is his product, scientists are obeying God and going straight to real understanding about how he thinks than those that think are smart and can jump to conclusions with no homework.
First, what you are witnessing in your examples are the results of certain Universal Laws.For example, the ‘killing of other pieces/substances for the good of that system’ you talk about is a result of either Self-Protect or Self-Nourishment which all living entities follow. These are Universal Laws.They don’t do it because they know that it’s “bad vs good”.Lions don’t kill for the good of life; they kill under the law of Self-Nourishment. & black hole cleaning galaxies is an unproven hypothesis
I think you are projecting your specific position as observer which is bio-intelligent centrism over the Universe for the sake of seeing beyond the Universe a metaphysical intelligence creating those universal laws and hence humans life and intelligence. If I am right, you need know that I am not against your worldview, I have no knowledge of real scientific proved facts denying yours world view. But my worldview suggests an ex-machine system acting naturally.
2) If you’re looking for something PROFOUND about what I’ve been saying, it is that: if you were just biological/evolved, you would not have instinctively known this law. It would’ve been foreign to you as it is to a tree or a lion or any other entity you can think of.
Nope. Non-intelligent and even non-living systems shows their pieces, elements, parts, killing other pieces/substances for the good of that system. Samples? The liver cleaning the organism, the lysosomes cleaning the cell system, a black hole cleaning the galaxy. Lions are the biosphere’s system function ( cleaning the system) that produced livers, lysosomes, black holes at another naturals systems. In the Matrix/DNA universal formula for systems this is the Function number 7.
Wow, so you just completely ignore one of humanities greatest evolutionary advantages, that is the ability to work in cohesive groups. I mentioned the very biological source of empathy, we have a name for people who are born without it, they’re called psychopaths.
Oh, and humans aren’t the only social animals of this type. Even piranha’s know not to kill each other.
Exactly. Cohesive groups. These groups are the merely natural graduated steps for formation of a new system, in this case, human social system, family system, etc. TrueVerdicts is advocating the idea that only humans have intelligence because intelligence has a metaphysical source, then, we are not apes. I am not against this hypothesis, I have no proof against it, but he does not know that biological instincts are merely evolution from physical forces responsible for matter into systems.
2) Lastly, the fact that piranhas don’t kill each other is an instance of another universal law. There are many universals laws decreed by Time-Space. The 3 main ones being: Self-nourishment, Self-protection, Procreation — which all living beings do instinctively.
Universal laws are natural physical forces. And you can see the origins of the seven natural forces popping up from any natural vortex, included those appearing at yours yard. I already said why time and space are not “entities” per se, they are units of measurement created by human beings. Time and Space does not decreed anything. Brute natural forces are the counterpart of tribal primitive agreements and universal complex laws are the counterpart of modern social complex legislations.
You are right and you must do not change what had learned in school. Here we are talking about theories. My theoretical models are suggesting at least seven forces, not proved yet. For example, the process that fragments a closed system, creating internal chaos, re-arrangements of its bits-information, mutation, and lifting up order from chaos with a new system employs other forces than the strong, electromagnetic, weak, and gravitational. Theories…
2) What tree do you know of that knows that those things are bad, or what rock, or what dolphin, or what star? Yet, they, and everything, are all physics/biological, right? To conclude: These laws that you NOW take for granted are not an act of physics. Someone will be thinking in bed tonight, when this will hit him!
They are an act of Physics. Morals, altruism, selfishness, what’s right or what’s wrong, all of these things are visible in natural systems existents prior of life, practiced by atoms or stars. For understanding why and how they are physics forces you need know the universal template upon which all shapes of natural systems are naturally built ( the matrix diagram/software showed in Matrix/DNA website). If is there something metaphysical, ex-machine, it is beyond this Universe.
I am not against evolution but every argument leads back to intelligence. For example if environmental stress is forcing a change on a species how does natural selection know what direction to change or what to change? It could be that a species needs fins or doesn’t legs then we have to assume NS is going to make the correct change which only leads to intelligence driving NS. If it was totally random then NS could devolve any species it wanted causing continues mass extinctions.
From Matrix/DNA Evolutionary Theory: “Natural Selection is the immediate environmental selection acting by stress guided by natural designers which are non-immediate natural systems, occupying the systems’ hierarchy at sequential inferior and superior levels.” This process goes back and before the Big Bang, triggered by an ex-machine natural system that contains consciousness. If you are a theist and want to call this natural system “God” know that it creates as do humans’ father and mother.
A user here named whiteowl1415 whom I’ve deemed below me, to whom I will not respond, suggested that he has come to know of other animals that innovate — meaning they’ve engineered something, and have subsequently made it better over time for their societies — such as the way humans have turned chariots into sophisticated automobiles. I’d like to know if others here support that and can give examples. Please don’t say monkeys use tools, as this is invalid
What do you think about bees and ants social systems? They are not social systems? And were there any kind of social systems before living beings, even before bees? If not, do you agree that they engineered the first social system, or, at least, they made better a system that is subsequent advancement from symbioses of cells’ organelles?
Yes but any other species less complex (I will not say “less evolved”, if you are a creationist) than ants were not applying less complex agriculture. If you are creationist you will say that God created ants with knowledge of agriculture, and then, I am out from debate. I see ants as the first to discover this “technology” ( of course, we can see something in bacterias, corals, but let’s us keeping here)
And maybe humans will stop at robotic machinery with artificial intelligence for agriculture. But it is possible that other most evolved specie can making arrangements of atoms from a chair into arrangements of lettuce, only using mind’s forces and light waves. Why not? This most evolved specie can be a transcendent shape of an evolutionary lineage that had human specie as ancestor. So, humans sensors have technological limits, which explains the technological limits of ants also. Or not?
Wrong. Mind is the natural counterpart of biological system correspondent to what’s software in artificial computational system. And softwares are evolving. Just my opinion. By the way, if mind was abstract, immaterialish thing, how could you making affirmations about its properties, as “it can’t evolve”?
I won’t worry. I know our lord is just and wise. Praised be his Neighs. They ring through the heavens, and are the actual cause of background red shift.
Since you mentioned CMB ( I was thinking that this background sound was due our Lord falling in love with Tom and saying “ooooooommmm…”) what if we change thoughts about meanings of human existence? Is it in topic here? My theory: Our scientific tools (optical telescope) are grasping the microwave region of the radio spectrum and not all regions because this tools are projections of our natural limited sensors. Universal evolution will go from BIg Bang (red) towards Big Birth (Y ray). No?
All such chemical elements are already found IN biological evolution, we’re composed of molecules. Everything in this planet came from star formation. Common knowledge in physics.To deny that is simple idiocy. There is no reason to think chemicals have to be “mindful” and “think” in order for biochemistry to take effect. Biochemistry is simple chemical reactions. There is no law of biogeneisis that says life can’t come from increasing complex molecules. Enough with your ignorance.
Question: Since everything in this planet came from star formation, why would be not possible that the observed chemical processes in abiogenesis were just the same process that Nature had applied before for getting formation of stars? Why would not be possible that those chemical reactions contained hidden variables driven the process towards cell’s formation? Chemical reactions are based atoms, which purpose is getting eternal thermodynamic equilibrium, so aren’t they a chemistry-stopper?
You are right, I should be clear that I am talking about physical processes, which can be chemical and nuclear. The evolution from pure physical nuclear reactions to the novelty of physical organic chemical reactions was based merely over the fact that astronomical bodies were made with only two states of matter (solid and gaseous) and organic molecules/systems were made with a new state, the liquid. At least it is what is suggesting the models of Matrix/DNA Theory.
Hey everyone! Bill needs brainwashed children who can’t think for themselves. He needs children to conform and “accept” that there is no God and they are part of an everlasting “evolution” which has never been proven. The evolution Bill is talking about is in fact a fantasy theory, no one has ever observed a plant turning into an animal, no one has ever observed a star being born, there are no fossils that have ever been found of a species turning into another species. Bill needs a slap!
I don’t think Bill said “there is no God”. He is against biblical creationism, but it does not means that is not possible a great intelligence creating universes with computer/genetic programs included for these universes developing forms of life and intelligence. You are right: somewhere in evolution theory suggests that first came plants and from them came animals but did not explain how. Matrix/DNA Theory explains it very well. It is about the origins of animal and vegetal cells.
You are right, and never Humanity will see it, since that these cosmological processes takes millions years. Then, the maximum that we can do is elaborating theories with gaps, holes, but under a unique logics that suggests what shapes must be the missing links. Modern Nebulae Theory suggests the processes of stars formation from nebulae of dust under rotation, but this is spontaneous generation. Matrix/DNA Theory suggestion is more rational.
“there are no fossils that have ever been found of a species turning into another species”
Ok, let’s suppose that the millions of similar fossils are not enough for proving a jump from one shape into other. We will abandon the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution? There is no known rational acceptable alternative. There is Matrix/DNA Theory that brings “punctuation jumps”+ mechanisms of cosmological evolution that produces mutations/muscles/cartilages and a new fossil. This is an alternative.
Nice attempt to divert from the presented fact that Life becomes tuned to its enviroment through natural selection not the enviroment is tuned to life.
Earth’s early atmosphere was nihospitable to most life we see today.
Plant life developed ad did just fine for a LONG time bfore animals were even possible.
Photosynthesis alterd the atmosphere and animal emerged in the NEW enviroment
Enviroment isn’t fine tuned it is in constant flux
That’s funny! What’s truth? Life becomes tuned to its environment or the environment us tuned to life? My wise grandfather always said: “You must suspect of any two extremes alternatives. The right one is a third, hidden, equilibrium alternative”.That’s just the case here. Plants’ life becomes tuned to earlier reduced environment, plants changed this environment in the way for this environment to be tuned to animals life. Plants were copies of astronomical closed system, animals are opened ones
You said: “If I say the sky is blue and another says it is yellow that doesn’t not equate to it being green.”
But…but… the sky is not blue neither yellow, the color is in the eyes of the observer. This Universe obeys evolution by the same process your body changes shapes ruled by the process of life’s cycle. This process comes from the life’s cycle of a light wave, having seven colors, but as observer you see only from the perspective of one wave’s frequency. The sky is white, my friend.
You said: ” 1) Life tunes to environment: FACT”. 2)Enviroment is altered by many factors including the impact of Life: FACT; 3) Life adapts to the new enviroment: FACT.
That’s just what I said. The problem is with yours first proposition. What kind of pre-existent life tuned to environment? At abiogenesis? If the theory says that life came from non-life? But, still you are right. There was no life coming from non-life, but biological systems coming from Newtonian system machine. No miracles.
RogerS4JC: “Information quantity & density? in a single cell is TOO MUCH DATA, beyond the possibility for abiogenesis apart from a source of intelligence.”
So, while atheists are seeing evidence for blind evolution you are seeing evidence for supernatural intelligence? I can understand these reasoned deviations far away of Nature due human consciousness is still a baby that was born minutes ago in relation to universal nature’s time, like any baby transforms every object in tolls/phantasies.
Do not tell me that my beliefs are wrong and I’ll do the same…whether you think the Bible is a big book of stories put not…its your opinion and that’s great but don’t tell me what I believe is wrong:)
Tiffani, these people here inquiring you does not understand yours healthy mind, I am sorry. I will tell a history about the writers of the Bible. A long time ago, humans were more naturals than we are today, their minds was like an empty book ( I know this because I lived 7 years in Amazon jungle among apes and natives studying their instints and psychology). They had a special sensitivity for grasping things we have lost. Then, monges from China, India, Hebrews, were having flashes of (cont.)
… memory from our past, long, long time ago, when our ancestor was a kind of spirit and his body was a whole galaxy. These flashes comes to mind due a strong event that happened with that ancestors, called “The Fall”. But, the shapes of our ancestors and their world were totally different ( I have the pictures at my website), and the non continuous flashes were like symbols, they made those writers thinking a lot, trying to identificate what their dreams were about. They told the dreams to students, disciples, and they tried also to solve the dreams.
Now I was designing those revelations from natives and I got the real picture showed by those flashes. About 4 billions ago, there was the Garden Paradise. It was a selfish astronomical closed system, the original galaxy. There were two beings in shape of flows of information (softwares? spirits?), one male, other female – Adam and Eve. They built the selfish Paradise suggested by a “Serpent”. Now, look to the pictures. The Serpent swalling its own tail is a shape of that system’s circuitry, but if you see the Paradise from other angle (cont)
it seems a Tree, like any spiral vortex galaxy. But if you see from above it seems an Apple, despite it is just the world in shape of that Serpent and also a tree. The center of that system was a quasar containing a black hole, which is the astronomical symbol for hardware as female and her anatomy. Like the beam queen, the female ruled that system while Adam had as anatomical hardware in shape of a Pulsar containing giants volcanos (male sexual organ) emitting magma (his genome) that flyies in space like comets (spermatozoons) towards the female quasar.
The garden paradise was built by Eve who convinced Adam it was the best world. But it was the extreme selfsness, a closed system, that broaken comunication with everything else, and closed the doors to their evolution. Then, entropy attacked the system, the Garden Paradise. It began to be fragmented in its surfaces bits of information, running towards the center. The system was collapsing into itself. These bits fail over planets surfaces and worked like genes, re-organizing themselves luke the shape of the old paradise, but the new enviroment was hard, made mutations, they lift up as opened systems. The time wasted from the Fall of that ancestor till the time of life’s origins was known as “abiogenesis”
And the thing that lifted up was the first living cell system. Now, why the scenes saw by sparsest non continuous flashes of memory were transformed in the genesis account? wrong interpretations of what we see but can not understand, they are things from other worlds and times. The disciples of Schimeon Ben Jochai, the hebrew that told his visions were the founders of judaism, esoterism, cabalism, etc.
FIM
XXX
In a scientific study just released by the University of Copenhagen, and funded by the Templeton Foundation. A 150 year sampling of devoutly creationist brains has yielded some surprising results. Observations and analysis have concluded that creationist’s brains are diminishing both in interconnections and cognitive function. The findings have been attributed to a loss of mass, and predictions indicate that within 300 years creationist’s brains will become vestigial.
Be evolution totally blind or obeying some ex-biological purpose, what we see here and now is that all Nature’s efforts are being applied to the development of human brains. And through human brains is developing consciousness. The models of Matrix/DNA Theory suggests an explanation. Biological systems are product from the entropic decay of something called “Newtonian machine”, a closed system, spreaded in bits-informations and delivered to new environment (planets’ surfaces). These (cont.)
bits are diversified, each one having a unit of the ancestor’s selfishness. 7 billions of bits of a big selfishness = human beings today. Facing one another, conflicting, will cure this sin and all of us will be one, an opened system. Then, my first purpose in this life is helping Nature’s efforts to develop brain and its product, consciousness. Yours news is the worst. We need doing all efforts for the freedom and welfare of humans, because all of them are indispensable for our own success.
Not at all – there are millions of other organisms evolving along with us. We are by no means the focus of Nature’s efforts – if anything micro-organisms dominate the biosphere.
Good point. We need making comparisons between micro-organisms development and apes/humans DNA development. My last informations is that human species DNA is evolving faster. Maybe the DNA’s micro-organisms are merely arriving to a final limit permitted by this modern environment/atmosphere. Or maybe at any planets where life emerged, all micro-organism will evolve into humans and when they gets consciousness, all leaves the planet… finding better places in the Universe. What do you think?
Yes they do and that is why we ask where do we see any of them “evolving” UP??? we do not. they all continue to remain basically the same.
we can witness this with amber we find that contains mosquitos and many other forms of life. They look no different from todays, although, some were larger but nonetheless the same.
the fact you think that evolution has anything to do with up is beyond me.There’s no such thing as up in evolutionary terms you think insects have remained the same? by all means find me dragonflies with a 2ft wingspan. just because a mosquito looks the same?…really? are you gonna tell me we’re gonna find t-rexes and smilidon’s roaming around? and giant sloths?
Well we do see other organisms evolving, scientists have observed speciation events (macro-evolution) many many times. Organisms evolve according to selective pressures, some slowly and some quickly – but there is no end point to evolution, and no reason to think that it is a process that has stopped.
The domination is not measured by quantities, and yes, by increased complexity. Matrix/DNA explains it. The diversification of stars are like the diversification of cells in a blastula. Each star has a bit differential, which is responsible by its unique function in this Universe’s system. When a star radiates its bits-information for evolution of biological systems, which accounts is their small differential bits, the resting are merely mass. The Sun is like anion, each time radiates a layer
Well where did you get that ‘latest information’ from? It sounds like it came from a layperson who thinks that there is some kind of imaginary limit to how much DNA can evolve?
I said “human DNA is evolving faster than micro-organisms DNA”, and thinking about the increased size of DNA since the apes DNA. Not said that microorganisms stopped evolving, I don’t have information about that. You don’t need an imaginary limit to how much DNA can evolve, only think about this: micro-organisms evolved at early atmosphere and environment, these things has changed, so, it is probable that their speed of evolution has changed also. Human increases in DNA is about brains. Or not?
Things don’t HAVE to evolve. And just because a mosquito today looks exactly like a mosquito eons ago doesn’t mean that some mosquitoes in a different environment didn’t evolve into something completely different.
The fact remains: Today we have mosquitoes, humans and rabbits, when eons ago there is no record of ANYTHING but single-celled creatures.
How do you explain THAT? The implications are undeniable.
What do you mean by ‘the diversification of stars’ – do you mean fusion shifting elements further up the periodic table? Stars don’t ‘radiate information’, information is something that you learn from something – not a physical property. For example – you can get information by examining tree rings, but tree rings are not information.
You need remember that this is not a debate among scientists, it is between Bill Nye and us, common fathers/mothers. So, the definition of words like “theory”, “information” that you were trained in scientific fields need be forgot and looking for the definition that the common person are using. Good see Wikipedia here. To me, information still is the old Latin definition in its turn derived from the verb “informare” (to inform) in the sense of “to give form to the mind” which is physical (cont
Information appeared in this Universe in shape of half-material vortexes containing 7 brutes forces that evolved to natural forces known today and after that to the seven life’s properties. Each vortex has a specific number resulting from the mixing of expression, intensity of those forces. So, information are bits, real and concrete physical bits that gives forms to particles, matter, systems. Stars transmits its own body and history through radiation, so their emitted bits are informations.
@”Sure it is information on the age of the tree and what environments it has gone through in the past”
He’s referring to the technical definition of the word “information”, you illiterate dickwad. All you just did was prove parsi’s point that you can extract information from informationless elements.
To me makes no sense saying that star is “information less elements”. By the way, the problem maybe is about different definitions of “information”as I suggested in the post above. For instance, how we know a star’s age and is lights- years away? Who is sending that information? And what is the substance of this information? Symbols? Code? No, it is physical bit belonging to the star’s body. Or not? By the way, Matrix/DNA Theory is suggesting that stars are more alive than we think.
Maybe the words “Nature’s efforts” are wrong here. I should say “the last Nature’s evolutionary bias” has been observed lately. My readings have saying that human DNA has increased its size faster than apes, lately. If it is right, what is being registered in this DNA? I think that apes as working functional bodies are better developed than humans bodies. What’s being evolved is sensors systems and psychology, all about brain and consciousness. Wrong?
What a crock. If this was true creationist would have diminished their brain capacity a long time ago by these standards. Creationism has been around much longer than modern science and yet we still move forward in all areas of development.
What on earth has the size of DNA got to do with anything? DNA is a polymer – there are sponges with longer DNA strands than us. Please tell me why DNA size is in any way relevant?
Let me think myself. DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system. If any specie keeps the size of its DNA, in any way it is evolving, because it means no new information are being added. It this specie is changing, it is not evolving, only mixing existent informations by fuzzy logics. If any species has increased the size of DNA it could mean that the added information is not new information but only more bits of same junk mass. But, there is no evolution if not increased non-junk DNA
“in shape of half-material vortexes containing 7 brutes forces that evolved to natural forces known today”
Incorrect. To the best of our knowledge, all of the fundamental forces of nature derive from one single force. This has been demonstrated experimentally for all three forces except gravity.
“the seven life’s properties”
Define please.
“Stars transmits its own body and history through radiation”
Stars don’t “transmit” anything through radiation except energy. False analogy.
You said: “Stars don’t transmit anything through radiation except energy.” Ok, let’s see that. We have different theoretical cosmological models, and my models suggests that initial astronomical bodies had life’s cycles and a star contains all information of those different seven shapes of astronomical bodies. The whole galactic system is encrypted inside a star and radiation due entropy makes those informations being emitted as photons. That’s what creates life at planetaries surfaces.Theories
You said: “the seven life’s properties, define please.” The initial quantum vortex at the Big Bang were divided in two big groups: those spin right and those left. This is about phenotype. besides that division there were the diversification of all them, due each one having a final number resulting from the mixing of that properties. One was curved motion, the other was rectilinear motion: one was fast, the other slow, and so on. This is genotype. Digestion, sex, metabolism all life’s properties
You said: “all of the fundamental forces of nature derive from one single force”. That’s what I said. But the unique force can be a quantum vortex. Only when you try to analyse deeper what’s a quantum vortex you find, theoretically but rationally, that all natural forces are encrypted into that unique force. Matrix/DNA models suggests that the production of these vortexes are waves/rays of light. Any spectrum shows seven different frequencies – which are the projection of vortex’s forces.
No, not at all – I completely and utterly reject your claim that scientific terms and their meanings should be dispensed with – this thread is about science education.
Bill Nye is saying: “fathers/mothers don’t tell creationism to yours kids”. It is about general education, at home and at school. And most fathers/mothers does not speak scientific definitions. It is not the case for dispensing scientific definitions, it is the opposite: this is an opportunity for scientific education included scientific meanings. But does not try to dispense the common traditional definitions because science had appropriated these terms. Science is not the owner of these words.
Then… what? Are you saying that human shape are/will not change?! Are you suggesting that human is the last shape possible for evolution? You don’t know the E.T. I have hidden at home. He is almost pure energy, he is like a ball, almost only “head”. And he said that thousands years ago their ancestors, in their planet, were humans like we are today. Of course, we are a provisional shape… and so, our DNA. DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal no-biological Matrix, my friend…
you are wrong. Human generations span decades whereas micro-organisms reproduce every 20 minutes. Greater populations means much more diversity which ultimately means bacteria have faster evolution.
The environment causing mutations, natural selection and finally evolution of human beings is different from the environment of micro-organisms. And thanks God…(ooops, my fault, sorry) – thanks Nature that it is in this way. Have you thought what would happens with our bodies if those millions of microorganisms inside our bodies evolved fast? Spaceships crossing the space among our cells, species acquiring the size of dinosaurs? My God…(ops…excuse-me again). We don’t know this issue yet.
“Let me think myself. DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system.” – No Louis, it is not.
“If any specie keeps the size of its DNA, in any way it is evolving, because it means no new information are being added.” – No Louis, DNA is not information, information is not a property of matter.
No offence Louis, but a few basic biology lessons and then you will at least know what DNA is and understand the basic principles behind evolution.
You said: “DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system.” – No Louis, it is not.”
Parsi, we are debating theories, not real knowledge. You are based in abiogenesis theory, where nucleotides should be product of long evolution of chemicals reactions and DNA the result of nucleotides replications. Am I right? I am based in Matrix/DNA Theory which suggests a model of building blocks of non-living systems (atoms, galaxies) driving those chemicals, exactly like nucleotides. Who knows?
You said: “No Louis, DNA is not information, information is not a property of matter.”
Again. difference between theories and definitions of words. My theory is suggesting that the process by which the half-mechanical/half-biological system productor of biological systems at planetaries surfaces is a genetic process where a kind of systems’ software is transmitted to models the new biological hardware. DNA as hardware is not information but the genetics instructions are physical information
You said: “No offence Louis, but a few basic biology lessons and then you will at least know what DNA is and understand the basic principles behind evolution.”
Thanks by no offense, I know it is hard to heard these weirds things. I had studied Biology, Evolution, Physics, Geology, Astronomy, all scientific fields and reading thousands of papers for 30 years, every day. I know I am not debating real scientific proved facts, only different interpretations of those facts. Maybe my theory is wrong.
Please define “quantum vortex”, because what you’re describing is definitely not a quantum vortex as understood in contemporary physics. Without that, I cannot address the rest of your post.
What’s “quantum vortex”? Two things: 1) all matter is reduced to particles, all particles are reduced to ghost vortexes; 2) The processes of atomic’s nuclei between protons and neutrons, as interpreted by the Nobel Hideki Yukawa, if such processes are projected over those ghost vortex, watching the results of vortexes interactions and development towards quarks, leptons, light, etc, we got all life’s principles, all natural forces and the universal formula of natural systems. They are “genes”
1. Quantum spin is a solely quantum mechanical property and is not “left” or “right”. It has no analogous counterpart in classical physics.
2. You again bring up quantum vortices, and demonstrate that you don’t understand what a quantum vortex is.
3. Your use of the terms “genotype”, “phenotype”, “digestion”, “sex”, and “metabolism” in this context all belie your purported understanding of cosmology and quantum physics.
You: 1. Quantum spin is a solely quantum mechanical property and is not “left” or “right”.
In physics, a quantum is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. Behind this, one finds the fundamental notion that a physical property may be “quantized,”. Maybe in QM it has other meaning, but QM is not the owner of the word “quantum”. The last non-matter unit are vortex, they have physical forces, they rotates and produces waves of light in two reversal directions…
You: “2. You again bring up quantum vortices, and demonstrate that you don’t understand what a quantum vortex is.”
Please, separates the words “quantum” and “vortex” because I think you are very literate in quantum mechanics and forgot the origins and common usage of those words. Now you can go Wikipedia and read the chapters of those two words. I know I am wrong, but there is no way when connecting data with new method if not using existent words. Think about vortices forming in dark matter…
You: “3. Your use of the terms “genotype”, “phenotype”, “digestion”, “sex”, and “metabolism” in this context all belie your purported understanding of cosmology and quantum physics.”
Exactly and thanks by wasting yours time with me. It is a hard testing for my models also. Those words are biological centered. I have projected “biocentrism” over cosmology and Physics’ phenomena instead modern scientific method of projecting Physics, Mathematics, Cosmology, over biological phenomena. Two theories
Ok, Joshua, the topic here is what we think is the best for teaching to our kids. I think first of all we need teaching the real scientific proved facts and i know you agree with that. But then the kids makes deeper questions about the whole existence, we have no facts known yet, we have theories. I make sure they know the scientific theories but I also talk about my own theory which has one citation: The Universal Matrix of Natural Systems and Vital Cycles (if you Google it )
There is no life force within a star, let alone a conscious one. And no Stars do not fucking create life on planet surface. There is no theory as we know it does not happen.
Yes, no conscious one, of course, the future forces used for formation of consciousness were not expressed in stars, yet. “Life force” is a wrong name, the right should be “natural forces”. “Life” is a wrong word, the right is “biological systems” for separating the systems’ shapes we have here from the systems’ shapes that are our ancestors (atoms, galaxies, etc.) Stars does not create life because there is no origins of life. Everything is a continuous chain of events coming since Big Bang.
Maybe you are only thinking about packages of bits of information… Information, from the viewpoint of my theory, starts with those bits that triggered the Big Bang. They are the unique thing ex-machine existent inside this Universe, since they came as bits from a fragmented system that was existing before the Universe, maybe another universe. Working like genes today (which are package of zillions of bits information) they works building this Universe towards I don’t know…
Exactly Louis – most fathers and mothers do not understand science, and so should NOT interfere with the science curriculum. Bill Nye is right BECAUSE most parents do not understand enough about science.
I think should be a good idea watching this vídeo: Kent Hovind – Debate 13 – Dr. Hovind vs. Professor of Anthropology Dr. Robert Trivers (Round 1). I think yours strategy is the same of Dr. Robert Triviers, and it was a bad strategy. Dr. Triviers knows he is right about evolution but tried to impose a new and weird information quick and fast, without previous appropriate preparation, to fathers/mothers modeled by wrong information. In the eyes of those fathers/mothers, Hovind earned.
I have skimmed the website you indicated. All I can say is, if you have evidence to back up your assertions, submit your papers for peer review. That’s where the real test of your idea’s mettle will be.
Thanks for doing that. If everything is wrong, at least it shows that one can explains every natural phenomena and event saw here if applies the reverse logics in relation to the logics applied by Physics when searching a theory of everything.Physic-centrism or biocentrism? The Universe is merely the result of moving physical forces or is tunelled for life and so, like a biological egg? Or like an ancestor’s body and we are the bacterias living inside its body? I will test it till my death.
Exactly who conflates cosmology with biology? The two disciplines have nothing to do with each other. I think you’re confused if you really believe that biologists have anything to do with cosmology. As for physics and mathematics, well, mathematics is a tool used in *every* scientific discipline, and biology and biochemistry follows the physical laws, so that argument is kind of moot.
Joshua, cosmology and biology are words invented by humans. The separation between the natural phenomena related to Earth and the system it belongs to and natural phenomena related to those things created by Earth and its system is only a human behavior not a Nature behavior. I think that it is rational thinking that this astronomical system created the first cell system by the same process of evolution that reptiles created mammals. Biologists want understand mammals without knowing reptiles?
You said: “And isn’t it kind of amazing how our Earth is JUST the right distance from the Sun to support life and have water?”
Sorry but there is other website than reason.org suggesting that the reverse is the right one: a pre-life put the Earth at the right distance from the Sun for walking free here, like humans beings makes roads for better walking. The problem of reason.org is that they does not know the real pre-biological system that the Sun and Earth belongs to.
No Louis – as I have repeated;ly explained to you, information is not a property of matter at all. We get information from examining things, but the things we examine are not information. I realise that you are not using english as your first language, so please let me assure you that you are just using the word ‘information’ innappropriately.
No Louis – as I have repeated;ly explained to you, information is not a property of matter at all. We get information from examining things, but the things we examine are not information. I realise that you are not using english as your first language, so please let me assure you that you are just using the word ‘information’ innappropriately.
You are based in string theory or any modern theory, then, you could be right. But… all these theories are projection of Physics-centrism, where the Universe is forced to be modeled and explained by Physics alone. My theory was elaborated doing the reverse way over the same evidences/facts: biocentrism forcing the model of this Universe. Here the final results suggests that “information is not a property of matter” as you said, but matter is a property of ex-machine “natural” information
Such transitional forms are beneficial. Without them there is too huge of a gap to leap in a single bound.
I started as a Young Earth Creationist, moved a bit to become an Old Earth Creationist, moved a bit more to become an Intelligent Design Proponent, moved a bit more to become a “quasi-directed Panspermia” proponent, moved a bit more to become an evolutionist, and finally moved a bit more to become an atheist.
In a scientific study just released by the University of Copenhagen, and funded by the Templeton Foundation. A 150 year sampling of devoutly creationist brains has yielded some surprising results. Observations and analysis have concluded that creationist’s brains are diminishing both in interconnections and cognitive function. The findings have been attributed to a loss of mass, and predictions indicate that within 300 years creationist’s brains will become vestigial.
According to wikipedia
A 2009 poll showed that almost a quarter of Australians believe “the biblical account of human origins” over the Darwinian account. 42 percent of Australians believe in a “wholly scientific” explanation for the origins of life, while 32 percent believe in an evolutionary process “guided by God”. A 2010 survey conducted by Auspoll and the Australian Academy of Science found that 79% of Australians believe in evolution (71% believe it is currently occurring, 8% believe in evolution but do not think it is currently occurring), 11% were not sure and 10% stated they do not believe in evolution
Besides the fact that women are not brood mares for other women, her’s some statistics about adoption not working NOW.
There are at least 400,000 children in foster care in the US at all times. childtrends(dot)org UNICEF estimates the number of orphans at 210 million in the world today. 86 million orphans in India 44 million orphans in Africa by 2010 10 million orphans in Mexico 35,000 children die everyday from hunger and malnutrition.
It is inevitable that the current worldview of delusional Christians will evolve until it finally ceases to exist, just as Christianity will cease to exist. Humans now have unrestricted access to knowledge and scientific facts that previous generations did not. The Christian Church became all powerful and all consuming through keeping knowledge and facts away from humans. It swelled its ranks by forcing millions to convert or be murdered. The Church can no longer control humanity in these ways.
@parsivalshorse “There simply is no competing theory”
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck
Não existe vida sem a energia do Sol, ela estêve aqui na época da abiogenese com sua luz prenetrando átomos terrestres, forçando reações quimicas a elaborarem a formação das primeiras células vivas. Apesar de que o tempo daquêles primordiais sistemas celulares já vai longe, o processo natural da formação de sistemas naturais agora volta a atuar, desta vez para formar o ideal sistema ecológico humano, o nosso habitat, adequado à nossa sociedade moderna. O que está ocorrendo é uma projeção no macronivel do que ocorreu no micronivel, portanto, nada mais racional que o sistema social humano seja movido pela mesma luz solar. Limpíssima, gratuíta e em abundancia! A Mãe Terra sorrirá orgulhosa de seus filhos e agradecerá com climas mais controlados. Cada brasileiro tem que procurar informação como trocar suas telhas por placas como a da foto e devem imediatamente procurar saber dos politicos que elegeram o que é ” net metering “, uma espécie de incentivo governamental implantado na Dinamarca para utilizadores the energia solar, cobrar d6estes politicos como anda a legislação nêsse sentido. A Dinamarca já substituiu 35% das fontes de energia poluidoras e caras por energia solar e pretende substituir 100%! A saúde e riqueza do Brasil depende tambem que isso seja feito aqui e o mais rápido possível.
Sarah me fêz pensar na teoria explicando porque existe esta divisão de umas poucas pessoas que apreciam musicas classicas ou com mensagens mais transcendentais como Pink Floyd e a grande massa que aprecia apenas musica que fala de sexo, com temas de cantores que parecem estarem com a libido aflorando à pele. Sarah desde a infancia revela ter um cérebro hard-wired com alguma diferença em relação ao seu genero feminino e à grande massa: desde pequena ela é fascinada pelo espaço sideral e ao assistir o desembarque do homem na Lua em 1969 ela sentiu imensa vontade de cantar as maravilhas imaginadas nêsse distante horizonte, seus fascinantes mistérios. Suas musicas, seus sentimentos ao cantar, revelam êsse íntimo deslumbramento. Para a teoria da Matrix/DNA fica mais um campo a pesquisar: como e porque acontece o “hard-wirement” em cérebros que insere o distante fenomeno do espaço sideral?! Como o espaço sideral desce e desembarca nos neuronios de um cérebro? Talvez a subita expressão de genes adormecidos no “DNA-lixo” que eram predominantemente ativos quando nossa matrix/dna existia como dna das galaxias?… Se sim, de onde vem o estimulo para que despertem e voltem a atuar?
Em todo caso… muito obrigado Sarah! Que os deuses desaparecidos, as possíveis inteligencias extra-terrestres, a ouçam e se voltem para nós.
(Vai lá e clique no botão com o polegar prá cima – claro, se você concordar com meu comentário) Esta é a quarta parte dêste artigo, vide as três anteriores, numeros 3, 2 e 1) . Foram perdidos muitos posts da Matrix devido uma revisão que desapareceu do blog ( principalmente posts do dia 08). Neus posts estão em dois nomes: TheMatrixDNA e Austriak1)
( Deletar PC Cleaner Urgente! Perdí Todos os posts entre 11 e 13)
Ultimos posts da Matrix/DNA: (perdidos posts de 04, thuesday, devido PC cleaner)
XXX
Posts modêlos para entrada todos os dias:
My question:
Saying that God creates Universes and man that seems like him inside it is not problem because humans also creates eggs and men inside it. Saying that Universes becomes a hot and concentrated small dot and explodes becoming again Universe is not problem because a big adult human becomes small egg and after the sperm “explosion” becomes adult again. But saying God lives inside Universes and Universes evolves without purpose are problems because I can’t see these things in Nature. What’s up?
As an agnostic and defending a new and unknown evolutionary theory different than ToE, I want for my kids ToE in science classrooms and ID obligatory in social/philosophical class. Evolution is not understood if only based on biological history, so, ToE is non complete “theory” and is necessary that it be criticized and checked by ID. ToE has no intellectual support for a meaning of our existence as religions does for avoiding kids falling on drugs, and ToE alone will not keep free thought.
I think Bill Nye is the expression of a second wave of Enlightenment, as happened at 18th century, due human Reason reaching a new shape in its vital cycle. Philosophers joining to scientists and atheists against those fantasies of Reason’s baby times, promoting science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition, intolerance and some abuses by church and state. If the first wave was based in Newton ( after Copernicus and Galileo), now it is largely based in Darwin and Astronomy.
Creationist “faith” can not be explained rationally based on current scientific view of the world. But, at same time this faith is an aberration produced by Nature, this aberration can not be explained because the scientific current world view does not translate the real world. This faith is product of expression of data storaged in the wrong called junk/DNA, real data about real world of times beyond 4 billion years. People with this faith has hard-wired brain confused by these memories.
TrueVerdicts: You haven’t criticized my post: “Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities “per se”, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universe as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time in between? Zero…
Here are creationists and immediate naturalists debating. They want to model the formation of children’s minds of the world. But, there are a minority – the cosmic naturalists agnostics – that also has its own model. We want our voice be heard here also. As said “illegalconspiracy”, a child with mind structured upon lots of evidences of a natural process of biological evolution interpreted by modern Darwinism will be a believer in an almost magical blind God acting without any guidance (cont.).
For us, biological evolution, the change into news species over long time, is obvious. In another hand, although we consider the indoctrination of children by a doctrine expressed in Bible is a prejudices to their healthy, we try to see the world from a cosmological point of view, and our suspection is that this process is not blind, what leaves opened to possibilities, included a non-biblical kind of “god”. So, although evolution must be a fact, the Darwinian interpretation must be a theory.
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ” Ephesians 6:5
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.” Colossians 3:22
“Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed.” 1 Timothy 6:1
That’s why earthly masters are the fundies of Christianism and appreciate that book – the Bible. And why you see the high authorities of the church always hand by hand with earthly masters. The very group of predators, mimicking the rules of the salvage system of the jungle for building social systems for humans. That’s why I hate that book since everybody treats me all my life as slave because I was born without family and homeless. I don’t understand why the preys are so indoctrinated.
since many times creationists are accused of inhibiting science because of their presuppositions (the God-did-it-so-there’s-nothing-more-to-study idea; but in reality, it’s just the opposite—“God did it” so we have every reason to study it!). Creationists for many years have argued that non-coding DNA is not junk (see “Junk” DNA Is Not Junk)
And now the scientific thought is acting as a science-stopper again. Due some success explaining evolution by Darwinian mechanisms and due our Astronomy still beginning and doing wrong cosmological models (as the wrong model of spontaneous generation of astronomic bodies), modern scientists don’t are stimulated to search the links between cosmological and biological evolution. The result is that changing in species are not understood because there are mechanisms coming from cosmology.
Ohno stated, “The earth is strewn with fossil remains of extinct species; is it a wonder that our genome too is filled with the remains of extinct genes?”1 Due to his evolutionary presupposition, he assumed that non-coding DNA was merely a “genetic fossil” that may have been useful somewhere in our evolutionary past but had been discarded as we evolved into more complex, higher organisms. Since this “junk” DNA was no longer needed,
Ohno had great intuition, he is in the right track. But he is touching something deeper, he can’t imagine that. Since we discovered that the fundamental unit of information of DNA – a horizontal base-pair of nucleotides – is just a copy of the fundamental building block of old galaxies, we have everything for supposing that DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal Matrix evolving since the Big Bang. If so, junk-DNA is memory of 13,7 billions years of evolution!
Mutation and natural selection, thought to be the driving forces of evolution, only lead to a loss of functional systems. Therefore, antibiotic resistance of bacteria is not an example of evolution in action but rather variation within a bacterial kind. It is also a testimony to the wonderful design God gave bacteria, master adapters and survivors in a sin-cursed world.
Not in relation to a closed system. Entropy attacks these systems beginning at periphery and advancing internally towards the center. There are no loss of energy/mass but degradation. From periphery goes the bits-information of that system, but if these bits reaches a platform, like a planet surface, a neuron in the brain, they have two alternatives: mixing with locals elements, reorganizing themselves as mutants end lift up as a new system. Or, as in Alzheimer’s, they does not re-organizes.
I’m pretty sure you know the Bible isn’t written in English, close enough is what we get, as long as the meaning is exactly what it is supposed to be expressed as, the Bible is surely more perfect than any other book available today. You should tell a judge that eye witness is INCREDIBLY FLAWED and there are no truthful people in the world, not even if God’s inspiration is flowing, OH WELL you wouldn’t ever get that. Besides they have no gain in writing a biased testimony, doing it to die.
I have my own theory about the Bible. Some events and places described in Genesis ( the Garden Paradise, Adam/Even, the selfish serpent, the fall to Earth) are real metaphorical but exactly descriptions of the state of the world and the event occurred before abiogenesis. They describes the body and process of LUCA – the Last Universal Non-Biological Ancestor. But I Ching, The Secret Doctrine, also describes the same LUCA. Explanation? Memory of past times registered into junk/DNA.
1GODISNOWHERE1: “Nothing in the periodic table of elements needs Darwin’s theories”
They need. The elements are different, diversified, because their origins was under the laws of evolution. Mendeleev discovered that each element of positions derived from 7 have the same properties. And Matrix/DNA discovered that different shapes of those elements corresponds to the different shapes of living beings under vital cycle. So, lithium and neon are babies, beryllium and magnesium are kids, etc. Louis Charles Morelli1:56 PM – Wed -17
XXX
I wonder what the more believable theory is: that everything was created from nothing during the big bang or that matter was already here and was just re-organized by a higher intelligence into what we now call the universe. Higher intelligence or nothing that is our choices.
I think there is a problem about the scientific community interpretation of Big Bang and this problem is that the Universe is being studied by Physics and its theories are elaborated with mathematical intellectual exercises. One sample? Physics arrived to “maximal amount of entropy” causing the Big Bang. But, a biocentric view see universes produced by Big Bangs as spermatozoon explosions and zygotes being formed due entropy attacking a human body system. Which method is the best? I don’t know.
All things that are cyclic replicates the last shape automatically, does not need repeats internal evolution again and again. Sample: the first cell system was organized by symbioses, but after that it does not do it anymore, it merely replicates. There is other argument for a theory of recycling universes?
Things that are cyclic repeat stages, they need not do so the same way.
Seaons are cyclic, this does not mean it is going to rain on the exact same days every spring or that the snow will fall in the exact same amount.
The cycles can contain internal variation.
Note I said I beleive, not proven, but…
Stars convert lighter elements to heavier ones, logicaly we will eventually end up with only the heaviest which through gravity of thier mass should recolapse
Ok… I think we are based in two different things: I am based in systems and you in processes. That’s why I appeal to a system (a cell) and you to a process ( seasons). The weird question is: the universe is a system or a process? If it is a process, you earned, the universe is self-recycling. But, I am not sure. Stars makes heavier elements. But I always search parameter in Nature here. Womb’s cells makes dense placenta for discarding it in name of embryonic evolution, not re-cycles.
Again, our problem is “process or system?” You said that your preferred theory is a self-recycling universe. I prefer an universe under evolution reproducing an old universe but increasing a little bit of complexity. Reconsumed placenta is a process among a lots of them that composes a whole system. In relation to embryonic evolution and its womb, placenta is discarded forever. In relation to Universes, matter will be discarded in name of an embryo of counciousness. You are part of that embryo.
We have no acceptable theory of evolution at the present time. There is none; and I cannot accept the theory that I teach to my students each year. Let me explain. I teach the synthetic theory known as the neoDarwinian one, for one reason only; not because it’s good, we know it is bad, but because there isn’t any other. Whilst waiting to find something better you are taught something which is known to be inexact, which is a first approximation
There are other theories than neoDarwinian theory that has found as existent the natural process of evolution, working with different mechanisms and suggesting new worldviews. Then, why you don’t know them? Because they can’t be published, the established mindset does not permit it. For instance, I will talk about Matrix/DNA Theory, which arose applying the method of comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems – trying to find a link. But, the found link is not ideologic accepted
Yes, the theory is not argument against evolution, as I said: “it found as existent, the natural process of evolution”. The problem is about the differences between the final results between the two theories. 1) The link of Matrix/DNA is the same LUCA – the last common ancestor of all biological systems – hypothesized by Darwin, but Matrix/DNA found LUCA to be an astronomical system and not a microscope organism; 2) Matrix/DNA suggests 7 variables instead 3 of ToE. This changes the whole view.
I am sorry Louis but that is still a biogenesis argument not genesis argument. I understand the basics of matrix but it still doesn’t fit into this debate.
Yes it is a genesis argument also. What is the first moment of your body? The “”big bang”of a spermatozoon inside an egg. Now, try to project this real event here over the Big Bang theory and see the Universe as an cosmic egg. But then, the event here suggests that was there, before the Big Bang, a previous design for evolution here, inside the parents (system) that produced the Big Bang. It is genesis by a natural being without using intelligence and magics, but with consciousness. Makes sense.
Actually you have a good point and that is what really exist without consciousness to understand it. Is there an universe without conscience life. Good question which I would say no. Nice point.
The problem arises when we try to develop this theory, trying to go deeper into the final mystery..The models suggests that any wave of natural light is the code for imprinting life into inertial mass. You can see why in the theory website. So, it suggests that the ex-machine system that triggered the Big Bang made it using only light. But the source of this light seems to be a kind of vortex (based in QM). Is it “the natural god” a kind of vortex? A vortex with consciousness?! I am lost now
The theory is based in a formula made like a computer’s software diagram but at same time is a unit of genetic information. The surprisingly thing is that all known natural systems fits exactly when superposed upon the formula, suggesting that the formula is the way nature organizes matter into systems, from atoms to galaxies to human bodies. Later, we noticed that the functions of that formula can be expressed as the seven different frequencies of light waves and it explains the vital cycles.
To say that Humans evolved is to say that intelligence/science saw birth with Humans — that science was at stage zero prior to Humans — as humans are the most intelligent entities — this is conflicting, because there existed things beyond human understanding prior to humans. <= Do grasp your mind very well around this. This only concludes that there was intelligence prior to humans which engineered them.
I don’t understand. It is not what Nature is showing here and now. The nowadays bodies of human beings are made by parents through natural genetic process without parents applying intelligence and although it happens, these bodies evolves and reveals intelligence. That is the real way nature works facing our eyes. So, a rational mind must apply the same process when inquiring the origins of first human beings. The non-living matter must have the forces for intelligence, but doesn’t applied it.
Only one problem(if Bill is honest) with his narrow-minded assertions. The fossil record. As every paleontologist knows, the fossil record displays a consistent pattern of sudden appearance followed by stasis, that life’s history reflects variation around a set of basic models rather than one of accumulating improvement and finally that mass extinction has been predominantly by catastrophe rather than gradual obsolescence.
These three questions are solved by Matrix/DNA Theory, unifying cosmological and biological evolution. The most complex non living system must be direct ancestor of the less complex biological system – of course. Since this ancestor is astronomical – it is the building block of galaxies, a system that works as perfect natural machine and shows all life’s properties – and the first living is microscope, Nature used the same process we see here when miniaturizes a human body inside chromosomes.
First there was simple single celled life. Then suddenly, about 530 million years ago, most major animal phyla were here. The fossil evidence is missing showing how life went from the single cells to the major complex divisions of animal life we have today. After the early Cambria era explosion of life there is fossil evidence that that life was now here. But no fossil evidence beforehand showing how simple single celled organisms suddenly became very, very, very complex.
No. The Big Bang of “your life” can be watched here and now, every time is exploded the envelope of a spermatozoon inside an ovule. The Universe only can create things like itself was created. Abiogenese is not going from single soup to single cell, it is about the almost perfect closed system that works like a machine called “galaxy” and nanotechnologically going to a single biological cell. Mother Nature does not play dice with us. She is showing here how she works. Why are you cheating her?!
(Fill in the blank, whatever your blank is) bless Bill Nye. My childhood, for what little of it you were a part of, was that much more awesome while you were in it. Let’s hope you’re right. Let’s hope in the future, the outdated ways of thinking which rule today are gone. Replaced by education and knowledge rather than fear and overreaction. The only saving We All Need is from ignorance.
“The only saving We All Need is from ignorance.” That’s the most beautiful phrase I like and I would ad my bit: “and saved from our selfish gene”. This selfishness expresses in everybody. The result is forgetting that our little brain facing this immense mystery can not grasp the final Truth. So, we watch evolution here, but is it blind without purpose? I watch evolution inside a womb, a shape of blastula becoming unrecognizable in the next shape as fetus. But, then…there is purpose. So?!
These debates are mostly useless. I never try and “win”, I just interject verses from the Bible and let God work on your hearts when you read them.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
It does not works with me. The History of America, my ancestors, its fairy tiles, folklore and traditions in first place, that’s what I want for my kids, not those of foreign origins. And there are no mentions of interventions of God in our History. So, if the god of foreign people is real, he has not talking with us, then, he is not real for us and not our friend. You are practicing mental terrorism on my kids. Let’s the people of America alone for discovering the meaning of our existence.
Why do so many Christians pretend that science and/or evolution are religions? This is a difficult question to answer because there are so many possibilities. Perhaps religion so controls their lives that they can’t think outside of religious categories. Perhaps they can’t imagine that anything which makes strong claims isn’t religious.
They have something (a fault on modern scientific thought) for hold on: 1) Darwin should never talk this: the diversification of life shows that species were not created one by one ( by God). Because Darwin was not prepared for explaining the origins of species; 2) Scientific worldview resists to link cosmological evolution with biological evolution and had inserted, in this big abism, the magical thinking of randomness. Scientists need avoiding to extrapolate to worldviews for avoiding enemies
1) Your science is simply an extremely negligible STUDY of an existing, indescribably sophisticated science/intelligence. Nothing simply ‘be’ be it not Time-Space. The engineering of the tree is the utmost science; the making of the star is the utmost science, the systematic, purposeful, flawlessly timed, synchronizing of cosmological entities is the utmost science; the engineering of the brain is the utmost science…
Search the natural matrix formula that organizes matter into systems and discover from where is coming all this “engineering”. If after that you will say loud that this is the formula created by God for creating things in these Universe without magics, I will show for you that this formula is coming from something natural, extra-universe. But you still will say that the extra-universal was created by God… and here I will stop. I don’t know.
1)Do you realize that your science, as a subject of Time-Space, is lesser than Time-Space, making Time-Space greater (than all) — as such, your science CANNOT explain Time-Space. And, it certainly not with physical approach. Your science is very negligible. It’s no hot stuff! It’s sad that you believe that Time-Space can explain by physics alone. You ought to be begin to understand that Time-Space simply ‘be’; that, in itself is illogical, metaphysical, it cannot be explained with physics.
Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities the per se, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universal as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created the space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time was there? Zero.There is measurement of a chain of events.
Your science will erroneously claim that intelligence dwells within biology, as it seeks to deny all possibilities of anything outside of physics. Intelligence does not reside in the body. “Thoughts” may, allegedly, be influenced in the manner you mentioned as a result of the mechanism/the biology being affected by the drug; i.e, when you alter/impact a vehicle’s part, the vehicle may perform differently; this does not mean the operator/driver/intelligence of the vehicle is ONE with it!
Alzheimer’s is proof that intelligence/consciousness resides in our bodies. As the brain decays so does the intelligence and personality. Your ‘soul’ assertion dissolved with a single physical decay.
I will suggest an argument for your theory. Think about a computer decay like Alzheimer, but, die fire. The hardware goes destroyed, but what happens with the software? As said mechanicmike69, the scientific theory uses Alzheimer as evidence that consciousness reside in our body. I think that computers are evidence that consciousness is separated. The software resident in computer is destroyed but the same software is in other places, like the mind of his creator, other computers. Do you agree?
The “software” in humans is the interconnection of billions of nerve cells, that die when you die and have no duplicate copies. Your argument is rediculous.
Hold on. Bits in a computer does not organizes themselves for running a software and does not creates their own software. And for clues that my argument is ridiculous you need bring on the paper peer-reviewed that reveals the mechanisms by which neurons are related to thought. There is no one. My theoretical models suggests that a natural software composed by photons is transmitted by galaxies over primordial soups driven abiogenesis. This software, later, becomes human consciousness. Weird,but
EVOLUTION DOESN’T MAKE FOSSILS; FOSSILS ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. STOP HIJACKING THE EVIDENCE OF THE GLOBAL FLOOD OF NOAH FOR YOUR EVIL ATHEISTIC PSEUDOSCIENCE OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM.
That’s funny! You say that one real natural phenomena – the amount of collected fossils – are being used by evil evolutionism as evidence for evolution, and at the same time, you point out one real natural evidence that sometimes in that place in the past had some flood and uses it by yours evil religionism as evidence for your imaginary fairy tales. If you think this behavior is a sin, why you do it?!!
What should mean that his brain is hard-wired in a non natural way? And maybe due indoctrination? I think that my brain is not hard-wired correctly also and I explain it by the fact that I am product of a chaotical biosphere that has tortured me mentally. But, if he have problems we need try to help him going back to the right track. My theory suggests that the supreme goal of evolution here and now is evolution of human brains and that we need all human brains evolving for our collective future
I have waisted enough of my time trying to explain things to religious people. They do not get it and I think never will. I now try to humiliate them with their beliefs. But you go for it. I enjoy reading your post.
I understand that you are upset due religious prejudicing yours goals. I was just reading Cosmic Log where comments criticizing NASA for spending money with Curiosity for finding pieces of metals. I will give my last dollar for NASA doing it because I need cosmic expansion, and religious does not help. But I don’t agree with humiliation, I think it does not work either. They are our brothers, we need find a kind of method for bringing them to our team, but, it needs be good for them also.
EVOLUTION DOESN’T MAKE FOSSILS; FOSSILS ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. STOP HIJACKING THE EVIDENCE OF THE GLOBAL FLOOD OF NOAH FOR YOUR EVIL ATHEISTIC PSEUDOSCIENCE OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM.
That’s funny! You say that one real natural phenomena – the amount of collected fossils – are being used by evil evolutionism as evidence for evolution, and at the same time, you point out one real natural evidence that sometimes in that place in the past had some flood and uses it by yours evil religionism as evidence for your imaginary fairy tales. If you think this behavior is a sin, why you do it?!!
Not forever. The reliance on evidence for making decisions, for understanding what is true, for establishing one’s position with regard to everything else – is growing. Religions rely on non-evidence , are based on faith, and fail as means to find truth. With the internet, more people see this and abandon the old ways.
Congratulations! You wrote what is happening with the right words. I think that religion has been propagating inside churches/schools by that authoritarian strategy of one-direction-dialogue. Nobody in a mass can stop the priest for asking questions when don’t understand/don’t accept something. Now, with Internet, everybody can see doctrine questions enunciated and has the courage for doing what has been afraid to do. God Bless the Internet…oh…I mean… PinkUnicorn bless the Internet…
You can’t deny God from ignorance as you aren’t all knowing. What you don’t know is infinitely more than what you believe you know but is mostly wrong. Only a superior intelligence could and did create all that exists that humans didn’t and can’t reproduce in the world nor could or does mindless & lifeless chemical elements by chance. This leaves only God, a superior intelligence/being, as a reasonable and intellectually honest option.
Please, tell me how and which method have you used when connecting the real and natural amount of proved data we have today and show me the final picture did you got? I did my own search for knowledge of those data, I choose a method (comparative anatomy between all known natural systems) for connecting all that data, I got a final picture, which is not suggesting any magic intervention of gods, from since before the origins of this Universe to nowadays. I am very curious to know your picture.
One cannot have knowledge/science of things presumed/imagined, which do not happen, and have hot happened and which cannot be reproduced. Pond scum to you evolution never happened or happens.
EVOLUTIONISM IS A LIE AND PSEUDOSCIENCE AND SCIENCE FICTION ATHEISTIC STYLE. IT HAS BECOME THE RELIGION OF THE ATHEISTIC SORT.
COMPARATIVE ANATOMY DOESN’T SUBSTANTIATE YOUR IMAGINED NOTIONS THAT A BEAR BECAME A WHALE; A MONKEY BECAME A HUMAN, THAT BIRDS CAME FROM DINOSAURS. THIS IS INSANE & UNSCIENTIFIC.
You are right…lol! One cannot get the final Truth (if have one) based solely in all data we know today. Any methodical exercise of connecting the known data shows blank spaces where is missing data. But we need some guide, meanings that makes sense, then we do the connection and hypothesizes how should be that missing data and get a final picture. This is called “theory”. Sample? The Higgs bosom. It is a guide for next search, experiments. Still waiting your picture.
Comparative anatomy is the most ancient and authentic method for rational theories about the unknown. Opening the bodies of animals instead the body of humans was the method for inferring what was inside the human body, which substantiates ancient medicine. We don’t know the natural forces that drove abiogenesis, then, take the state of the world of that time, put the existent systems, atoms and galaxies, over the table, and do comparisons with the first cells systems. Get theories of forces.
WHO SAW A BEAR BECOME A WHALE, OR DINOSAUR BECOME A BIRD, OR AN APELIKE CREATURE BECOME A HUMAN, OR CHEMICAL ELEMENTS IN WARM POOLS OR WATER SPONTANEOUSLY GENERATE THE ALLEGED COMMON ANCESTOR OF ALL AND THEN ITS TRANSMUTATION INTO ALL THE LIFE FORMS THAT EVER LIVED? EVOLUTION FROM POND SCUM TO ALL THAT EVER LIVED WAS AND IS NEVER SEEN FOR REPEATED TESTING AS THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD REQUIRES. THEREFORE, EVOLUTIONISM IS ATHEISTIC PSEUDOSCIENCE/SCIENCE
You are right. The great transformations of, to say, reptiles into mammals, are not well explained solely by the three mechanisms of ToE: Variation, Selection, Inheritance. Then, what a rational mind should do? Go back re-observing everything. Put the galaxy over the table, put the reptile inside the galaxy, stands above the galaxy and think. One day, one year, or 30 years like I did, no matter, think. I got an answer: there are more four mechanisms added to those three. I got my mammal. Theory
Are you saying that I can’t think by myself and you can, then, I should accept like a ewe your conclusions? You are insulting my intelligence. Ne pas jamais. But I like to learn and changing real information. If you go straight to the data…
COMPARING ALL CARS AND THEIR ENGINES DOESN’T MEAN THAT THIS COMPARATIVE EXAMINATION CONFIRMS THAT CARS EVOLVED BY ACCIDENTAL COLLABORATION OF MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS. DID YOU WAIT FOR YOUR CAR AND HOME TO MAKE ITSELF?
WHY ARE YOU INCAPABLE OF RATIONAL CRITICAL THINKING? WHY DO YOU LOVE THE LIE OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM? WHAT SIN DO YOU LOVE OVER THE TRUTH OF GOD?
YOUR IDEA OF THEORIES IS ACTUALLY VILE FOOLISH HUMAN IMAGINATION.
Comparative anatomy does not work in this way, it works only applied over real natural wholes systems. But the comparison of cars, since the carriage pulled by horses to a BMW suggests evidences for a process of evolution and suggests the existence of an external agent driven this evolution. Since it is not a living thing, the evolution happens in the agent, not in the cars. If a future car gets artificial intelligence, it should evolve by itself. That’s what happens since origins of life.
GOD DOESN’T LIE. MAN DOES. WHY ARE YOU LYING FOR EVIL EVOLUTIONISM?
THE CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION OF LIFE FALSIFIES EVOLUTIONISM, AS DOES THE FOSSILIFEROUS SEDIMENTARY WITH BILLIONS OF DEAD FLORA & FAUNA AS GOD PLANNED TO DESTROY, AS DOES INFORMATION IN THE GENOME OF ALL BIOLOGICAL LIFE AND THE DNA CODE THAT CAN ONLY COME FROM AN INTELLIGENT MIND, AS DOES ALL THE KNOWN SCIENTIFIC LAWS THAT EVOLUTIONISM DEFIES.
You are right, accordingly with my theory, which does not agree with the idea of a meteorite causing it. Dinosaurs disappeared due same cause disappears all species that super-specializes as closed systems and closes the door to its own evolution. But is not falsifies evolutionism. Nature applied the old astronomical mechanism of entropy producing chaos for dinosaurs and went backwards, finding the small cyanodont for continuing evolution and getting a mammal. And then, new order arose.
There’re many idiotic stories for the extinction of dinosaurs. Dinosaurs are found in graveyards with many different animals together. This information is kept from the public because it falsifies the alleged order of evolution which the fossil record doesn’t help as with the Cambrian Explosion of life containing more than 100 phyla that suddenly appear without links to the bacteria, spores, algae in the adjacent layer, the Precambrian, just below the Cambrian. Evolutionism is a cosmic lie.
Sorry, I have not studied completely the Cambrian explosion as you seems to be well informed. But I said that I am waiting your information about the method you been using and the final picture you got. You have found intervention of a God producing a flood at that time? Is it 60 millions years ago? My method has suggested that – if had no evolutionary links between pre-Cambrian and after-Cambrian, there was intervention of solar flares due atomic reactions reaching internal new layers.
YOUR COMPARATIVE ANATOMY IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS MY CAR/ENGINE ANALOGY. STOP LYING. DID YOU READ ROMANS 1:18-32?
ALL THE CHEMICAL ELEMENTS IN YOUR BODY AS IN THE CAR ARE NOT ALIVE I.E. HYDROGEN, OXYGEN, CALCIUM, NITROGEN, CARBON ETC. ARE NOT ALIVE AND CAN’T CONTRIVE ENGINES, CARS OR BIOLOGICAL LIFE.
THE “EVOLUTION OF THE CAR” IS YOUR DECEPTIVE USE OF THE WORD. IN THIS CASE IT’S THE PROGRESS IMPROVEMENT OF THE AUTOMOBILE AND TECHNOLOGY BY HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, NOT WITHOUT INTELLIGENCE.
You are right, is the same analogy, and that’s why we arrived to same conclusion: there is an external agent doing it. The difference between us is about who is the external agent acting over biological evolution. You have seen a magical god I have seen a new cosmological model. The elements in our bodies are not alive, but they were connected by photons coming from sun light and cosmic radiation bringing on informations about a system that is half-mechanical/half-biological. That’s a theory.
NOBODY SAW MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS POPPING INTO EXISTENCE FROM THE ALLEGED BIG BANG OF NOTHING AT ALL, THAT THEN COLLABORATED TO CONTRIVE THE ALLEGED COMMON ANCESTOR OF ALL WHICH THEN TRANSMUTED INTO EVERYTHING THAT EVER LIVED?
BILLY NYE THE PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC GUY IS SUGGESTING THE OPPOSITE WHICH IS A PUT-DOWN AND AN INSULT TO BELIEVERS OF GOD.
Who are you in Internet calling me a “moron”? What evidence/proof have you found for bringing on the table and proving that?
Natural evolution was the rational conclusion of any healthy mind in my teenager times. There was no enough data about abiogenesis and Big Bang, so, any affirmative conclusion would be not rational, it were opened questions. About History, myths, the one of my nation has the first place, and there is no mention of interventions of supernatural beings. What do you want?!!
I think you are based on the information that scientists have trying to ad information into DNA and never got an improvement – an information that fits your world view. I read it 20 years ago, and I don’t know if still is valid. But, since you are advocating the idea that humans are special because you believe they have “soul”, I ask you: “why not a soul under evolution that can change DNA when the body is a hardware that does not works?” Have you thought in this possibility?
I agree. Though, dolphins are not intelligent, as they CANNOT engineer and innovate. I submit to all following this debate that only Humans are intelligent.
I think you need change the word “intelligent” in this debate and not using the words “engineer, innovation” for advocating an idea of human “soul”. Intelligence has been defined in many different ways including, abstract thought, understanding, self-awareness, communication, reasoning, learning, retaining, planning, and problem solving. People here understand it as it derives from the Latin verb intelligere which derives from inter-legere meaning to “pick out” or discern.
If you feel happy with your belief, good for you. But, please, don’t tell it to my kids neither through their school because I want the mind of my kids free of private fantasies for better learning so many things about the nature of this world and be prepared for survival facing the ferocious competition. Fantasies are defined as private world views without public evidences.
One does not convert to atheism because atheism is nothing. It is a neutral stance on the claims about god. One just wakes up one day and says ” shit I’ve wasted my life on bullshit!!!”
But…attacking the name “god” is wrong, I think. My life’s experience and little knowledge are suggesting that this mind inside each human head and probable in many other lifeforms are like bubbles of dense substance called “consciousness” floating in an infinite ocean of slight consciousness, like a photon floating in light waves. Particles of photons with high quantum of light can be wave, also. Each one can call this “ocean” by the name he/she wants. If “god”, no problem.
Life is so complex, that just a few proteins coming about by chance …even if the whole universe was an organic soup, is 10 with 40,000 zero’s after it to 1. Note that 10 with 50 zero’s after it, is a number greater than the atoms in the universe. So the chance is 0
An ovum is so simple and an embryo is so complex! Any hypothetical microscope being located inside an ovum, seeing only yolk, should say that the chance of something like genes coming about… even if that little universe was an organic soup, is 10 with 40.000 zero’s after it to 1. he should concludes the chance is 0.
But.. it happens. Nature has some forces in it that makes it happens. This microscope being that can’t see those forces would believe in magical gods or magical randomness. You?
Yes for a few proteins to randomly pop up in thin air is damn near impossible. That’s not what scientists think happened btw. please do some research on abiogenesis. and it’s not evolution anyway.
Yes, iaml3642494 appealing to magical gods for explaining what happened in that primordial soup is not rational. But, scientists appealing to chemical reactions for explaining it is not rational too. My post above to iaml3642494 appealing to observed process happening in Nature is more rational, but… then, the same observation reveals that the events in that soup are driven by instructions coming from external source. Those scientists are suffering from myopia.
Oh, friend, I thank FATHER for you this day! I, too, come from hard knocks, I can thus praise HIM for it’s not of me that you are seeing such a “good life” & “living a rich life” but of HIM & HIS love by HIS grace & mercies that I can share my testimony today with you & others. There’s nothing too impossible for FATHER to correct, nothing too bad/monstrous HE can not heal with in your hurting heart, friend, I assure you. Place your trust in HIM & HE’ll make a way for you. Feel free to PM me, OK?
No it should not be good for you. If you are happy with your faith and respect the space of my kids, good for you. I am not the kind that go to church because when the priest says the first phrase and I think it is wrong, I stop him or I go out. No talks one direction alone. Debates only are useful if starts with real facts on the table. For instance: why your God permitted that me and other 1 million Americans that worked hard all life loose our homes?
We have been seeking beings like us through the cosmos for decades with no success, that’s because our kind is unique. It’s not just biological. And we are mistakenly looking for intelligence of a difference creed than us. We are likely to encounter our same creed first in the cosmos, and they won’t necessarily be more intelligent than us, but they could be more or less ‘advanced’ than us. And when/if we do find our kind, rest assured, that they will resemble us from top to bottom.
Again you are only half-right. Seeds of “life” are produced and spreaded by galaxies in different time/space and they can germinate and grow if a convergence point is appropriate. That’s due the building blocks of galactic systems are half-alive and has the same configuration of nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. Entropy attacking galaxies produces the transmission as in genetics and nanotechnology do the rest. But then is possible that we find a lifeform made-up of iron or plastic
There are diverse, transferable degrees of intelligence. Humans’ degree of intelligence was transferred, not evolved. In fact, biology CANNOT evolve; it is universally decreed impossible. Because all bodies within Time-Space, whether (inert or alive, including Humans) have a constant, identifiable structure, pre-determined mechanism, and purpose.
We don’t know yet. There is the new theory of Universe, called biocentrism. It makes sense also. Opposing Physics-centrism, if this Universe is the place where is occurring a process of genetic or computational reproduction of what was before the Big Bang, from Biology will come the Theory of Everything. All you said fits with evolution of a universal embryo: intelligence is transferred and evolves, all bodies has a Matrix/DNA structure, purpose, pre-determined mechanism, etc.
Science’s narrowed biology-alone approach to intelligence simply diminishes the magnitude of what we’re part of; thus, has conducted studies on the wrong platform. Which is why we remain largely incapable of conquering the cosmos. The degree of intelligence needed to be fully fluid within Time-Space is metaphysical, not just biological or physical. It MUST be metaphysical as the state of being of Time-Space, itself, is metaphysical; i.e.Time-Space simply be; this fact is biologically unexplained
You are only half right, but if your goal is conquering the cosmos, we are together. Mathematical theorems has indicated that matter alone could not jump to self-consciousness and neurology has not found how neurons are related to mind. It means that biology producing consciousness is largely theoretical. I said before how “metaphysical intelligence” seems merely natural ex-machine software. Time is measure of chains of events and space arises only if have two objects. They aren’t entities.
Another reason why intelligence does not reside in biology/genes is.. take robots/computers for example.. they can only showcase a mechanism. This is the plague that has stopped Artificial Intelligence dead on its track. AI will NEVER be self-innovative no matter the amount of physical intelligence inserted in a robotic entity; it can only showcase a limited, programed mechanism — even when it records new things on its own by means of repeated patterns, it cannot engineer and make things better
You don’t know the work of those two Physicists that earned the Nobel-2012. They got the isolation and observation of photons waves which is one step before quantum computation, which will be one step before artificial intelligence. If you add this discovery with what we had get in Matrix/DNA models, you will see the relation biology+intelligence+light. See our model: any wave of natural light seems the arm and hand of “the father’s source” that brings the code for imprinting life on matter.
INNOVATION is UNIQUELY what intelligence is! The reason that, thus far, only Humans, as a subject of Time-Space, can innovate (not the stars, nor gravity, nor dolphins, nor monkeys, etc), is because only Humans are direct progenies of gods. Only gods can innovate. Therefore you are a god, not just biological matter, not EVOLVED. Because biology CANNOT evolve. You were engineered/created with the same properties/intelligence of “that” which engineered you (As it says: “In his image”)! Read below.
Human intelligence produces real innovation only when observing Nature, discovering its mechanisms/process and mimicking them. But you are right: only who has consciousness which are direct progenies of that “generator of universes” ( some fish, apes, already has flashes of it) can do it. But since you are mirroring in humans for inferring what is our “father” why you forget that we are not magicians, only natural? For avoiding rational evidence that the ex-machine “father” is too natural?
Biology can exist without intelligence (as all physical entities, including matter, are biological); and intelligence can exist without biology in a metaphysical form. However, biology cannot exist in a metaphysical form – which is where science remains stuck until it changes course.
Humans have inherited and can tap into the metaphysical source: innovation, dreaming, imagining, weeping, meditation, etc. Other forms of biologies, that we know of, cannot. [some say 'spiritual' for "metaphysical"]
What you call “metaphysical intelligence” we call “universal software”, and biology is the hardware. We get the software when extracting out the energetic circuit of any natural system, included human brain and DNA. We have tracked backwards the evolution of this software and seen its origins at the Big Bang (quantum vortex and fluctuations of light waves). Only humans have dreams, consciousnesses, etc, because this software was sleeping in atoms, dreaming in galaxies and is waking up in humans
1) You are wrong, and you know it. Because you would have to explain the origin of the Big Bang. Secondly, if you’ve “extracted” it, you ought to be able to integrate it into other physical/biological entities. You folks should start with AI for instance, why not? Not gonna happen!
Nope. And I can explain the origin of the Big Bang. Reason suggests that when you feels that there is a natural phenomena but you can not see it, collect its effects and search in nature the same manifestations. The phenomena producing these manifestations that you can see is the best source for a theory about what you can’t see. There is another “Big Bang” initializing a natural system and producing expansion, etc: the fecundation starting your own body. Nature does not play dice with us.
2) Had Humans been solely biological, we would’ve digressed to the level of intelligence of the other biological species; or, it would be natural that other biological species progress/evolve to the level of intelligence of Humans. Biology, being found throughout Earth, could not have singled out just Humans be to intelligent, leaving behind all other species.
My post agree with you that humans are not solely material biology, as only hardware, I told about the software. The cause that among all primates and other biological species only ancestors of humans got a brain that could wake up this universal living software was that only they went to leave in a cave, feeding the younger and older, which was the root of the human family, where arose feelings and emotions, the impulse for this awakening. If any ape give food to his father, he can get it too.
Noah is our common ancestor, and having 3 sons doesn’t make him a hermaphrodite. As for FATHER being gay, I do think HE is a very happy and joyful CREATOR after all look at all HE’s created … such beauty through all that our senses marvel in! What an awesome CREATOR we serve! Hallelujah, FATHER! Amen! Won’t you please learn of HIM & that of HIS love? HE truly is wonderful. HE loves you & us all so very much. Peace & HIS abundantly blessings to you, friend. <(^8
Este post abaixo devia ir para TrueVerdicts e errei:
Sorry, it is not possible an intelligent conversation between us. It seems that you had a good life with lots of money and living in a rich place for explaining why you have seen only the half part of this world, the beautiful one, which could explain the way your brain was hard-wired and your faith in a intelligent designer. Unfortunately I have seen the other half, the bad and monstrous design, which had effects in my hard-wiring and explains why I can’t believe in gods watching this here.
Every living thing through out the universe exists to evolve on some level, however, with out GOD, creationism & evolution would cease to exist. Therefore the human race who the FATHER of the Universe created, along with all seen & unseen things, need to teach our offspring about HIM & all that HE’s created especially of HIS mercy, forgiveness, grace, & unconditional love. I can only hope HE draws you, & us all, closer to HIM. May YESHUA/JESUS bless & fortify you, & us all, everyone. Peace. <(^8
You are right, accordingly to last results of Matrix/DNA evolutionary cosmology, “theory”. Human race have as father who created the Universe. The problem is who created the Universe. Physics suggests it was a small atom. This theory suggests that this Universe is a kind of cosmic egg where is occurring a process of genetic or computational reproduction of who was existing before the Big Bang. But, parents outside the womb/egg does not go there creating shapes of fetus, embryos, etc. All Nature.
Yes, of course it’s nature … GOD, our FATHER in Heaven, created the very essence of nature and that of its’ components and cosmos. With out HIM there would be nothing, and nothing from nothing equals nothing … no womb, no egg, nor creation, no “big bang theory” and no “us” to debate HIS existence. I thank GOD the FATHER for HIS mercy, patience, forgiveness, grace, and love for we are a stubborn and rebellious creation. JESUS bless you, friend. Peace. <(^8
1) Ask yourself, if the essence of Earth was to harbor Humans, as we so arrogantly think, then why is it that Earth must have been in existence some 4 billion years prior to Humans insignificant few thousand lousy years on it. We can all agree that humans is the best thing to happen to Earth; then why must Earth have existed such length prior to the main Event?? That’s because, the Earth is, assuredly, NOT billions of years old; and science as a whole is in error.
Nope. The shape of humans are result from evolution coming since abiogenesis, and abiogenesis took some billion years which is natural when a shape is coming from systems belonging to cosmological evolution. Think abiogenesis as process of macro-universal embryogenesis which takes billions years. Why should humans to be the best thing to happen to Earth?
Your science has gotten you so lost. Nothing, absolutely nothing, lasts such length within Time-Space. You cannot even truly begin to wrap your mind around ONE million years of past events, much less billions of years. Your science is tedious, very suppository and speculative. Yes, Humans, are the best thing to happen to Earth.
Nature is tedious for a microscopic observer but it runs fast for an universal observer. Look to Solar System just now, it seems eternal, never changing, the moon always around Earth, the Sun always there… What then if observing the galaxy, 10 billion years, same shape? This vision impregnates us with tedious… but only those that think microscopically. Stars dies, becomes dust and resuscitates from its own gray, everything is moving. Abiogenesis is for universal observers understanding.
There is a method for training a person to evolves from a microscopic observer to an universal observer and you can learn it. But then, you need understanding universal macro evolution (13,7 billions years) and not only biological evolution (3,5 billion). And you need learn that DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal Matrix that began as simplest quantum vortexes emitting light at the Big Bang, has organized matter into atoms, galaxies and now is living inside cells systems.
XXX
louie says – ToE alone will not keep free thought.
Religious brainwashing is the antithesis of free thought…
You should say “creationism brainwashing is the antithesis of free thought”. Because there are religions more like philosophies different than creationism, which believes in ex-machine consciousness not interfering with human existence. But, the surprising and aggressive reaction of atheists (denialism of some form of superior consciousness) against a religion suggests that atheism is the other side of a coin, and if so, it seems also the antithesis of free thought. Why not ID also?
I think nobody will accept my deep reasons for ID not in science classroom but in philosophical studies. Because for understanding my arguments, one needs leave out this planet, going above the galaxy, and from there, observe biological evolution here. I don’t know nobody did it besides myself. Doing it, ToE is revealed as a very poor theory that needs be improved. Then forget this argument and keep only the following: ID has been a tool for evolutionists rethinking evolution, improving it.
I think that if one accepts evolutionary process by evidences seen in biological evolution, can not relates it with the idea of magic and omnipresent gods. Rationally, the two ideas are self-exclusive. But, universal evolution leaves an open door to the possibility that this evolution we are observing could be merely steps of an ex-machine process of reproduction (till of consciousness) like a virus inside an egg see evolution of an embryo. We are microscope beings in relation to the universe.
Certainly he knows the theory about “single cell organism’s from chemical reactions”from high school. If he is asking how life began is because he does not accept this theory. Why hydrogen cyanide separated from the Prussian blue and linked to ammonia for resulting in adenine if it never happens and any other situation? The theory suggests it was due pure chance, which is a hypothesis not falsiable. He is in his right.
Alma 14:124 “Yea, and my joy is carried away, even unto boasting in my God; for he has all power, all wisdom, and all understanding; he comprehendeth all things, and he is a merciful Being even unto salvation, to those who will repent and believe on his name.”
So you will educate your kids saying to them they are sinner and needs repent? Ok, we must respect the way you want to educate yours children, but, please, never tell this thing to my kids and does not force it into schools, because I am sure this is very prejudicial to the self-esteem of my kids.
When we have no enough data for provide an answer about any natural phenomena the logic is searching in Nature parameters, patterns. Because nature has its laws for doing natural things, and maybe there are patterns from where we can learn those laws. So, a good parameter for yours questions: Nature did your own body starting by an “explosion” ( abrupt opening of spermatozoon membrane), your life came from yours parents existing before that explosion. And they are “natural”. Any question?
And today we have separated the two fields of study into clearly defined “abiogenesis” and “evolution.” There is even an informal and outdated “law” in the study of evolution called “biogenesis” in which it is given that life is only formed from other life.
As you have been informed twice now that abiogenesis and evolution are two separate fields of study, you will begin to be a liar yourself should you choose to repeat the claim that abiogenesis and evolution are the same field of study.
Lol… thanks! That’s why I am following this debate: every minute you learn something new. The difference between abiogenesis, biogenesis and evolution, very well explained.
There is a tentative for searching how those ancestors non-living systems could produce – directly and evolutionary – the first living cell system. The Matrix/DNA Theory found a theoretical solution: a model of the building block of ancient galaxies that’s half-mechanical/half-biological. Maybe ToE will be cosmological.
indicating outward velocity as if, say, from an explosion.
we beleive that god is eternal and there for exists outside of time
its an explanation and realy better than nothing
why answers are better than nothing
boldburrito, you believe in the Bible’s god, and I must respect the freedom of beliefs. But why are you here? I have collected your writtens: “every scientist now agrees that time started at somewhere”, “what made the big bang how did something come from nothing?”, “we believe that god is eternal and there for exists outside of time”, “ its an explanation and really better than nothing”, “why answers are better than nothing”. All of this is debatable. Are you trying to extrapolate it to public education?
XXX
YOUR COMMENT IS THE NON SEQUITUR FALLACY. ATHEISTS DID NOT INVENT GRAVITY, GEOMETRY, OR ANY OTHER FIELD OF STUDY. ANYONE CAN STUDY GOD’S CREATION TO REALIZE GOD USED SYMMETRY, PROPORTION, PURPOSEFUL DESIGN ETC. WHEN HUMANS DISCOVER THE THINGS GOD MADE AND GET SOME SUPERFICIAL UNDERSTANDING IT NO MORE SUPPORTS THE RIDICULOUS NOTION OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM THAN ONE STUDYING THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE WOULD. MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS DON’T AND CAN’T CONTRIVE LIFE OR ENGINES.
“ANYONE CAN STUDY GOD’S CREATION TO REALIZE GOD USED SYMMETRY”
So, symmetry is used by creationists as argument for magical creation? Sorry, it is not. Symmetry is result of a natural force that had been always present when Nature developed a new specie of systems. So, this force has been a systemic function and its mathematical number is phi, considered the golden ratio. Go to see the Matrix/DNA formula for systems, you will see there is no magical action for producing symmetry.
YOU’RE A ROYAL BUFFOON. YOU JUST TOLD A FANCIFUL STORY. HAVE YOU SEEN NATURAL FORCES I.E. WIND, RAIN, THUNDER & LIGHTENING MAKE LIFE? MINDLESS AND LIFELESS CHEMICAL ELEMENTS CAN’T AND DON’T CONTRIVE LIFE OR CARS, BOATS, HOMES ETC.
DID YOU WAIT FOR NATURAL FORCES TO MAKE YOU A COMPUTER?
WHY DO YOU TALK ABOUT AND SAY THINGS THAT ARE IDIOTIC WITHOUT CRITICAL THINKING?
But you have not search the Matrix/DNA formula as I suggested for you learn how I based my arguments about where bi-lateral symmetry seen here is coming from. You have jumped to the conclusion that mine is “a fanciful history”, without knowing the foundations of that argument. This is the way you are dealing with origins of life, universe. etc.? Jumping to conclusions without searching the data collected by Science and/or empiricism? Sorry, in this way is not possible an educated debate.
And he says: “ALL THE ELEMENTS OF YOUR BODY AREN’T ALIVE LIKE THOSE IN A COMPUTER” . Is he suggesting something like the vital force as suggested by Pasteur – but is he suggesting this vital force coming from a magical god? If so, he does not know the strong evidence that the “vital force” was existing before life’s origins, animating the ancestors systems and there are strong evidences that it is encoded in a single wave of natural light. Ah..ah…now you are saying: this guy is also crazy!
That’s right. Science doesn’t prove a thing. It only disproves.
Disproves stuff like talking snakes and “stopping the sun in the sky” and a worldwide flood.
Science is a knife that cuts away falsehoods, leaving something that’s the closest we can get to the truth.
God, spirits, and the supernatural might exist, but science says nothing about them. It all comes down to if you accept unfounded claims of magic, or not.
And if you do accept magic, I got a bridge I want to sell you.
They are not unfounded claims most are founded on personal evidence granted that it is not testable but, it does not mean the claims are not valid. It just seems unlikely. The story of Adam and Eve is an allegory even though there are some who believe in it literal interpretation. Mass Christianity however recognizes that the story is an allegory
If it is allegory, must have a real event/fact that support the message in that allegory. What’s the real event/fact related to the narrative about Adam and Eve?
It is a story of how original sin came in to play and mankind gain free will independently of God. There also moral to the story that making something forbidden only makes people want all the more.
No, it is not “a story of how original sin came in to play”. The discipline of History in school there is anything related with this story. If you have discovered some real event/fact that in the past there was a ordered/perfect world, there was human beings or other lifeforms, these beings did something wrong and had a fall …. you need send it for peer-review. I elaborated a testable theory of a real event/fact for that allegory, it seems related to real event, do you want know it?
Ok. There was a real world as described allegorically. In this world were living our ancestors, they did a “sin”, and they felt towards planets and they drove abiogenesis, still driving our evolution. This world is rational, scientifically testable, and I have its pictured model. It is the result of a method: comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems. Since Science has not got all data about that space/time, still is a naturalistic philosophical theory. Do want know more?
You see I’m going to have to disagree with Bill’s biased opinions, I think that all children should know things so that they can make there own informed decisions about life rather than being forced into one thing or another. They choose religion one must accept that, if one follows science then so be it.
You are right accordingly with my personal viewpoint, which must be no totally right accordingly to the final Truth. This debate is between two extreme opposite world views – theists and atheists – and your suggestion means you are in the middle, like me. The question of this video is too much important, it is about the chose of the destiny of human kind. We in the middle need our voice be heard also, but all that came here suddenly disappears. We need here a list for subscribers. Or not?
@DarwinsFriend Yes, let’s everyone rebel and become kings. There would be no inhabitants in our own personal kingdoms though since everyone one is king of their own inhabitantless kingdom as well. We will turn the universe into a hell. Or did you think you would deny one single individual the rebellion you enjoy? Party on, alone.
Wrong. We, evolutionists don’t want to be kings. We want to rebel against any gods as described on the Bible, against humans’ gangs that gets money and power based on the rules of predators/prey observed in this chaotic and salvage biosphere, we want the universal human family as dreamed by a man, Jesus Christ. Everybody is our brooder with equal rights and obligations, every mother is our mother, every child is our child… This is the great cause of Humanity, going to its own transcendence.
I don’t want be authority, I don’t want followers, employees, nobody below me, I want partners. If someone or a group want different, think different, no problem, keep their space and respect our space. Any social system that needs nucleus and periphery, predator and prey, any kind of authority, is based in the formula of closed systems, or dispersion opened system, which is a non-complete and related to past times of evolution shape of the ideal natural universal formula. Yes, no authority.
@Louis Charles Morelli Sounds ideal but what do we do with those who refuse to play along? They say they don’t want partnership but war. What do we do and by who’s authority?
Of course, first of all we need a cohesive group. Second we need to choose: let’s stay here among them or chose a separated place for living? Third: we need work hard for to be prepared for our self-defense. Fourth: while developing ourselves – materially and intellectually – we begins to ignore them – no business with them. And so on… While we don’t do nothing about this “dream” we need participate in this kinds of debate for not permitting any group getting the power. Snakes swelling snakes.
@Louis Charles Morelli So unresolved disagreement means separation, like in a marriage. How long, unless disagreements cease, before we’re all separated? And, a military without a chain of command? Also, it’s death for those who don’t want partnership? Guess they weren’t free to rebel.
Needs separation because the two groups, certainly, if one gets power, will make life here insupportable and self-destroyed. Atheism would leads to a kind of “Brave new World”ruled by a Big Brother, cutting our dreams about “to be something else more than apes” which is a mind-stopper. Theism would permit that the normal evolution of Nature with its normal changes caught us non prepared by Science, because they lives based in the “supernatural”. We need evolving but keeping our mind free.
We will be separated – living at the same or different places – only temporary. We will joining together because we will develop the right Science and the right technology, we will have better society while they will be in trouble.Today technology is not for humans welfare because technology arises every time we discover new natural process/mechanism and Science is selecting some data and discriminating others due be driven by profit. They are our brothers in species, we will save them.
@Louis Charles Morelli I’m having a hard time understanding you, are you translating from another language? Anyway, I don’t completely disagree with your utopian idea but you haven’t given me any realistic method to accomplish it. How will men ‘get along’?
Sorry, English is not my native language, I am still learning. I think you have not read my two last posts to you. I think there is a possibility for human kind solving these actual problems that are leading us to out of control. A new big discovery about real Nature, about the meaning of our existence. This discovery would be the right drive towards a new worldview with new moral, where each human being will be part of solution. There is a scientific method that can leads us to this discovery:
Nope, I don’t approve Oashpe and scientology. The worldview that I think is more rational and explains better our existence is TheMatrix/DNA Theory, but I don’t believe in it also. I need a world view now for driven my behavior but I cant believe in anything created by this little human brain when I remember the size and age of this Universe. I am still searching…
@Louis Charles Morelli I take that to mean that humankind doesn’t have the answer right now and I agree. Salvation won’t come from the mind of men and science. It came from above this world and Christians like me are saying “comprehend the light in the darkness (Christ) and take hold while you have the chance to choose life”.
Sorry, I can’t agree with this organized religion called “Christianism” because the real world I have seen in my life’s experience is suggesting to me that this religion is wrong. Christians are not real Christians I think and Jesus Christ said lots of wrong things and I don’t believe he was a son of God’s Bible.But Jesus said the most beautiful and lovely phrase: The universal sacred family is not this nuclear family but one where all brothers are my brothers, etc. Science is the unique hope.
@Louis Charles Morelli I take that to mean that humankind doesn’t have the answer right now and I agree. Salvation won’t come from the mind of men and science. It came from above this world and Christians like me are saying “comprehend the light in the darkness (Christ) and take hold while you have the chance to choose life”.
I have post a comment answering this one. But let’s take this good example you said:”comprehend the light in the darkness (Christ)”. Yes, since light seems to be a universal constant, it should be the treasure keeping the secrets of universe and human existence. Comprehend what is light and finding all existent sources of light is the supreme goal. But you stop doing it when you think you know the mystery: you said “Christ”. Meanwhile my research of light is suggesting it has the code for life.
Mark 3:35 “For whoever does the will of God is My brother and My sister and mother .” We don’t get to decide which parts of God’s word works us while we reject the rest. It’s either all valid and important or none of it is . You wouldn’t have it any other way would you ?
God never said direct to me or to my parents or to my grandparents, to nobody that I know, what is his will. Why not? I am not a son of God equal others human beings? Why he talks with one son and not with other? My understanding about good fathers is that they does not discriminates their sons. So, it is most probable that my brother who said that god talked to him is lying. What will work for us, for our next generations? I have my opinion based in my life’s experience, anything else.
So Jesus is a searching-stopper. Who accepted Jesus and follow Jesus has arrived to the ultimate Truth. Does not need searching anymore. It means this being arrives to the ultimate shape and from now it will be eternal. I would not support eternity in this weak and stupid shape of human species. I know, you will say that the eternal is not human shape, but, the soul(spirit) shape. It is not rational to believe that we have soul and humans can ending the evolution of souls. No evidences.
I never will accept that a father talks to one son and not with other. If my father do that, I go out of that house and never will see him again. It means he does not love me. That’s was my position when I began concluding that the Bible (the book of the Christian community where I grew up) is merely fiction. Then, I did my own search about the meaning of universe’s and human existence. Today I keep the possibility of having a superior kind of consciousness and why it does not talks to humans.
The bible indicates that people will reject the truth in favor of appealing doctrines of malevolent beings. I can’t stress how important it is to be careful and pray for guidance. Your eternal destiny depends on it. Please.
A book does not indicates anything, the author does. The intention of this author is clear: he was advocating a doctrine, he want more people following the doctrine and is trying to keep the people that is already indoctrinated. He believes in that doctrine? Maybe yes but certainly nod guided by Reason. He is guided by natural instinct of survival and selfishness which approves privileged status for him, approves authority of ones over others, and avoids his obligation for doing the hard work..
My will ?! First of all, since I was born I never had an opportunity to apply my will. I was born in the wrong place, in the wrong time, and earned a body that seems merely an ape, less able to survive. The most bad design. And a human civilization that mimics the rules of the jungle, shared into predators and preys.That is why I choose early not reproduce me, I made myself the job of evolution, discarding what must be discarded.
Course I will select what I think operates better as you does.
No, you not lean in the Bible, you lean on what the authors of a book wrote. Who were those authors? 3.000 years ago? Yes, of course, I prefer lean on my poor and faulting knowledge than on the thousands minor knowledge of that authors. That’s why I am still searching knowledge, but the unique source for knowledge I believe is Mother Nature. I don’t approve the fact that Jesus worked as a searching-stopper for you, because you will not helping me to fix what I think is wrong.
Excelente Esclarecimento da Diferença Entre Abiogenesis, Biogenesis, e Evolução:
And today we have separated the two fields of study into clearly defined “abiogenesis” and “evolution.” There is even an informal and outdated “law” in the study of evolution called “biogenesis” in which it is given that life is only formed from other life.
As you have been informed twice now that abiogenesis and evolution are two separate fields of study, you will begin to be a liar yourself should you choose to repeat the claim that abiogenesis and evolution are the same field of study.
What’s malevolent, evil, & vile about the biblical god? Where shall I start? Maybe drowning a planet, sending fire bombs on a couple of cities, murdering the firstborn of Egypt for his own glorification, considering burning his chosen people & needing a mere man (Moses) to set him straight, sending his son down to be murdered so that he could forgive people their transgressions instead of just forgiving them.God is a total douche bag who despite his omniscience couldn’t teach a dog to bark.
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ” Ephesians 6:5
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.” Colossians 3:22
“Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed.” 1 Timothy 6:1
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful.You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts.Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.1 Timothy 6:1-2
SÔBRE EDUCAÇÃO DAS CRIANÇAS, NAS ESCOLA E FAMILIAS
Public school teachers and administrators shouldn’t allow creationism, which is a religious ideology, to be presented in classes or other officially sponsored school activities (assemblies, field trips, etc.). Unfortunately, we can’t always trust school administrators to do the right thing. Whether through ignorance or malice, creationism slips in and complaints from parents come too late.
Ohno stated, “The earth is strewn with fossil remains of extinct species; is it a wonder that our genome too is filled with the remains of extinct genes?”1 Due to his evolutionary presupposition, he assumed that non-coding DNA was merely a “genetic fossil” that may have been useful somewhere in our evolutionary past but had been discarded as we evolved into more complex, higher organisms. Since this “junk” DNA was no longer needed,
Hmmmm, science is the gathering of evidence and basing conclusions on that evidence. So technically evolution can’t be at the core of science because it would bend the scientists thoughts on a subject towards it. And that’s bad science. Just a thought.
Só faltava mais esta! Um ambiente escuro – seja a noite, o quarto com luz apagada, etc. – estimula no corpo a produção de melatonina, um hormonio que atua como mensageiro avisando ao cérebro que é hora de dormir. Mas a luz irradiada pelas telas de monitores, tablets, celulares inibe ou interfere na mensage e depois o sono não vem… Bem, quanto a mim, o que tem acontecido ultimamente, acho que isso parece ser verdade, e vou tentar evitar estas telas à noite, dormir mais cêdo e assim levantar mais c6edo quando então voi paras as telas antes de sair para o trabalho. Seria mais sensato… e saudável. Vejamos o inicio do artigo com esta incômoda noticia no…
Having trouble getting to sleep? It could be your iPad, Kindle or any other screen you use for reading before turning the lights out. New research explains why this happens, but what can you do about it — short of going back to paper?
The Lighting Research Center at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute recently published a study explaining how readers’ beloved tablets and e-readers keep people up at night. A dark room triggers the body’s production of melatonin, a hormone that acts as a messenger telling the body it’s time to sleep, and lighted screens interfere with that message.
Any light can make it tough to fall asleep (that’s why many parents with young children bemoan the onset of daylight savings time), but light of shorter wavelengths, such as the bluish tints emitted from LED-backlit screens, suppresses nocturnal melatonin, according to the sleep study. The brighter the light and longer the exposure, the more difficulty it will cause in falling asleep.
The findings come just after Amazon introduced its new Kindle PaperWhite e-readers, which offer higher-contrast backlit displays, an answer to Barnes & Noble’s popular Nook with GlowLight. And multi-purpose tablets — such as the iPad, Google Nexus 7 and the newest high-resolution tablets launched last week by Barnes and Noble — are frequently used as e-book readers. But more vivid screens aren’t necessarily better when it comes to sleep.
“The ones that do not emit light should be better [for sleeping],” Mariana Figueiro, director of the Lighting Research Center’s Light and Health Program, told me.
She offered some tips for getting a better night’s sleep without giving up your e-reader or tablet. Figueiro recommends reducing the brightness of the screen to its minimum (which helps conserve battery life, too). Tablet users can go into “settings” to do this. (VEJA RESTO DO ARTIGO NO ADRESS ACIMA)
Êste caso me repugna porque mostra uma das principais feridas dos sistemas sociais humanos. Os juízes se alteram emocionalmente e descarregam tôda sua ira quando ocorre uma perturbação na ordem do sistema, porem, os seus intimos interesses inconfessáveis – como suas práticas de obtenção de privilégios economicos a começar por seus salarios predatórios em relação aos demais trabalhadores reais da sociedade – fazem com que apenas captem algumas perturbações, mantendo-se cegos à outras, muitas vêzes, piores para a saúde do sistema social. Quem é o pior criminoso? O comerciante que entrou nas casas do povo através da mídia enganando crianças e incautos com publicidades mentirosas ou estimulantes de comportamentos doentíos, o politico que entrou nestas casas prometendo o que não está cumprindo no mandato, ou três pessoas que entraram na sede de um sub-grupo social fazendo aquele protesto? A prioridade dos juizes deveria ser atacar primeiro o pior. Se as três pessoas foram punidas com dois anos, com quantos anos devem ser punidos os piores perturbadores da saude do sistema? Mas sabe porque os juizes são cegos a serviço dos agentes mais nocivos? Porque escaparam imoralmente e desonestamente da condenação que a Natureza impõe a cada ser humano antes dêle nascer: comerás o teu pão com o suor de teu rosto. São alienados na realidade da vida humana. Eu tambem queria (desonesta e imoralmente), ao invés de ir para a roça pegar na enxada aos dez anos, e carregar pedras para a construção aos 14 anos, ser sustentado no paraiso que é estudando direito numa universidade. Isto está tudo errado! A prisão das três meninas é apenas mais um galho pôdre produzido por uma árvore que tem uma doença nas suas raízes.
Mas os êrros vieram de todos os lados, e tento destacar alguns nos meus comentários postados na Internet:
1) Penso que estas heróicas militantes erraram o alvo pois deveriam fazer a manifestação na frente do edificio do Estado alertando-o para não atender à uma bandeira religiosa por que seria conceder privilégio a um sub-grupo dentro de um sistema, o que deve ser rigidamente proibido. Qual a correta estratégia: impedir a tentativa de intromissão e influencia religiosa no govêrno (como um pastor acenando com a bandeira religiosa pedindo voto ao presidente) ou impedir o govêrno de dispor o Estado e seus pertences publicos ao usufruto de uma religião? Penso que a segunda é correta, o govêrno deveria ser o alvo das manifestantes, e não a igreja, porque todos tem direito a pedir ao govêrno. Se elas fizeram isso contra aquela igreja, tem que fazer contra cada lobista, cada corporação do mercado, time de futebol, banda artistica, etc., que tente conexões de privilégio com o govêrno.
2) Os opositores devem investigar urgente quem é essa juiza, Marina Syrova, e os jurados (se houveram), na vida privada. Se for provado que é religiosa dessa igreja ou frequentou alguma vez essa igreja, ela não pode julgar o caso.
3) Apesar de repugnante, o pior não é a influencia religiosa no Estado e sim na Justiça. O Estado pode ser corrigido e punido pela Justiça, mas a esta, quem pode punir? Como filhos de reis são educados desde a infancia para serem reis, juizes deveriam ser educados para serem juizes:sem ideologias, religiões,etc. Enquanto isso, temos que checar os regulamentos para admissão de juizes, se lá está expresso que juiz não pode ser fanatico e expressar religião na função.
4) Êste caso me lembra o estudo da Justiça pelos filósofos gregos: como uma nação poderia elaborar uma correta constituição judiciária se nenhum homem conhece qual é a Justiça do Universo?!Tôdas as justiças nacionais existentes são risíveis, produtos dos interêsses de seus internos predadores economicos.As justiças humanas miram-se na meia-face caótica da Natureza que produziu esta biosfera e a espécie humana e seu animalismo, enquanto a meia-face ordeira astronomica é pouco conhecida e esquecida, e a face superior completa, a sabedoria, se oculta para alem do Universo. Aos amigos das militantes, como eu, uma sugestão: sempre questione e vigie o seu poder judiciário, com coragem.
5) Se estiver correto que as manifestantes erraram o alvo, qual seria a causa do êrro? A cultura superficial reinante na juventude moderna, incapaz de se aprofundar nas raízes primeiras dos fenômenos.Abandone os chats e dialogos de meias-palavras e grunhidos e force sua mente a evoluir nos foruns de longos e completos textos que enquadram maiores horizontes.
Since the target of these billboards is the president election, I suggest the following billboard with three figures:
1) A figure of John Quincy Adams putting his hands upon the Book of America’s Constitution ( or Constitutional Rights?); Below the figure, the words: “In “He” we and the atheists thrust”
2) A figure of pastor/priest putting his hands over the Bible – A Foreign Book not American; below, the words: “ He (This) is wrong”
3) And at the right side a fat politician putting his hands over a Book “Corporations – Power and Money”; bellow, the words: “He (This) is wrong”
A second billboard could be a well dressed politician saying to a dirt worker: “You shall eat bread by the sweat of thy face”. And above him the words about what he is actually thinking: “this is for you, not for me” And the title: “How politicians uses religions”
Creationist “faith” can not be explained rationally based on current scientific view of the world. But, at same time this faith is an aberration produced by Nature, this aberration can not be explained because the scientific current world view does not translate the real world. This faith is product of expression of data storaged in the wrong called junk/DNA, real data about real world of times beyond 4 billion years. People with this faith has hard-wired brain confused by these memories.