Arquivo para a ‘Culturas’ Categoria

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (11)

sábado, janeiro | 12 | 2013

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU

Êste já é o “11″ capítulo incluído nêste website sobre o debate que segue a êste vídeo no Youtube, com nossa participação

XXXXXX

Posts da Matrix/DNA para debates:

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA6: 57 PM – Jan – 15 – 2013

I am asking permission to commentators, to Bill Nye and Youtube, for adding one approach, which is forgotten here. We are adults debating what we should transmit/transfer from our experience of life to our loved next generations. But, what about the other side? There are no children here speaking for themselves. We should try “empathy”, changing informations about “who are them”, thinking from their “mysterious” wishes, and making comparisons between their bias and the real world as we know it.

TheMatrixDNA6: 57 PM – Jan – 15 – 2013

When I try to think from the “children perspectives”and the world that is waiting for them, some issues comes quick to my mind. First of all, the issue about over-population.This world will become very unsuitable for them. It seems this issue is solved in first world of Europe, but till Europe will face the effects of world over-population. We need acting over education at third world countries. What we will teach: the control by scientific methods or this “non-control” by their religions?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA3:26PM – Sat – jan – 12 – 2013

Apes, are healthier and perfect physical machine than human beings.They are the fittest for getting better life at this biosphere built by a kind of perfect machine, described by Newtonian mechanics. But human mind is a natural production that changed the environment, in a way that apes aren’t more adapted.Then, physically, there are degradation of the inherited ape with 75% of bad mutations and 24 neutrals. Humans are the dark reverse light at the same avenue that is advancing the white light

XXXXXX

INICIO DOS DEBATES

XXXXXX

Dave Kim 1 minute ago

So the fact that males have genes encrypted for a uterus, this implies a creator rather than common ancestry?

You’ve lost me, here. This definitely seems to imply the latter..

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No. It just implies that the common ancestor of all living beings is in the sky. Which means that had no abiogenesis, but, cosmological embryogenesis with a big mutation due the ancestor was made with solid and gaseous states of matter, and the first living being was nurtured in a womb where emerged the liquid state, hence chemistry.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 17 minutes ago

is… in the sky?

wow…

and you say that this “first living being was nurtured in a womb where emerged the liquid state…”?

So correct me if I’m wrong here: a magic baby turned into this thing we call Chemistry as we know it today?

AWESOME! Makes perfect sense now. Thanks.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Well…it is not in the sky in relation to earth, because earth is part of it. It is in sky like you are just now. Have you thought about that? The “womb” for the first living being was this planet…in this cosmic region. Stellar systems and galaxies were nurtured in environment existing only solid and gaseous states. At least organic Chemistry is a recent emerged process. Something wrong here?

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 2 minutes ago

Then you sound like a New-Age Pantheist or Gaia worshiper of some sort…

Still cold?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No human names for world views. My method was applied by the forst time in Human History: comparative anatomy among all natural systems, from atoms to galaxies to brains… and now, consciousness. Academic Science is missing to do that and the result is very bad: they had shared Universal Natural History into two separated blocks, with no evolutionary link between them. That’s why they can’t understand the emergence of life here. matrix/DNA has a better rational theory about

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 2 minutes ago

Wait, what? Comparative anatomy of galaxies?

Is this a course they teach at universities? Or is it perhaps something someone made up and then wrote in a book (or YouTube comment section)?

I wonder. Hm.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Comparative anatomy of natural systems. Galaxies are merely one of those. This method is rational because it is the right thing to do if you make the rational question: the first living being was a system, the cell system. So, its creator must be a system. Which natural systems were existing at that time? Which is the most suitable for to be the past evolutionary link? The right question brings on the right answer.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 43 minutes ago

Super-nova is not explosion and emergence of a new star. It is the opposite:implosion. Of a dark giant planet turned on a pulsar. All planets has as nucleus the germ of a star, which nuclear reactions goes eating the layers of rocks from inside to outside. When the last layer is tiny, it collapses and the internal light is released to the external world. A new baby was born. Our ancestor made everything like we do now.

·  in reply to LagrangianL4 (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 2 minutes ago

I’m all for this “ancestor” theory of yours… but what does this “ancestor” consist of?

Is it/he/she material or immaterial? If material, then which elements make up this “ancestor”?

Is this ancestor anthropomorphic or is it some kind of amorphous gaseous blob that floated around in an eternal vacuum until it “decided” to fart out the universe?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This ancestor is seen when galaxies are observed from Biological perspective, I mean, by the reverse way of evolution, knowing the last product (cells) and calculating the ancestors…It is the opposite way used by Physics perspective.There was a nebulae of lighter atoms about 12 billions years ago. The nebulae made the first lightest stars. These stars were under forces that imprint the process of life cycles. They changed shapes and composed an almost living system. Lots of evidences for it.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 5 minutes ago

But why are you looking at galaxies from the “Biological perspective”?

You do realize that you’re simply making an “analogy” between “biology” and “astronomy”?

Then I hope you realize that in most schools of Logic, analogies are considered technically “fallacious” (though you can come up with “good” and “bad” analogies)… Why? Because you’re ultimately comparing apples to oranges. Yours falls under “False Analogy”.

Go google: “False Analogy”

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Dave, the human idea about evolution was made based in analogy between species, fossils, DNA, etc. Why? It is the unique rational alternative we have for inquiring the unknown past times. Where Biological systems came from? Be it what to be, it was inside an astronomical system. You will not agree with that if you believe in magics, by gods or randomness. So, if biological came from astronomical, the principles for biological must be hidden in the astronomical. That’s so clear!

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 20 minutes ago

Ok. Just because we call a cell a “system” and a galaxy a “system” doesn’t imply that they have some relationship.

I’m not saying they aren’t related, I mean obviously a cell is part of some galaxy…

But to claim that the name “system” creates some kind of palpable relationship between the two is REALLY stretching it.

What about this cool “Lean System Success Plan” i can buy online for 100 dollars that guarantees I will lose 10 lbs in one month? It’s called a “system” too! Is it relevant? NO

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

It really doesn’t imply, but, implying that a cell system came from a non-system, like the primordial soup, is less rational.I think what is missing for modern academic Science is knowledge about natural systems. I think there are only three: atomic, astronomic and biological. I had aligned them in this sequence for you notice that there was a movement from the simple to most complex in right chronological time. This is evolution. Universal Natural MacroEvolution. There is genetic relationship

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

XXX

Martin Koch 3 minutes ago

Adam didn’t have a uterus, did he?

Where did Eve get hers–you claim she needed Adam to have all the parts that she had….

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes Adam had a uterus. All males have it. Encrypted In the genes. It is not expressed because the gene for phallus is expressed two times. If you see the cosmological model of the state of the world when the Bible says that Adam existed you will see that those primordial galaxies were hermaphrodite, Adam and Eve encrypted. Things are more, lots more complex than you think…sorry.

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

XXX

Edmond Goo 1 minute ago

I’d believe in fairies before I would believe the universe once could fit on the head of a pin.

Can you see the error of atheistic science yet?

·  in reply to narco73 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

But yours body once time could be fitted on the head of a pin, Goo. Why not the Universe? The smaller initial size of the Universe is not food for atheism, it is food for agnosticism and creationism. What was existing before your body being smaller than a pin? Yours parents, right? Why not the Universe? You need to understand that nature applies nanotechnology ( making a big body as a microscope one) and giantology ( making a microscope body being a big one)

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

Edmond Goo

Edmond Goo 6 minutes ago

I don’t think the sun is a fusion event.

The lack of Neutrinos is telling.

So are sun spots, 11 year cycle and speed of the equator.

I believe it to be an electrical plasma process and the sun is probably a giant anode.

·  in reply to DarwinsFriend (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This issue is very important because if we knew the truth about the sun we could built a mechanical copy getting another kind of energy. And an important factor should be a better understanding about life origins and operations. There is a problem with the method used today: they are calculating the sun from Physics perspective only. But, since that all life is dependable of Sun’s energy, and life was created by this energy also, we need the biological perspective of the sun, made by Matrix/DNA

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

NewSoulSam 17 seconds ago

I just let it play out and continue as is. :) In a way, I’m sure it is kind of mean. My area is neuropsych, though, and I intend to study clinical psych (in fact, just got an RA position in a neuropsych and social cognition lab so we’ll see how that goes). From what I understand so far about it, cognitive behavioral therapy is actually fairly difficult and challenging, in that the therapist or clinician challenges the client’s beliefs and cognitions where they are maladaptive.

·  in reply to fremiamagus (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

How do you know that the client’s beliefs and cognition are the wrong ones and not the social system’s beliefs, which erected the wrong social system?!

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 29 minutes ago

Because the cognitions are maladaptive. Examples would be, “I am worthlesss”, “I am God”, or “I hear voices which tell me to kill myself”. Also, cultural considerations are made. For instance, an American might say that a particular Japanese person is neurotically shy when it may turn out that he is just culturally reserved. I will learn a lot more about this later, but I know some now. Just please know my knowledge is incomplete.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ok. I think the area of neuropsych is very important for future of human kind but it needs urgent self-analyses. You will think that this idea is odd, but, for neuropsych professionals to understand what is going on in the brain they will need study astronomy also. Nature produced the brain which neurons must mirror the connections among natural phenomena for to be healthier. Culture can works as a kind of malignant virus, when culture has the wrong interpretation of reality. Am I wrong?

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 28 minutes ago

I need to go out, but I will check back because this is an interesting conversation.

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

I don’t understand your idea of self-analyses in terms of astronomy. You are correct that neuropsych scientists and clinicians must understand the brain. We do, however, spend a great deal of time understanding basic brain processes such as neurodevelopment and the basic concepts in learning like plasticity, sensitization, and habituation with model animals in controlled experiments such as those done with aplysia.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I will try to explain, but, be advised, it is merely my theory. I am trying to follow the everyday new discoveries published by neuropsych scientists and clinicians.But I apply the knowledge of the brain for trying to understand the Universe and vice-verse.The brain is shared into two hemispheres. Do you know why Nature did it this way? The building block of galaxies is shared into two hemispheres also, the connections between them help us to understand the connections here. Same functions

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Only for yours sake: Physicists Find Evidence That The Universe Is A ‘Giant Brain’ – If you are interested, Google it

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
NewSoulSam

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

Well, the idea of culture being wrong about something is very touchy. There are psychologists who devote themselves to cultural psychology, such as culturally specific mental illnesses. The definition of a mental illness may help here, which is that it is only a mental illness if it 1. Causes you mental stress and 2. Interferes with your daily functioning.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

And how is the definition of the whole society mental illness? How to diagnose the social mental illness? How we know if a social behavior is naturally healthier or more one collective mental illness that is not synchronized with the laws of Nature? But.. there is no way for to know what is Nature here and now if we don’t know what is our astronomical system. For instance, the cosmological model resulting from a biological perspective is different from the cosmological model made by Physics

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You need understand that civilizations are built by a specific interpretation of the world = culture. All human interpretation of the world must be wrong, with some few degree of rightness.But, human beings have the resource of self-cure, or self-correction. When an individual is under this process of social self-correction, his behavior will be not normal in relation to that “wrong” civilization, which causes stress. What we can do? The patient is the society, not the individual

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

werriboy55 9 minutes ago

Because our brain has 2 halves and thinks and some pre-galaxies have 2 halves you believe that they think.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No, it is not so simple like that. Only for yours sake: Physicists Find Evidence That The Universe Is A ‘Giant Brain’ – If you are interested, Google it. The fact that human brains are not an entire whole, or that is not shared into 3, 4, 19 parts is because this bi-lateral symmetry is a constant pattern of natural systems, from galaxies to biological systems.

·  in reply to werriboy55 (Show the comment)

werriboy55 19 minutes ago

Here’s some more of the Huffington Post article

“No, it doesn’t quite mean that the universe is ‘thinking’ – but as has been previously pointed out online, it might just mean there’s more similarity between the very small and the very large than first appearances suggest.”

And the piece of speculation you are basing your claim on is “might just mean”. Hardly concrete evidence

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, but it doesn’t quite mean that the universe is “not” thinking also. We don’t know. My personal investigation using anatomy comparative method already suggested that the first cell is an exactly copy of primordial galaxies – if astronomical bodies are under the process of life cycle formation. I have lots of evidences suggesting it is. And “if” the cell is a copy of galaxies, the brain must be a copy of Universes. There is nothing more reasonable: the creature is the face of the creator

·  in reply to werriboy55 (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 37 minutes ago

All I know is how the two hemispheres develop in neurodevelopment but I will look up that paper. Is that the title of the paper and do you have the authors and/or journal it came from?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This is a big opportunity for you being a famous and helpful professional for Humanity. I am suggesting a new approach for neuropsych area that nobody tried before. I can’t do it because I am researching thousands of other issues and I have no knowledge/resources you have about this field.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

I disagree. That would be an opportunity for me to commit career suicide before I even start. I would prefer by continuing to study cognitive rehabilitation in post surgical epileptics and learn what I can from that experience.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ohhh…sorry, I was forgetting to talk only the things that are safe for you being a good synchronized citizen of your “health” society. I have committed my career suicide, it is very painful, I ‘must not suggest to others doing it.There are centuries people are “studying” cognitive rehabilitation and it does not works yet, without forcing the cure with drugs. be a good professional following this mindset, it is about money.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 15 minutes ago

What? I don’t understand your first comment. I can, however, say that cognitive rehabilitation is a very specific therapy that has not been around for centuries and is a valid form of therapy. We are looking at a specific implementation of cognitive rehabilitation. Cognitive rehabilitation works based on the idea that the brain is plastic, which wasn’t known centuries ago.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I am not resumed to cognitive rehabilitation therapy, which deals with injured brains ( If I remember it right) but I am thinking the broad sense of cognitive remediation therapy which deals with traditional diseases like schizophrenia, ADHD, and major depressive disorder.

For yours sake: The US Department of Defense has declared that cognitive rehabilitation therapy is scientifically unproved. As a result, it refuses to cover the cost of cognitive rehabilitation for brain-injured veterans

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

It is enough paste the title at Google. It does not talks about two hemispheres, this issue is about Matrix/DNA Theory’s models. If you see the configuration of a bi-lateral pair of nucleotides you see two hemispheres. Remember that brains are evolutionary result from evolution of nucleotides. If you try to understand how was the state of the world that created nucleotides, you need a cosmological model. If you get the right one, you will understand each division and function in the brain.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

werriboy55 2 minutes ago

The way to tell if a society is healthy or not is simple. Is society (objectively) growing or declining. If it’s growing it’s healthy. “naturally healthier” is a subjective judgement, requiring you to impose your personal values which are not necessarily valid in the society you are commenting on.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

So, when the dinosaurs society were growing it was naturally healthier? ( Don’t tell me that fare tale about meteorites) Same for lions, wales, eagles… all of then going to extinction. No, growing in not indicative that nature is happy and will support a species. It can grow in wrong way. Besides that, who is growing now and well adapted to this environment will be sick and destroyed by the next environment due natural changes.

·  in reply to werriboy55 (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

I disagree. That would be an opportunity for me to commit career suicide before I even start. I would prefer by continuing to study cognitive rehabilitation in post surgical epileptics and learn what I can from that experience.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

NewSoulSam 56 seconds ago

Actually, you can study neurodevelopment in early organisms and in humans to understand how the brain developed over time, from the nerve ganglion in some flatworms to our brains. In order to understand the organization and function of the brain, you need to study the brain using various methods, including neuroimaging, nothing more.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Nothing more? In order to understand the organization and function of the brain we need to know about natural systems, a forgot area by modern mindset. Brains are the new evolutionary shape that came from atoms systems, astronomical systems, cells systems, early organisms systems, etc. Don’t do that and you never will know what a brain is about.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 15 minutes ago

What? I don’t understand your first comment. I can, however, say that cognitive rehabilitation is a very specific therapy that has not been around for centuries and is a valid form of therapy. We are looking at a specific implementation of cognitive rehabilitation. Cognitive rehabilitation works based on the idea that the brain is plastic, which wasn’t known centuries ago.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

NewSoulSam 53 minutes ago

I appreciate your wikipedia search for my sake, but I am well aware that of what cognitive rehabilitation is and in what ways it has been shown effective. We will be the first to test the effectiveness of cognitive therapy in epileptics. I am aware that the Dept. of Defense will not cover cognitive rehabilitation, but I’m unaware of what relevance any of this has. Our lab’s work is our lab’s work and you are welcome to read the paper when it is published. I’m not exactly sure what your point is.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 14 minutes ago

What is my point? Cognitive therapy is actually fairly difficult and challenging due wrong approach due wrong interpretation of the brain due wrong interpretation of origins and meanings of brains. If we don’t know this Nature here and now we don’t know if the unusual behavior is illness of the individual or of the society.

I am grateful for you keeping this conversation because it is constructive for my job.But I understand why you never have thought outside the box.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam

XXX

fremiamagus

fremiamagus 56 seconds ago

That is what I said right here

“What you are citing is a program that only checks for the version of that particular os to make sure that it has not corrupted during the transfer process.”

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Nature does not permit to systems that she creates to be eternally perfect closed operating system. It is because the very foundation of this material Universe: he is assented upon the expansionist light-wave triggered by the Big Bang.This light-wave produces fragments, photons, which go out from direction of the wave. Same way, the unique perfect closed system reached by matter had fragments of mass/energy going out of the systemic circuity. With time = there is whole corruption/mutation

·  in reply to fremiamagus (Show the comment)

XXX

g24417

g24417 34 minutes ago

try to stay consistent. You said their is no evidence for spontaneous life. In fact there is evidence and some of that is that 1 – RNA and lipids arise naturally and 2 – RNA and lipids together perform all the functions of life. Also you should be concerned about Prion’s. They arise naturally and can replicate themselves. That is more evidence that life can arise naturally.

·  in reply to Tom Adams (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No. The fact that RNA and lipids arise naturally is not proof for spontaneous life. They arise by the same process a new human baby arise inside the womb. Should we say our bodies arose spontaneously, by chance? What is missing for you is to see and understand the larger big picture, the state and shape of the world where the first RNA arose. If you try do it you could be more helpful for Humanity. Just now you remembered me that I need go back to study prions-diseases and Matrix/DNA models

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

g24417 7 minutes ago

You fail to understand both the conversation and the point you are trying to make. 1st, RNA and lipids arising naturally is not “proof” – only an idiot would say that. It is however evidence. RNA and lipids do not arise in nature through the same process as they arise in our body. For example, if you freeze a solution of amino acids, they will form RNA. Hint: your body does not freeze amino acid solutions to form RNA. There are other ways they form in nature as well.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I think I can understand your point because I know your world view, but, you can’t understand my point because you don’t know mine.The emergence of RNA at abiogenesis could be an evidence for spontaneous generation only if one does not know the informations inside atoms, molecules and aminoacids. Same way, the emergence of an embryo inside a womb being watched by a microbe living in that womb should be for him evidence of spontaneous generation. He does not know DNA. You don’t know Matrix

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

g24417 12 minutes ago

You do not understand my point because you do not know what you are talking about. You are using the terms completely wrong and nothing you are saying makes any sense. Its like you are saying the “rabbit ran fast unicorn eats soup” (WTF?). Additionally, your idea of a world view is nonsense, we live in the same world that follows the same rules of logic and evidence, this “world view” idea is simply a dishonest way to avoid your own ignorance.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You don’t know what you are talking about. Why a long post totally off the topic that initiated our debate? It is about yours beliefs in spontaneous generation of RNA and lipids. Let’s check yours evidences? First: why carbon atom was chosen for to be the basic atom for organic matter? Second: Why carbon choose to link to N and O for building aminoacids?

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ok, you are talking something that I don’t know and I need know it. I will search the paper/articles about freeze aminoacids making RNA, but if you could advance the best paper, I will be grateful.The Matrix/DNA models are suggesting that it is impossible inside a lab to built naturally those 20 aminoacidos and naturally they will compose as RNA. If it is possible, I must throw Matrix models into the garbage. But I want to see it

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

Terncote 3 minutes ago

“First: why carbon atom was chosen for to be the basic atom for organic matter?”

Chosen? Why choose that very slanted word? That seems careless or prejudicial.

Why not ask, *why is carbon so well suited as the basis for life*?

“Why carbon choose to link to N and O for building aminoacids? ”

It didn’t choose, like all elements, it’s a mater of complimentary valences. There is no self awareness involved.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I am not worried with semantics, but about facts. So, *why is carbon so well suited as the basis for life?*. What is your explanation? It is not enough to say that carbon is able for several connections, etc. It does not works at other different planets. Why Earth is the right catalyst for carbon making the right compositions for life? Of course there is no self awareness involved, but why linking to N and O results into aminoacids fitted for biological systems?

·  in reply to Terncote (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 4 minutes ago

“At the moment, since we have no idea how probable life is, it’s virtually impossible to assign any meaningful probabilities to any of the steps to life except the first two (monomers to polymers p=1.0, formation of catalytic polymers p=1.0). For the replicating polymers to hypercycle transition, the probability may well be 1.0 if Kauffman is right about catalytic closure and his phase transition models, but this requires real chemistry and more detailed modelling to confirm…”

TALKORIGINS

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The modern academic worldview have no idea how probable life is because this worldview is denying that every son must have a father with same genetic code. This worldview is suggesting that the first cell came with a genetic code built spontaneously at abiogenesis, but they do not show where and how this genetic code was in the state of the world during abiogenesis. Do you need to apply probability calculus for to know how a female womb is suitable for creating a new life?

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 53 seconds ago

Do you need to pretend like you know the answer to this impossible question?

Join us in trying to find the truth instead of pontificating all over my new shirt.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Impossible question?! Are you talking about the question: “Which were the natural forces and elements that contributed for building the first biological system? Where were them? How and why those forces and elements converged to this planet surface at same time?”

These is the unique most rational questions we can do. And the method for finding the answers is: “Go looking them at the ancestral existing natural systems: atoms, galaxies, etc.” Yes I did it because I am not denying our ancestors.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Terncote 30 minutes ago

“How and why those forces and elements converged to this planet surface at same time?”‘

Again with the loaded verbiage.

Every mote of stardust contains three things, silica, water and hydrocarbons.

It is impossible to avoid the basic materials for life – they are pervasive in the universe!

Earth just happens to be in the habitable zone of our sun. There are potentially millions if not billions of planets where these conditions exist.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 minute ago

Hummm…Yours argument is irrefutable. Really, it is impossible to avoid the basic materials for life – they are pervasive in the universe! Yours problem will begins when you take a little bit of those ingredients, mixing them for getting the right 20 aminoacidos, only the left handed molecules, and leaving them by themselves continuing the process towards the first cell system. Since they will not do that, you will go back, to the Universe – as the designer – for asking the same question.

·  in reply to Terncote

Terncote 1 hour ago

We are semantic creatures so words matter, especially loaded ones.

Because of its structure, carbon easily forms long chain polymers and these are essential for organic life.

“It is not enough to say that carbon is able for several connections, etc. It does not works at other different planets.”

What more can you say about it? And you are wrong – carbon has the same qualities anywhere in the universe, just like every other element.

Earth chemistry is the same as chemistry everywhere else.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, but why the carbon structure easily forms long chain polymers for organic life? Why the oxygen or Nitrogen structures are not such suitable? I think academic establishment never did these questions, so, they have no explanations. I will advance the explanation from matrix/DNA models: carbon has number atomic 6, which is the exactly copy of Matrix natural formula for composing natural systems. Each particle is a tool performing a specific universal systemic function. And goes on…

·  in reply to Terncote (Show the comment)

XXXXXXXXXX

Edmond Goo

Edmond Goo 55 seconds ago

They can’t see what’s under the photosphere of the sun.

No one knows what’s there.

I say iron.

Do I know?

Nope.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)
Louis Charles Morelli

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago

The sun is going to dye because he is eating himself, Goo. The lesson of his existence, the big mistake of being supreme selfish, composing his own body as his own Paradise as a closed system, is spread to the external world in shape of light, a lesson for his offspring don’t do the same mistake.Creationists did not learned the lesson. They don’t love Humanity and Nature, they makes an alliance with a powerful god and lives their selfish life. Your light is our darkness. We’ll do different

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

DarkHoundNero

DarkHoundNero 6 minutes ago

ok then, again I say, they believe the universe only existed that long. where did the universe COME FROM?

·  in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Every time you have a question about Nature (the Universe is Nature) search the answer in nature.nature does not play dice with us. So, you will see that all elements and substances inside a cell system came from outside, through holes at the membrane.Now, try to make yours theoretical model about “where the Universe came from” based upon what you see. It is better than appeal to imaginations going far out away from Nature. That’s was the method used by Matrix/DNA models

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)

TheOneTheOwnLak 21 minutes ago

Funny how when I mentioned that fractal patterns are in this universe from the atom to the solar system to the galaxy…..you all said i was mad

funny goats.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I never said that. But…natural fractal patterns are in need of analyse from a different approach, other than Math. The universal pattern that Matrix/DNA models are suggesting seems a living thing that evolves, creates different appendices, changes time from micro to macro, etc. It is the universal formula that nature uses as template for organizing matter into systems. It is better seeing as a bi-lateral pair of nucleotide, the unit of information of DNA.

·  in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

DarkHoundNero 43 seconds ago

Technically, science is a product of your brain. and then if there were no organisms on the planet during the Big Bang, how did they come from nothing? Macro evolution also doesn’t make sense, in the terms that everyone came from a single cell that multiplied and already had the function to multiply if it was the first one

·  in reply to davermiava (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

DarkHoundNero, our known data were rationally connected and the result is the Big Bang Theory. It requires that something came “through” “nothing” and not that something came from nothing. It means that the Universe is surrounded by a kind of membrane remembering nothing, with holes. And the first cell was not the first natural system able to self-replicate: our ancestors, galaxies and stars already does that.These theories are very pretty rationals under the light of what we see here and now.

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)

DarkHoundNero 25 minutes ago

I believe in God, but Matrix, I give you props.

You’re the first person to actually make some sense and answer me.

So science says that an organism was not present on the earth when the Big Bang happened and it was formed? So where exactly did an organism come from?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Organism is the name that we call any natural biological organized system. Then you have the same question I had 40 years ago and since nobody had the answer, I went to Amazon jungle - the still living world that witnessed the origins of life – searching the answer. There the jungle sent me to ask to the sky, because at the sky was the answer. Then, I saw the Matrix/DNA in shape of astronomical system, working exactly as an ancestral organism. Maybe my answer is wrong, but it is interesting…

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The Matrix/DNA does not have seen supernatural interference upon the long chain of causes and effects that began with the Big Bang and is coming to our days.But absence of evidence is not proof for non existence. I will not destroy yours faith and hope in the existence of a lovely God, but only I will debate the events and real facts of this world that my little brain can grasp

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

DarkHoundNero 5 minutes ago

I agree, sounds interesting.

LQG on CNN

Was just found like yesterday

might be intriguing

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“LQG on CNN: might be intriguing”

I am not well informed about LQG, which means I need to dedicate more time studying. But…theoretical Physics seems that are going away off the beam. I don’t appreciate the idea of existing ghosts black holes as theorized by Hawking, I think that it is result of deviation of Maths from the natural world due the excess of Maths and computer simulations. Matrix/DNA is suggesting that at galactic nucleus there are merely vortexes formed by dust of died stars

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)

XXX

Edmond Goo

Edmond Goo3:00PM – Sat – Jan – 12 – 2013

Genes do mutate.

75% of mutations on a typical gene are bad, 24% are neutral (waiting to go bad) and less than 1% give an arguable benefit.

No life form can survive those numbers and the more time you add, the worse it gets.

I know it seems simple and logical to you.

HERE is your problem.

Your Philosophy of “No God, Nature did it” creates a perception problem for you.

You become incapable of discerning what is real because a Philosophy has replaced objective reality.

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

It’s reasonable that any natural system 75% bad mutations goes worse and the 1% good, by logics, never should get fixed. But the macro-evidences of this world, the analyses of whole Natural History, shows that the long natural chain of causation is not linear as wish our logics. The carriage makes a curve and so, there is an evolutionary movement from simple to complex that is curve also.Have you heard about white light and dark light? It does that a system must became worst for becoming better

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

xxx

TheFallibleFiend 28 seconds ago

“I don’t know that humans are apes, but I do ‘know’ that life is a kind of energy. Despite my science illiteracy, I KNOW that all the actual scientists are liars or idiots.” –TheOneTheOwnLak

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Life is a kind of energy?! So, this guy has no Higgs bosons at his body?! Shouldn’t… since he says life is no mass…

·  in reply to TheFallibleFiend (Show the comment)

TheOneTheOwnLak 38 minutes ago

life is energy…I stand behind it as matter is energy…you dont know how physics works?…go see einstein.M=E/c2…

No Higgs boson…itll never be found

electromagnetism.

you guys hate to look stupid dont you…and then you make shit up like I said it…HAHAHAHAH

what will you guys make up next?

Unicorns? haha

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 5 minutes ago

My definition of “life” is: “The shape of the universal natural system that began simplest as a vortex at the Big Bang, but containing all seven brutes natural forces that became the seven life’s properties. This shape correspond to our shape as “fetus” when our body is changing shapes due the action of vital cycle process. So, this Universe is a genetic reproduction process of something ex-machine, performed by steps known as Evolution, but, which, really, is the Universe under a vital cycle

·  in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

If my definition will be proved the right one, life is not merely “energy”. Energy is merely a natural state got by accelerated mass and mass is the state of low energy. Both, mass and energy are not essence DE per SE, but derivations of a deepest essence: information. Informations are those quantum vortexes that appeared at Big Bang working like genes and composing quarks, leptons, etc.Reproduction of Universes…or Gods? I don’t know.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
emfederin

emfederin 2 minutes ago

I’ve seen AI programs that make more sense then you do.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Really? Thanks by this information, I will go back for repeating my research about AI, maybe is there something new that I don’t know.Any suggestions for correcting my mistakes are welcome.

·  in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)
XXX
cupera1

cupera1 37 minutes ago

how did light sensitive pigments become light sensitive?

·  in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

cupera1- how did light sensitive…?

Every material body that still belongs to any natural system is light sensitive. All matter is supported by an ocean of light that produces wavelengths with different intensities of vibrations.All seven vibrations are shapes of a single vital cycle process. So, the shape of “green”color always are sensitive to “yellow” and “blue” colors due the same cause that a baby is the shape that links to embryo and child. There is symbiosis among material bodies

·  in reply to cupera1 (Show the comment)
XXX

When a kid lose his parents and becomes homeless, his inner tendency forgets parents and turn on as hate against the hell in the streets and the world, becoming a criminal. But, if the kid is kept by relatives and grows on the same land, he keeps the memory of parents, like Uudam did, and the missing parents’ love becomes great potential tendency in some kind of arts. Usually he does nothing in relation to the whole Humanity, this species abandoned here without spiritual protectors parents. But.

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (10)

quarta-feira, dezembro | 26 | 2012

POSTS DA MATRIX/DNA PARA ABERTURA DE DISCUSSÕES

XXX

Living in the jungle I woke up for the salvage chaotic state of this biosphere. All creatures, from any plant to any animal are tortured in this existence. But, then, suddenly we see a beautiful small flower. It seems not belonging to that world. We see a bird nurturing its offspring. We see the tall tree offering flavor fruits. And we see the salvage natives. A mother holding her baby and a male bringing on food to them. This is order lifting up from chaos. This is divine evolution.

XXX

Creation plus Evolution is a process much more complex than all guys are thinking here. The deeper template where natural history is established is the history of light light and dark light, ( vibrations popping out of a membrane of nothing that separates different worlds). Matter only is adjusted over this template. Driven by this universal force, biological systems (aka life) evolves in relation to Earth and degenerates in relation to this galactic system. The source of light is creation.

XXX

God said to humans: “Grow and multiplicate!”

But…he forgot to say the same thing to this planet. Now that human had grow, we have super-population, but the planet stands the same size…

What fuck…bad designer retard god!

XXX

Thanks America! This debate is signal that a collective mind of a whole Nation has the courage to face its inner conflicts, thinking about then, suffering the pain of self-correction,but just it keeps the strong creative power of this great nation. What’s about the European and the Asian religious countries, South America, etc., which already discovered the ultimate “Truth” and has no capacity for fix what is sure wrong? There is no such debate. Yours voluntary suffering here is an heroic act!

XXX

What’s beyond the Membrane of Nothing?! The astonished idea coming from Theoretical Science, is Lawrence’s “something from nothing”. Since that Matrix/DNA calculations arrived to the astonishing idea that the seven frequencies of electric-magnetic spectrum of lightwaves are the source that imprints the vital cycle, life, into matter, we are searching the source of this natural light. The unique situation where things emerges is through membranes, then, I think there is a Membrane of Nothing.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

NoGoodScienceForYou is here suggesting a video ( /watch?v=HRyXauc0h04) which uses real scientific reality as propaganda for his theory. I think the best education for children is showing the images of reality but, being careful self-watching for not using any kind of concepts related to adult’s interpretations, no imposition of theories. I could make a video with same images having in parallel images of spermatozoons as comets, oocyte as nuclear black holes, etc. This is for philosophy class.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA – Dec – 26 – 7:35 PM

Creationists frequently are using the probability calculus for refuting the odds of evolution and evolutionists are using the same calculus for reinforce the odds produced by chance. Both are wrong. The “individual” evolution of a new being inside a womb is driven by the external environment (human species as the non-intelligent designer) which acts internally (through DNA) and externally. Biological evolution is being driven by an yet unknown external environment, probabilities does not applies.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA 10:11 AM – DEC – 29 –

Atheists: “How man was made?”

Creationist: “By magics of God”.

Atheist: ” Hummm… how the planet was made?”

Creationist: ” By magics of God!”

Atheist: ” Hummm… how was made…

Creationist: “Stop with these stupid questions… it is magics always down!”

Really, really that’s the Science they want for kids?

· 

XXX

TheMatrixDNADec – 27 – 2:28 AM

Creationist woman – “My grandfather was not a monkey!”

Lawrence Krauss – ” Well… yours case is not so clear… ” (maybe a pork?)

Evolutionists could be more intelligent if they explain the real state of Science today. All known facts suggests strongly the physical body of human beings came from primates. But Neurology – the field really expert in this matter – says that it still does not found how neurons produces thoughts and how they are related to human mind. This is hope for dignity

XXX

TheMatrixDNADec – 30 – 4:23 AM

Edmond Goo: “Evolution was spoken into existence”
No. Biological Evolution is a point of time/space located at the long chain of causes and effects started with the Big Bang beginning with particles evolution, atomic and Cosmological Evolution. All forces of Biology were there at the last non-biological ancestor, the top pf cosmological evolution and I can show you where. But… we don’t know if the very seen steps of evolution is universal evolution or merely reproduction of universes.
XXX
TheMatrixDNADec – 30 – 4:23 AM

GoodScienceForYou: “Mitochondria in most species has lost over 1200 complete genes”

And you says it is due degeneration from Adam’s DNA. You have a point, you are right. Adam was a closed selfish astronomical system, also called LUCA, his DNA was the formula of Universal Matrix. The decay or Fall of Adam into the microscope shape of biological system due entropy was a change from closed to opened system. Mitochondria tried to close it doing photosynthesis, and got it as cell plants.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

The mistakes of “degeneration theory”:

About the graphic made at “evolution-is-degeneration dot ComSindex dot asp?PaginaID =1102″

Matrix/DNA:The graphic doesn”t shows a complete period of micro-evolution, nothing about universal evolution. Biological systems are result of the decay of astronomicals systems described by Newtonian mechanics plus Relativity plus Quantum Mechanics theories composing a quasi-perfect closed system, half-alive. This “evolution” has been reproduction of that ancestor

XXX

The mistakes of “degeneration theory”:

As introduction, they says: evolution theory says all life has started as single cell organisms”

TheMatrixDNA: It is wrong. There is no separation of life and no-life when talking about natural systems. Then, “life” has not started as single cell organisms. Biological systems (aka, “life”) had all principles of its forces, elements and properties inside atomic, astronomical systems, expressed or not. See them at Matrix/DNA models.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

INICIO DOS DEBATES

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Peer reviewed scientific paper shows there hasn’t been enough time in the history of the universe for evolution to take place.

Journal BIO-Complexity, “Time and Information in Evolution,” Winston Ewert, Ann Gauger, William Dembski, and Robert J. Marks, II once again show that a mathematical simulation of evolution doesn’t model biologically realistic processes of Darwinian evolution at all.

bio-complexity(dot)org/ojs/ind­ex(dot)php/main/article/view/B­IO-C.2012.4

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This debate between Dembski team and Ewens team will not be solved while Humanity doesn’t know the entire context that affects our biosphere and living things. The existence of biological systems is not due a simultaneous act of magical creation neither a long process obeying natural selection as agent of immediate environmental changes. For instance, the process of Earth nuclear reactions and Sun’s reactions are stronger forces composing NS, any change there means changes here. See Matrix/DNA

XXX

Evolution has been destroyed and is now in the level of archaic mythological science. These priests of the past faith based pseudo science will be known for how they retarded biology and any progress towards cures for diseases. They’ll be mocked as they should be.

NOT ONE cure has ever come from the medical industry! We have rampant NEW genetic diseases eating away at us and killing our babies.

The rise in genetic diseases under their watch is horrendous. thanks to this Evodelusionism. LOOK!

The souls of the creators of the Selfish Paradise, Adam and Eve, that remains at Earth in shape of humans, are joined around the creationist world view, has been corrected. These people wants to reproduce at Earth the falling paradise, but they reserves to them the residence at the palace, while all other humans beings should be the slaves. You can see the design of that Paradise at Matrix/DNA Theory: You see Adam and Eve, the serpent, the tree, the apple, the Fall, and you will know the truth

XXX

I’m very glad to hear that you got saved. I certainly agree that the effects of Evolutionist propaganda are tragic. We need to fight for what’s true, but I don’t think comments on a YouTube video are exactly the frontlines I’m looking for. :P

(For Evolutionists reading this comment: yes, spreading Evolutionism is only tragic from my Creationist viewpoint.)

· in reply to ncwdane (Show the comment)

The effects of Judaism and its Bible and its production as Christianism approving human slavery, sharing Humanity into predators and preys, and as Islam, the violence that never ends, are most tragic. You are a bad human when propagating that anti-Humanity book. It is rational to suppose that there is some thing as God, but one needs never forgetting the size of this Universe, then, giving to a “possible God” his real dimensions above the Universe. The bible stupidly reduces Reason and God

· in reply to Peter Markley (Show the comment)

XXX

The earliest writings on that subject come from the satanist Helena Blavatsky. She was busted several times scamming people and making up history. I take it you believe in her channeled demonic writings or one of the copycat offshoots like Zeitgeist the movie. The history lesion in Zeitgeist comes from Blavatsky’s imagination.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

Yeahh… Blavatsky, a woman that challenged the Russian status quo established by imperators supported by arm and religion, a woman that abandoned a powerful Russian military husband, for travelling alone to Tibet searching other kind of knowledge. Was she a satanist? You, as supporter of an established power ruling at Vatican, unable to challenge the status quo, that had enslaved populations inside industries, is a saint? I prefer Blavatsky.

· in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

I have thought that the Earth is an amusement park. Where beings come, inhabit us and share our life experiences, feelings, etc. I’m not sure if the science fiction story has been written or not..

Your thought maybe is right, but, it includes the supposition that should have a parallel spiritual Universe, is it right? If so, I remember that there is no evidence/comparative parameters here for parallels universes and spiritual existences. Why not thinking that those beings that come, inhabit us, are really bubbles of consciousnesses that pops out of this planetary matter? Think about computers: software (as bubbles of intelligence) and hardware (material living bodies) in feed-back.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

XXX

Have you ever written down your complete philosophy? It would make a great book… I would couch it in science fiction, personally.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

I think it is not “my philosophy” because it is a normal natural effect given some circumstances. Any one, included you, should get the same world vision if – known the modern scientific data and with single scientific tools – go to live in some virgin jungle by 4 or 7 years. It is the jungle that produces this philosophy over modern hard-wired brain by scholar education. But Darwin took 30 years for written a book, the jungle is big, there are lots of data, I need doing lots of work yet.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 hour ago

There is no evolution. There is no evidence for it. Not one species had evolved more complexity. You are a liar and are part of the denial of humans and their compulsions that destroy not only human lives but all life on earth. Putting your faith in humans has never worked. Why are you so stupid you want to thing now is different. They have killed so many people in the name of some idea.

· in reply to RipleySawzen (Show the comment)

Maybe you are right. Maybe there is no evolution inside this Universe. Millions of generations of hypothetical intelligent particles living 17 seconds each one and inside a fecundated ovum should watch the steps of evolution from single zygote to a human embryo believing that was watching evolution. We, outside their “universe” knows that it is “reproduction”. Maybe we are watching and working the reproduction of the son of some god. But… for while, we are watching evolution, that’s reality.

Changing the faith in humans for faith in supernatural ghosts produces the preys (95% of world population?) and hating humans by loving the salvage past animalism inheritance produces predators (the 1%?). Why human beings has followed these stupid millennial social models, shared into salvage capitalism, salvage communism, etc? It is the work of the “serpent” that convinced “Eve” in the “Paradise”. It is the stupid universal material tendency to be extreme selfish closed system. Not humanism…

XXX

“There are millions of single celled species that never evolved into multicellular organisms.” Exactly and that means there is no evidence of any form of advancement from a single cell to 2 cells with the new cells performing new functions. Thanks.

· in reply to RipleySawzen (Show the comment)

Don’t you know embryogenesis?! Fecundation, zygote, meiosis, morula…etc? You need learn something new, but for doing it, you need change your magic supernatural ghost creator in the sky by the real, natural, creator in the sky. Functions comes in two types: the systemic function (which is the effect over the external world from the projection of the shape of the whole system) and internal systemic function, which is related to each part of a system. There are different expressions of (cont.)

of internal functions and each system has its tendency expressed by the most strong expressed part. Any bit of external change makes changes at internal expressions. The interactions between internal parts creates infinite numbers of internal functions, called “fuzzy logic”. The initial process of eukaryotes merely replicating its cells is the first phase of biological evolution mimicking the process by which stars, galaxies are replicated, by self-recycling (see Matrix/DNA models)

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
XXX

I want you to name one disease that “modern” medical science has cured.

I want you to find one positive mutation ever found in the human genome.

Where is your absolutely irrefutable physical evidence of simple life evolving into complex? NO opinions allows and no religious books.

· in reply to TheArgonianbeast (Show the comment)

“I want you to find one positive mutation ever found in the human genome.”

The Matrix/DNA models explains how and why the genome is continually mutated. The fundamental unit of information which is the building block of RNA/DNA is a bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, which is the biological microscopic counterpart of the building block that came evolving from quantum vortexes after Big Bang, to atoms to galaxies. This universal “matrix” diversifies into infinite different kinds of nucleotides

Medical science is going away off the beam due Biology being seen as separated from Physics. It’s the same that one try to understand the existence of human body composed by flesh organs and substance without the skeleton and nervous systems which are related to the entity of natural systems. They had separated Universal Evolution into two blocks, with no evolutionary links between them. The abysmal hole created between two blocks are being fulfilled with the myth of absolute randomness.

· in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

I use evidence and the DNA is fantastic evidence for only DE-EVOLUTION.. All creatures are losing gene functions and we can easily see this in the DNA. Fossilization is not rare. We have samples of over 200 million fossils from most creatures that have ever lived. WE have 88% of the non bird, NOW LIVING, vertebrates as fossils and the original looks FAR more fit than what we see now. Go look! You cannot use faith and belief!!

You are watching the reduction of ENIAC into a laptop and saying it is degradation?!

But… the difference between things produced by ENIAC/apes and laptops/humans are not de-evolution.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX

“suboptimal function”

This has to be the dumbest argument for evolution of all of them.

The famous laryngeal nerve “evidence”. If the path of this nerve is not optimal then God is a screw up.

The fact that “evolution” only leads to screw ups from the original far more fit condition means that the laryngeal nerve is evidence for genetic dysfunctions of original “engineering” when the nerve was in a much shorter path at one time and “Evotards” still don’t fully know the purpose of this nerve.

·

We know. The purpose of this nerve is transforming chemical operations for connections between organism’s organs into sounds waves (voice) for connecting separated brains into a whole Humanist system. When you need transformations of signal waves you need apply quantum superposition and following separation. Then, the left and right nerves superposed makes the complete circuit of an established system, and when are separated they can be turned into a new different system. But…this is complex

XXX

In the first paragraph they clearly define “anti-evolution” or loss of good genetic engineering as the creatures “degrade” from the more “optimal” to the “suboptimal”.

This is the MOST compelling evidence for anti-evolution or gradual degrading of the best genetic engineering to the more defective genetic engineering we see today that I have ever seen and that we can see today.

·

The problem is that yours “more optimal” is good for stupid monkeys, but unsupportable for who has some intelligence. Yours optimal is called “Adam’s DNA”, a creature that was living like a stupid monkey eternally at a garden full of animals and plants. Any intelligent being would prefer the suicide, if they think that would be condemned to that life by all eternity. Thankfully had the Fall, the “Adam” genetic degradation, even that we were condemned to beginning as microscope cell here

XXX

The famous The Left Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve is totally evidence for genetic degradation. These people are “nuts” by the way in not being able to see the obvious, because they are brainwashed into seeing things BACKWARDS.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You are still blind to the deeper secrets of Nature Why the left RLN os different from the right RLN? This question makes no sense, there is no right and left nerves, there is a complete circuit of a system, separated into two slices. Make the superposition of those two nerves… you gets a complete circle. Why they makes a circle and why the left has several branches? Well… see the Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems, you will understand everything. No degradation


XXX

“protein functional redundancy”

There are only a very few amino acids available to make living tissue from, so OF COURSE it will be used in different creatures to make similar body parts.

Look at the amino acids chart and tell me how many do you see? (20)

We live on a tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.

We do not have infinite resources to build body tissue from.

Drive your eyes down to look to those 20 aminoacids and now drive yours eyes up to see the galaxy, the Universe, that produced them. Ask “why”, “how”, “for what”? Do you see the evolution of aminoacids? First step: Carbon is called by Nature to be the central atom. Why? Because Nature has several different faces, states, and our astronomical system was standing at the specific state as closed perfect natural system. Which is composed by six universal functions. Just carbon atomic number. So on..

“protein functional redundancy… our tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.”

This doesn’t means that life was tunelled due intelligent design. Proteins are slices of a kind of complete systemic circuit – the system around us – so the slices are limited in number. Planets has limited variations, resources, because limited is the specific state of Nature that produced them. But biological systems (aka, “life”) are just a rebellion against the creator system, so, open for mutations

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX

“anatomical and molecular parahomology”

It is ridiculous crap “pseudo science” and a stretch of the imagination.

It goes along with the idea that fools think that any similarity of use, appearance can only mean a direct genetic linage link.

This is utterly ridiculous and in fact all that we have seen of this idea in fossils of the “ancient version” of the creature are shown to have far more usable features and the “homology” becomes more complex as you go back in time.

“De-evolution”

XXX

I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1

While Naturalists are struggling trying to understand this world, trying to discover mechanisms and processes that can be transformed into technology for increasing Humanity power, spiritualists are criticizing them, being obstacles to their job?! No spirits and supernatural beings has made anything good for human kind till now and still 95% of our brothers in species are being tortured in this stupid conditions of life. Evolution is the idea that arose from a man that sacrificed his life for us

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1

That’s the cause we agnostics prefers the naturalist/rationalist community than the religious community. Our life experience as humans at Earth have been too much bad, our dream is to change everything. The naturalists woks in rhythm of changes, while creationists are conservationist of this stupid “status quo”, so, they are obstacles and unuseful.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

Even the “father” of evolution mentioned sripulations under which evolution could not be true. Those stipulations were met. Darwin discredited evolution in his own words. But you all havent actually taken any time to study it, you just assume blindly.

Why aren’t you honesty and respectful enough? If you want to destroy the worldvision of a man due you think it has bad effects, what you should do? Repeat his experiments, contest his evidences. Take a ship and go by 4 years facing the hell in a salvage world, do observations by yourself, applying the modern knowledge, show what was wrong with Darwin idea. Or do you want to refute such sacrificial heroic job standing under air conditioned? Taking Reason off Nature by magical thinking is easier

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1 (Show the comment)

XXX

@”Christianity is a theory”

No it isn’t. It’s an assertion.

· in reply to SheepTheAsian

Christianity is a theory by the real definition of “theory” by the Greeks that coined the word. It is not a theory by scientific definition, but here is not a scientific community congress, it is a public debate. Theory is “a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking”- Wikipedia. Christianism is product of earlier human consciousnesses recently formed as any modern baby impregnates its surroundings with magics and ghosts friends.

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

@”Christianity is a theory by the real definition of “theory”

The guy was equating christianity as a “theory” to evolution as a “theory” and was attempting to put them on the same plane.

They are not.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Both can not equating at the same plane as the operations of a baby brain (Bible authors) is not the operations of a teenager brain (Darwin). All big religious theories were built from an unique source: the real little world seen by an infant intelligence plus flashes of memories popping up in the baby brain about a not seen but lived womb’s world. Ancient founders of all religions were visionaries (embryos) that had real visions about the womb were our ancestors shapes lived: the Cosmos.

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

You will not believe in my narrative as I don’t believe in it, I am still searching a better explanation as skeptical that I am. The narrative is: a native xaman living in Amazon jungle 30 years ago, with altered state of mind due their beverages, described visions of black holes and cosmogony identical to descriptions of black holes and cosmogony seen at Blavatsky books about “The Secret Doctrine”, or “theosophy” made by ancient eastern 5.000 years ago. I have a theory about: same baby brains

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Rational – based on or in accordance with reason or logic, able to think clearly, sensibly, and logically, endowed with the capacity to reason.

Christianity hardly fits the criteria for “rational”.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Yes, Christianity is not rational in the sense that Reason must be a natural product of nature. But… the non-rational productions of Bible’s authors can be rationally understood, using an analogy: the excessive installations of an industry is used to produce different sub-products. My theory is that the fusion of Chrom-2 suddenly produced an abrupt augment of cerebral mass beyond the normal installation that should be produced by the normal evolutionary chain. Earlier hominids had imaginations

· in reply to davermiava (Show the comment)

I an sorry that I am not finding now a recently published paper showing that human fetus suddenly produces neurons twice more fast than apes/monkeys fetus. I think it is a good evidence for this theory about the development of consciousness at the level of the human species, when I separated the stages of its evolution between babies/teenagers/adults shapes. But… why still there are people that believes in the Bible, which was a baby’s minded production? Missing education, denial to be adult?

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX


I honestly don’t know what to think. The idea that there’s a guy upstairs pulling all the strings sounds silly, and completely illogical, yet for macro-evolution contradicts itself in more ways than one.

While it makes absolutely no sense how or why we’d choose to go back to primal technology after conquering the galaxy, the only thing I’m truly comfortable with is that we developed on another distant planet and migrated to earth.

Yes, makes no sense the idea of some intelligent powerful being responsible by this chaotic biosphere and the struggle for species to become powerful. And makes no sense that an intelligence in shape of quasi-apes after conquering galaxies with high technology arrived here forgetting all that technology. The unique explanation that makes sense to me is Matrix/DNA Theory. Intelligence was merely potential at ancestors that were, themselves, the building block of any shape of natural systems.

· in reply to SoulofaDeity

XXX

Macro evolution sounds silly because there is no such thing. Its just evolution. There is no reason to split it into micro and macro.

· in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

Biological evolution is merely a micro-evolutionary cycle which must be added to lots of others micro-cycles and finally composing the Universal Evolution, from the extreme singularity resumed to a central point towards complexity expanded to astronomical size. How should you call the period of evolution that goes from yours body shape as teenager until the final shape of adult? As biological systems we are one transitional shape of a universal system that evolves by vital cycle process.

· in reply to NegridoPie

XXX

from simple to complicated

· in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment)

Things does not change by themselves from simple to complicated, this should be creating new information from nothing, by magics. But there are things like atomic, astronomic, biological systems that changes from simple to complex, at individual and populations levels. Individual occurs at embryogenesis, a body transforming from extreme singularity to complex. The mystery is that this world has a hierarchy of systems and you are not seeing the system the informations are coming from.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak

XXX

Panspermia, there is no real evidence, but it seems logical…

· in reply to SoulofaDeity (Show the comment)

Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body. The natural elements and informations for transforming non-organic into organic and electric-magnetic-mechanical systems into biological systems does not arises by magics or absolutely randomness. Those necessary and enough for building biologicals must come from a stellar system described by Newtonian mechanics turned into half-biological galaxy, as described by Matrix/DNA Theory.

· in reply to geezusispan

@”Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body”

And there you have it, folks.

You see this, soullessdeity?

Even matrixdna, world-class expert at butchering logic, reason and lucidity, not only completely understands the inherent conflict contained in your ridiculous statement, but can even state it on a level that approaches eloquence.

That alone should have you burying your head in utter shame.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

I don’t understand why posts like yours are being flagged as spam. You, as everybody, has the right to express opinions, we are debating theories, one can read or ignore what he/she doesn’t like. This is not honesty. About logic I do my best advocating the logics that I learned from nude. virgin, salvage Nature living 7 years at Amazon jungle were was elaborated Matrix/DNA worldvision. Conflicts with modern scholar logic is an issue to be solved by time, not by us. Who is away off the beam?

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

XXX

Look! There are trees. Someone must have designed them. See? Tree elves are real and great designers engineering trees for everyone. How else did trees get here, if not by the mysterious powers of the chief tree elf?

· 

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, trees were designed. Genetically, by transmission of “Matrix/DNA” from their creators…living in the sky. Trees are the same image of galaxies.The trunk represents the central nuclear axis. The branches are the galaxy’s arms. The leaves are the planets. The yellow fruits pending on the arms are the stars. The plant cell is the biological tendency to reproduce the closed astronomical system with chloroplasts making photosynthesis linking the cell to the star, which is an evolution-stopper.

·  in reply to PinkUnicornIsLord (Show the comment)

XXX

Mikezzz749 25 minutes ago

Question: why can’t humans create a self replicating machine? We can’t even create a machine that can eat breakfast. Intelligent designing humans can’t come close to the technology, complexity, efficiency, eloquence, etc of any type of life. Why would random chance processes be better able to produce life (even when the laws of physics, entropy, are against their natural creation?). I’m interested in an intelligent response! Do you have one?

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“Machine” and “life” are cultural symbols used for describing real states and details of Nature. We learn mechanisms, processes existing at Nature and we see matter organized as working systems. Our technology is mimicking natural phenomena, sometimes applying fuzzy logics, mixing mechanisms and materials from different phenomena and producing new arrangements. We produces “machines” because our limited sensors and brain capability see only mechanical and biological aspects of natural systems.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

If you want to debate your theory about this yet unknown world first of all you need be honest and a method. You post this exactly post here yesterday, got several answers, now answers that answers.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

Martin Koch 46 minutes ago

Man has created self replicating machines.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Could you elaborate this information? Are you referring to synthetic molecules, like those from Craig Venter? Matrix/DNA is researching the extensive already published papers related to NASA research of self-replicating robots, but any additional information about other sectors will be welcome.

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

Mikezzz749 42 minutes ago

@Martin Koch really? That’s all you got? Just flat out denial? Oh brother.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

NASA has a sector dedicated to study self-replicating machines. The goal is sending robots like Curiosity to other astronomical bodies, self-replicating robots that could use the matter of those bodies for populating the astro, maybe extracting some valorous mineral, etc. I am preparing a descriptive suggestion because the Matrix/DNA models arrive to a theoretical formula, a software’s diagram about a natural self-replicating machine. It is about the Newtonian mechanics aspect of systems

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

JoshuaWaller 41 minutes ago

The same question would have been asked as to why humans can’t get to the moon a hundred years ago. Not only have we done that, but we’re getting closer to building a self replicating machine.

Also, technically, we absolutely can create a self replicating creature that eats. We can create some that are even capable of learning on a fundamental level. Programmers have done that for quite some time. It’s limited to another, simulated universe. Technically, those programmers could be gods.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This issue is good food for thought. Nature makes self-replicating machines: a stellar system (working with the principles of Newtonian mechanics) degenerates, decomposes, its dust composes again as a new stellar system. But this process is self-recycling, when the original machine needs “dying” and its matter be used for a new one. Suppose that we could insert a software inside each atom of Curiosity and when the robot become oldest, we keep it at same place, the atoms would joining again…

·  in reply to JoshuaWaller (Show the comment)

XXX

Joe Shmoe 31 minutes ago

Then why doesn’t 1 human have at least 1 wing growing out of their back. The fly did it, w/ less of a need to fly, than we have. They can walk around all day and find poop. That is their life “poop”, poop is on the ground, they do not need wings.

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Joe, the causes are deeper than we think. Wings can be a result of personal effort (anfibians jumps) or can be imposed into a specie by informations flowing in this environment. Wings are specific shapes of accessories developed from cellular cilia which was produced by a universal systemic function number 5. This same function produced the tails of comets for realizing an operation. Here, the system that built biosphere was in need of something being the transporter of pollen. It was imposed

·  in reply to Joe Shmoe (Show the comment)

XXX

Alan Clarke 18 minutes ago

@tsub0dai “humans are far more diverse as a species than any individual person”

The population of human species is comprised of individuals. Theoretically, one individual from today’s human population could be compared to one individual, Adam, in the creation model for genetic diversity. The quagga is an example of selective breeding (artificial selection) used to restore lost genetic information to a few individuals. Natural selection works oppositely toward genetic entropy, i.e. loss.

·  in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, Adam/Eve were/is the most perfect genome possible to be made by Nature. Their genome was the formula for building their bodies, which was a closed non-minded system, merely extension of their genome. You can see their “photo” published by Matrix/DNA theory. Natural Selection worked oppositely to their tendencies, entropy causing the big Fall. As microscopic biological systems, the offspring of Adam/Eve lifted up at planets, as opened systems. The sinner father in the sky is driven NS now.

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 53 minutes ago

The land of militant Evotards who constantly give me death threats:

Austrailia: “The incidence rate for all cancers combined increased by 27% from 383 cases per 100,000 people in 1982 to 485 cases per 100,000 people in 2007.”

This is the highest rise in cancer of all the social liberal states I have found 127% rise in cancer in 25 years.

Cancer is only caused by genetic defects according to 449087 peer medical papers on PubMed, the international library of genetic diseases.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, cancer is an issue that needs urgent attentions. If you see the picture at my website tipping “The Cycle Of Cholesterol And The Matrix” you will know a new approach for understanding diseases. We have the formula for perfect systems, any disease is dysfunction of that formula. My problem is that I am alone doing this, have no time and resources. I did only fast research about bad cholesterol, Alzheimer. For analyzing cancer under Matrix models is necessary reading lots of informations.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 20 seconds ago

Germany, with militant socialists liberalism has 7.5 million functionally illiterate adults out of a population of 81.7 million.

That is a great sign of how well that works. Germany used to be the country where science and engineering prevailed and German engineering was well known. Now 9% of the population can’t read or write. They are setting up programs to educate people who have already been through the school system

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I think this is normal result from WW2: generations of people went to hard work instead schools. But this is also a suggestion that Matrix/DNA models are right. They are suggesting a different kind of targets for the Science enterprise, producing a different kind of technology, medicine, human habitat, different design for urban life. Different from that produced by Germany, whose unconscious target was driven to be a kind of Brave New World ruled by the Big Brother, mimicking insects societies

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 minute ago

OUR DNA closely maps out our history of self destruction. Its clear that we have been destroying our genome for a long time and it shows in the huge numbers of deaths directly due to genetic diseases, 30.4 million is less than half of the real number each year. Considering that we created all the viral fungal and bacterial infections by our stupid actions that kill us from infections.

We seem to have become animals with sexual compulsions owning us completely, never aware of what that is doing

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The building blocks of DNA, bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, are diversified copies of a unique system. each copy expresses a particular particle, a specific function, different of all others. These copies self-assembly themselves, free in biosphere and cell environment. Some kind of biological behavior selects among these copies which will be increased in their genomes. But the constructors of these copies does not want us as biological minded creatures, they want pieces for a natural machine.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 2 minutes ago

We now have the all time record of childhood congenital disease rates and at astonishing accelleration. 120% rise in Autism in 2 years! 1 in 88 diagnosed by 8 year old. 1 in 125 babies born with congenital heart disease. A rise of 135% in childhood invasive cancer in 34 years. 200% rise in 10 years of STD’s affecting 1 in 4 and young fertile girls have the highest rates. Evolution is a denial mechanism that supports this genetic suicide. “evolutionforum.info”

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I should leave these statistics for atheists answering them. But, my personal technique is searching causes based on Matrix/DNA models. They suggests that degradation of humans genetics and bodies is the predicted results from this biosphere evolution. This biosphere was produced by chaos through fragments coming from the decay of a ordered half-mechanical/half-biologica­l system. The action of these fragments is to reproduce the machine, humans must be pieces, so, it is fixing our genome.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)
XXX

GoodScienceForYou 3 minutes ago

History’s shown from the dark ages; the advent of many diseases that nearly wiped out humans, like the plague , wiping out 1/2 the population of Europe; resulted in extreme political measures, using the state religion, Gods authority, to stop diseases. Prison time public whipping, death to homos & anyone who had sex outside of a virgin marriage was a criminal period. It took a lot of suffering to learn to stop killing families children mothers fathers. Used to use a sharp pole for punishment.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I had no time yet for analyzing those plagues based upon Matrix models, but these models suggestions about the origins of viruses also suggests that diseases caused by them are produced by specific psychological states – individual or collective. Viruses are organic constructs from Matrix/DNA genetic code – which exists inside living beings and flowing in the environment – produced by universal function number 5. So, those plagues were produced by specific state of mind, which were religious.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)
XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 hour ago

33% of people ages 15 to 64 will die from cancer in the USA. Source CDC. Childhood invasive cancer in the US has risen by 135%;34 years. STD’s in the US up 200% in 10 years with the highest rates: young women ages 14 to 24.

It seems that also the fastest growing religion is atheism.

It turns out that Evodelusionism is the religion of atheists, homos, sex addicts, socialist liberals, communists, politicians, prostitutes (no kidding) and scientists. What a group of people to model after. Eh?

· 

TheMatrixDNA 44 minutes ago

It is just the opposite. This degradation of human bodies is the corolary of millenniums of religious thought ruling societies with wrong social systems, wrong technology and wrong science. Religion is a minded-stopper, it separates men from its Nature for alliance with supernatural. Then, the whole body is driven not by the intellect, but by the laws of atoms composing the body. These atoms are matter which supreme tendency is closed inertial equilibrium. We got it, but Nature is responding.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou

TheMatrixDNA 35 minutes ago

A good sample is the biggest religions of the planet, the Asian religions, which supreme goal is the search for personal equilibrium and nirvana. We have a model of a natural system just in this exactly state: the building block of astronomical systems, our ancestor since 10 billion years ago. It is a closed system into itself, cutting relations with the whole natural world, a self-constructed paradise, where the two aspects of matter, mass and energy got its targets. Extreme selfishness.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

These building blocks grew and built galaxies. Its shape is like a perfect machine, a perpetuum motor, self-recycling. The Universe was populated by them. But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation, measured by entropy and the pretense eternity falls down. Today the Universe is composed by their fossils, ours ancestors. Meanwhile, consciousness was sleeping at galaxies, woke up in shape of animals and lifted up as humans. Religious aret repeating the sin

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

emfederin 1 minute ago

@”But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation…”

First off, it doesn’t produce degradation. It simply states that isolated systems will always achieve maximum entropy, manifested as thermal equilibrium. This is the ultimate destiny of our universe.

Secondly, galaxies aren’t isolated systems within the context of “the universe”.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Are you based on Thermodynamic Theory for systems? First of all, those theorists never knew how and what is a perfect closed system. It is built by any lightwaves invading inertial mass and modeling matter accordingly to its seven different frequencies of vibrations, from gamma-ray to radio. Entropy is the name of unit of measurement, not the sate itself. Degradation is not loosing quantities of energy/mass, is fragments escaping from the circuit flow and diminishing the quality of closed system

·  in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

XXX

ozredneck22 3 hours ago

EVOLUTION is a fairytale for grown-ups, complete with its abiogenetic virgin birth, apes that talk and tell lies, “survival of the fittest “moral code, The prophet called Charlie, a magical process that’s never been observed while its happening, cows that tried to walk on water but became whales, a story about how a primordial soup made a chef.

· 

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Almost equal to the collection of fairytale in the Bible, eh? The big difference is that Charlie really sacrificed his best years abandoning a good life in London for facing the hell of the salvage world, observing facts for building conclusions, while the prophets of Bible forgot the real facts of nature and jumped to imaginary conclusions. Any other man that go back to the salvage world with the modern scientific knowledge will find models that solves all problems pointed by you, rationally

·  in reply to ozredneck22 (Show the comment)

XXX

odinata 10 seconds ago

DNA proves evolution.

shut your retarded hole.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No, DNA proves that he has all informations for doing all species at Earth. DNA proves to aliens that there are diversification of species at Earth. It does not prove Evolution, it merely suggests that evolution is possible.

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

Nathan Londrie 1 hour ago

I’m sorry, but last time I checked, not matter what you believe, there’s only so much evidence, and at some point you have to go on faith. Tell me again how evolution is a fact?

·  in reply to PinkUnicornIsLord (Show the comment)

odinata 16 minutes ago

DNA proves it.

FACT.

·  in reply to Nathan Londrie

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

DNA proves for a microbe as observer located inside the womb and watching the progress of a fetus that he is seeing evolution. As observers outside the womb, we know that it is reproduction. This Universe is a cosmic egg – or is an agglomerated of bodies still alive or of died fossils (galaxies) – where is occurring a normal natural process of reproduction. And we – like all conscious living beings at millions of other planets – are the minded “genes” making the embryo for the final Big Birth

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

Alan Clarke 2 minutes ago

@van der Meer “[Creationists] provide an answer, just not the correct one”

Considering that scientific theories are only temporal and never absolute (e.g. Newton’s gravitation theory was replaced by Einstein’s general theory of relativity), how do you know what the “correct” answer is concerning man’s origin? Modern-day scientists admit that they don’t know how life began nor has anyone ever created an artificial environment that facilitates the spontaneous generation of life from non-life.

·  in reply to Peter van der Meer (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Newton’s theory was not replaced by Einstein’s theory because they were dealing with different dimensions of time/space. Newton’s theory is for Einstein’s the same that atoms are for cells, it means, the new arrangement of atoms inside a cell changes their behaviors and functions. Newton was dealing with mechanics at stellar system level which is an mechanic arrangement like a watch – but Einstein was dealing with galaxies which is half-mechanical/half-biologica­l acting over stellar systems

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

We don’t know man’s origins in relation to human mind/brain, which could have aggregated new informations coming from a superior natural system located at a superior level of complexity in relation to the total systemic environment (Milk Way) that supplied informations for man’s body, about which we have the most strong evidences that came from primates. For creating biological systems from the evolutionary top of non-biological systems we need more knowledge about natural light, it is the code

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

XXX

kamphwagon1 2 hours ago

I would hardly think the lack of 100% confirmed theory in the branches of science would drive children into the wrong path, most depending on age wouldn’t grasp the Matrix /DNA theory anyway ,and most likely be taught at the college level.. Where as religion prefers to brainwash children at a young age before their logical abilities are fully developed and are still easy prey to mythical fairy tale stories and fear of invisible boogie men and good fairies … ;-)

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You are right, religion has not worked for improving human existence, so, they are not the solution, our futures generations needs search other alternatives, while the empirical scientifically proved facts must be known. The observation of fossil record and another known facts strongly suggests that there is a natural process from simplest to complexity, which is called “evolution” But this process happens at universal macro scale, unknown, so biological evolution is a non-complete theory.

·  in reply to kamphwagon1 (Show the comment)

XXX

RogerS4JC 1 week ago

@NuggetKazooie “negative factors you described wouldn’t apply to the other populations”

Then you get a net positive. Even very small positives soon leads to huge numbers & small negatives quickly lead to extinction.

“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass, with a narrowing population of Homo erectus leading to possibly one single mutant, whose improved genes emerged into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from failure to success is startling.” Alan F. Alford

·  in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment)

Martin Koch 1 week ago

Not true. Alan F. Alford is not an reliable witness–His first book Gods of the New Millennium (1996) drew on the ancient astronaut theory of Zecharia Sitchin

·  in reply to RogerS4JC

RogerS4JC 12 hours ago

@Martin Koch “Alan F Alford is not an reliable witness”

“however, he admitted to serious faults in his use of Sitchin’s theory and proposed an alternative, cataclysm theory of ancient myth: “I am now firmly of the opinion… the descent of the gods was a poetic rendition of the cataclysm myth…” wiki

Alan Alford is thus a “hostile witness” for creationism. Too bad he was forced to consider what he thought was a better mechanism than TOE.

Do “reliable witnesses” only have your same viewpoint?

·  in reply to Martin Koch

Martin Koch 5 minutes ago

Again, the crackpot claiming “ancient aliens” is not a valid source.

·  in reply to RogerS4JC

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass,…”

But his observation above is known, being the human genes emerged by evolution or by other unknown source. Alford almost touched the deeper secret of Nature and the deeper source for religious myths. In fact happened a cataclysmic event and the descent of gods as source for human genes. But this cataclysm was not the Noah’s flood neither the explosion of Nibiru, Matrix/DNA suggests other kind of “cataclysm” and descent “gods”

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

odinata 1 minute ago

No, there is no known observations of any aliens, ancient or otherwise.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, that is what Matrix models are suggesting: no aliens, ancient or otherwise. We need to remember the initial state of this biosphere and the jungle is the best witness still existing about the life’s origins. It indicates that this biosphere is product of chaos. Chaos is product of cataclysm that happens on ordered environments. The environment existing before biosphere’s origins was made of atomic and astronomical systems. So, there was the Newtonian machine and ours ancestors, the “gods”

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

odinata 31 minutes ago

There is no “Matrix Model”

There is only “Matrix Gibberish”

You’re an idiot.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The Matrix model still is a theory explaining this worlds’ existence, under tests facing real proved facts. It is a natural formula used by Nature for assembling matter into systems, like atoms, galaxies, trees, humans, cells, etc. This formula is under evolution since the Big Bang ( initially the Matrix was shared by billions of vortexes as bits-information or ex-machine quantum genes) and here the formula is resumed into a base-pair of nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. Theories…

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

khoraski 1 hour ago

How is Science inappropriate for children?

TheMatrixDNA 55 minutes ago

Only when Science as real knowledge of real facts is used by someone that did the mental exercise for connecting the facts, got a big picture, and teach to children that his picture is Science. Since we for sure don’t have all facts ( maybe neither 30% of all facts of this Universe) any big picture will be product of imagination, then, should be taught as theory. Any big picture (as Matrix/DNA Theory) now will be a driven into wrong pathway for children or a closer mind

·  in reply to khoraski (Show the comment)

khoraski 38 minutes ago

Well, yeah. That’s true for both Evolution and Creationism.

My point is, Creationism, by definition, is Science.

Throwing away an entire branch of science simply because you don’t believe in it, and disallowing any studies in that field is extremely unscientific.

Personally, I think we should teach all science behind all theories of our existence, or we should teach none.

And besides. Natural Selection is not the theory of Evolution, like a lot of Atheists try to combine as one single idea.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I agree and I will talk to kids about ToE, ID, panspermia, Matrix/DNA, etc., mentioning that I don’t know which theory is more appropriated and my personal thought has indicated that there is a natural process of transformation that have increased complexity. But, all these theories must be taught in a Philosophy class, not Science class. Science only inform about real known facts, has no conclusions. The most important thing is to be certified that kids will be opened minds, free for choices

·  in reply to khoraski (Show the comment)

odinata 48 minutes ago

Shut your gibbering hole, fuckwit.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

That’s funny. You make me remembering when Morelli was in Amazon jungle and elaborated the Matrix/DNA Theory. He saw lots of snakes in his pathway, they were static waiting any attack for expelling their venom. Louis usually touched them with a long piece of wood, and the snake bites the wood, before going away. Here in Internet, we find snakes in needs of expelling poison of their souls and any comments contrary to their beliefs works as the wood branch. Funny is that Interned is enough long

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

mrtalos 51 minutes ago

@khoraski ok fine, give me a proven testable hypothesis, just like every single real scientific thory must do, and we will start calling creationism scientific.

·

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You have a testable hypothesis. The Last Universal Common Ancestor – LUCA – of all living systems, is pictured in a intelligible astronomical model that’s testable. Taking out LUCA from Earth and out of abiogenesis, putting LUCA in the sky, all tools of a cells system can be reduced to the astonishing singularity of LUCA. Broken LUCA into small pieces, you have as result all living species seen at earth. But, LUCA was found coming from before the Big Bang, its origins is unknown.

·  in reply to mrtalos (Show the comment)

odinata 6 minutes ago

A theory is well established set of facts.

Your gibberish is not weel established.

Its not “factual”

It doesn’t qualify as a “theory” it is a madman’s rant.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ok, they you think you have the right for taking the word “theory” from the ancient Greeks that coined the word and give a new definition. No, my friend, the modern schools are not the owner of this world, they applied the wrong word to jobs resulting from a specific method of connecting real data, which method can be wrong. The Matrix?DNA Theory is a theory in the strictly sense obeying the right of its creators.

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Good Ideas/Informations

The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear.

All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this assumption can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Sentient animals put a face to phenomena – the evolution of the ‘god’ concept. All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it Assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this Assumption, this Instinct can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Mas então tem o contra-argumento dos criacionistas, o qual precisa ser notado, considerado, pensado, para procurar a explicação:

TheOneTheOwnLak 1 minute ago

Yes we all see monkeys with Gods ….talking of evolution when primates dont worship anything kinda contradicts your words…Primates with Gods?…oh dear.

· in reply to mechanicmike69 (Show the comment)

E esta analize me fêz produzir a seguinte resposta:

That’s your big mistake! yes, primates and all animals worships real things which symbolizes divinity. Primates, dogs, worship caves. black caves, they do holes in the soil, because in their brains are flashing images of black holes, which is encrypted into DNA. Flies worship any lighting lamp, because their atoms is a scene of electrons worshiping the luminous proton. Bees and ants worships the model of astronomical closed system and indeed, they built social system as the real copy.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (5)

segunda-feira, outubro | 8 | 2012

(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?

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago – 8:56 PM – Tue – 09 – Oct.

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.

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago – 7:14 PM – Oct – 12

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.

XXX – PERDÍ OS POSTS ENTRE 11 E 13.  RECOPIA-LOS.

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…

Louis Charles Morelli 1 hour ago – 7:00 PM – Oct – 13

XXX

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.

XXX

OT, huh? Well…

“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

So much for that.

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.

XXX

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.

XXX

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!

XXX

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.

XXX

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.

XXX

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 Morelli 1:56 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.

BigWater59 1 hour ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

This has been flagged as spam hide • 

1) Creationism is the beleif that a diety created everythign out of nothing…it is the ONLY concept put forth that says From Nothing

2) Big Bang says from a singularity..an expansion from condensed matter.NOT from nothing

This will natural lead to “Well then where did the singularity come from?” which is an argument from ignorance.

Personally, I tend towards the veiw that the universe is eternal and cyclic and that eventually it will colapse back into a singularity and repeat

whiteowl1415 in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 33 minutes ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 21 minutes ago

This has been flagged as spam hide • 

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

whiteowl1415 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 16 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

This has been flagged as spam hide • 

Nothing in nature isn’t recycled.

Amoung other animals, the placental is often reconsumed by the parents.

When it isn’t it nourishes the soil for plants.

People waste, nature never does.

whiteowl1415 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 8 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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

–Professor Jerome Lejeune, Lecture in Paris

JoelMckay69 2 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to JoelMckay69 – 12:38 AM – Tue – 16

That is not an argument against evolution it is an argument against abiogenesis. I take it you’re a Matrix student?

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 3 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 minute ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 26 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

You’re a little over the top now and I am not a matrix student so bring it down a little so we can understand your point.

BigWater59 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 6 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

TrueVerdicts 3 days ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

Jonathan Michaels 3 hours ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Jonathan Michaels – 7:47 ÃM – Mon – 15

XXX

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.

EphraimManasseh in reply to narco73 (Show the comment) 35 minutes ago

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?!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to EphraimManasseh (Show the comment) 16 minutes ago

XXX

(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.

homewherehorrorlives 18 minutes ago

“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?!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to homewherehorrorlives (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

The1Indignitary 10 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to The1Indignitary7:43 – PM – Oct – 13

XXX

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.

IDisnotscience 42 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to IDisnotscience - 7:24 PM – OCt – 13

XXX

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…

TrueVerdicts 48 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

TrueVerdicts 38 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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!

TrueVerdicts 32 minutes ago

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.

mechanicmike69 in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 25 minutes ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

HodadWah in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 32 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 1 second ago

xxx

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to ExtantFrodo2 (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

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?!!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN 1 hour ago

Because he is mentally ill.

HodadWah in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 4 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

HodadWah in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 minute ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 2 seconds ago

XXX

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to ExtantFrodo2 (Show the comment) 4 minutes ago

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?!!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 2 seconds ago

XXX

This argument looks like it’s gonna go on forever….

VitalSubtlety 15 minutes ago

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.

ExtantFrodo2 in reply to VitalSubtlety (Show the comment) 10 minutes ago

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…

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to ExtantFrodo2 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Part 1 of 2

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to TheRainmaker2001 (Show the comment) 18 minutes

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 2 seconds

YOU’RE SO STUPID AND CAN’T THINK FOR YOURSELF.

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

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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…

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 2 seconds ago

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 minute ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 4 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

ANYONE THAT ACCEPTS EVOLUTIONISM IS A MORON.

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to HodadWah (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

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?!!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second

XXX

I did not say DNA cannot “divide or reproduce”. It cannot change into another (entity’s) DNA.

TrueVerdicts in reply to TheHigherVoltage (Show the comment) 7 minutes ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

TrueVerdicts in reply to ExtantFrodo2 31 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts - 2:21 AM – Thu – 11

XXX

Thankyou but there is a God and he is the the one and only holy GOD and that is the only one you should believe in!

Chloe Woodward 14 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Chloe Woodward 9:36 – PM – Wed – 10

XXX

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!!!”

allanhill1 1 minute ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to allanhill1 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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

iaml3642494 2 hours ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to iaml3642494 - 8:47 PM – Wed – 10

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.

tsub0dai in reply to iaml3642494 (Show the comment) 2 hours ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

XXX

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?

netta2158 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

“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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to netta2158 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

TrueVerdicts 2 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.

TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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"]

TrueVerdicts 54 minutes ago

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

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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!

TrueVerdicts in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

TrueVerdicts in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 3 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

if your god is the father then who was the mother? You should have symmetry in your anthropomorphism in order for your mythology to make some sense..

Mike Johns in reply to netta2158 (Show the comment) 2 hours ago

Well…glup…in certain meaning, the last universal common ancestor was the father of all living beings, and he was hermaphrodite… Oh…no…is God gay?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Mike Johns 2 hours ago

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

netta2158 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to netta2158 1 second ago

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

netta2158 25 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to netta2158 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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

netta2158 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

XXX

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.

TrueVerdicts 3 minutes ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts4:36 AM – Wed – 10

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.

TrueVerdicts in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 22 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TrueVerdicts (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

Não Publicado

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…

geezusispan in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment) 1 second ago

So let’s hear your argument for ID

tsub0dai in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 3 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Why not admit that God is the slow force behind evolutionary processes and cut out the middle man?

unclethermo in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago

Why not admit that God is the slow force behind evolutionary processes and cut out the middle man?

unclethermo in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to unclethermo (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

single cell organism’s from chemical reactions, research the theories instead of asking people on youtube…

kegstar4mma in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment) 9 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to kegstar4mma (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

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.”

One of my favorites. Makes me feel happy. :)

bigjoegamer09 10 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to bigjoegamer09 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

ok, well, answer this qustion, if we came from life, and they say we came after the big bang theory, how did life start?

from whatever beginning of time they claim the big bang happened

how does life come from nothing?

if the first organism was brouht into existence and started repopulating

how could it be alive?

life just doesnt start from nothing, it had to be given it

DarkHoundNero in reply to parsivalshorse 2 minutes ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to DarkHoundNero1:55 AM – Wed – 10

XXX

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.

arthurjeremypearson in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to arthurjeremypearson (Show the comment) –  1:36 AM – Wed- 10

XXX

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.

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago

“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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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?

HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 hour ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago

A computer is not a living creature…Completely wrong comparison..

TheRainmaker2001 in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 59 minutes ago

By the way, computer are made by humans, and if humans are not a natural force, I don’t know what else they are…

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to TheRainmaker2001 (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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!

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXX

what makes you atheist so sure that there is no God. science says nothing on the subject.

itsoriginalme 3 days ago

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.

arthurjeremypearson in reply to itsoriginalme 48 minutes ago

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

itsoriginalme in reply to arthurjeremypearson 1 minute ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to itsoriginalme 9:39 PM – MOn – OCT – 08

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.

itsoriginalme in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 46 seconds ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to itsoriginalme (Show the comment) 1 second ago

i’m listening

itsoriginalme in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 minutes ago

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?

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to itsoriginalme (Show the comment) 1 second ago

XXXX

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.

MrDevin712

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?

Austriak1 in reply to MrDevin712 9:39 PM – MOn – OCT – 08

XXX

@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.

John Brown 21 minutes ago

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.

Austriak1 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago – 9:39 PM – MOn – OCT – 08

All this without authority right?

John Brown in reply to Austriak1 51 minutes ago

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 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 19 minutes ago

@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?

John Brown 3 minutes ago

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 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@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.

John Brown 4 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@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’?

John Brown 4 minutes ago

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:

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli Oashpe? Scientology? Too naive and vague for today’s problems. So enlightening it’s blind.

John Brown 17 seconds ago

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 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@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”.

John Brown 1 minute ago

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 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@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”.

John Brown 1 minute ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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 ?

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

@Louis Charles Morelli Searching? There is nothing else but Jesus.

John Brown 3 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

So you don’t believe because you don’t understand or accept His actions in a matter? Are you your father’s judge or authority?

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 4 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 minute ago

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..

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

I lean completely on the bible . You rely on your own wisdom which is limited by it’s comparative lack of knowledge.

John Brown in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago

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.

Louis Charles Morelli in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 second ago

Adendos Começam Aqui:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

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.

arthurjeremypearson in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 hour ago

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Against Creationism/ID

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.

ExtantFrodo2 14 seconds ago

“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

So much for that.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

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.

IDisnotscience 21 minutes ago

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Informações Valiosas

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,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Contra Evolução/Ciência

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.

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (4)

segunda-feira, outubro | 1 | 2012

(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

Ultimos posts da Matrix/DNA: (perdidos posts de 04, thu, devido PC cleaner)

XXX

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?

XXX

@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.

XXX

Someone give me proof that creation is wrong WITHOUT using evolutionary theories

That’s easy. The mental transformations of any individual human being due the process of life’s cycle is projected as mental transformation of the whole specie and vice-versa. While a baby yet the individual impregnates objects with fantasies because has no notion of the real world. This Universe has a natural system growing under a process of life’s cycle. Atom, galaxy, cell system are shapes as blastula, fetus, embryo. Mind is new shape that was born a minute ago, believe in Santa Claus.

That doesn’t work.

The pertubations emanating from the transcendental dimesionless void fluctuate a priori via the superposition quantum entangled mass density, with an impulse inversely proportional to the time flux patternized through electrostatic equilibrium.

And finally that impulse takes several units of DNA for to make a unique being appropriately called “DNAunion”. Which is funny because spreads only love because is our brother in the mithy, tiny. lovely lord PinkUnicorn. Thanks, bro…

XXX

Consider this. God created a perfect world, man sinned so he had to destroy what he made but not completely because there was a righteous man alive and he saved the animals. The flood completely altered the state of the world and the ongoing natural disasters are actually considered a sign of the 2nd coming of Christ as they get closer and closer together. These are my beliefs. I’m not stating them as fact because I know people wouldn’t like that.

Hummm… let’s see the logic here. Suppose you are a rich man, owner of a beautiful farm and have 20 sons. Suddenly yours 19 sons make something wrong that causes perturbation in the farm’s harmony. You kill your 19 son, keep one, destroy the farm and begins building the farm again. Please… this is the most stupid history I have seen. First, if you are a father able to kill yours sons – be their fault what could be – you are a monster. Destroying the whole for reassuring harmony?!

Read Genesis?

Yes. But I also went in Amazon jungle searching the origins of anything, included how salvages creates their mythologies. Under their beverages they described same thing that Orientals said 7.000 years ago and called chakras, etc. I draw the description: is the same description of the shape of DNA. Then I went further about origins of biological systems and got a model of the shape of the world in that time: it is the same described in Genesis. Is the voice of our memory, not the voice of gods.

When I said state I meant that it changed how the ground lays, formed mountains and such-like altering the seasons. Besides, wouldn’t anything made by the same being have a similar pattern?

It seems that Noah’s event is a repetition of Adams event brought from the sky to Earth. There is a sin, the fall, etc. But the state of the world that felt at Earths surface and was reduced to a microscope cell system happened 4 billion years ago when a closed thermodynamic system, astronomical ( I have its theoretical model) was attacked by a natural force measured as entropy, a flood of free radicals, not by a flood of water. That system shows the symbols of serpent, Adam/Eve, etc. Design.

You are a liar

1) Chakras have NOTHING to do with ANYTHING remotely connected to DNA

2) I don’t buy for a second that you went to the Amazon based on your reference to people there as “Salvages” (Savages btw)

3) We don’t have any records of anyone sayign anything 7,000 years ago, writting has only been around abotu 5,000

5) Genesis doesn’t cover it either

You are a closed mind which makes you blind. See the rude artistic image drawn as two serpents involved in a spiral having 7 stars among then ( kundaline and its chakras). Now see the rude artistic image of two strains of sugar+phosphate involved in a spiral having the nitrogenous bases between them. They are bot images far away from the reality due difficult of visions. Yes a lived in Amazon 7 years, exactly dates does not matter here and genesis cover it but with wrong interpretations.

King’s Lomatia is unusual because because it has three sets of chromosomes (a triploid) and is therefore sterile, reproduction occurs only vegetatively: when a branch falls, that branch grows new roots, establishing a new plant that is genetically identical to its parent. Although all the plants are technically separate in that each has its own root system, they are collectively considered to be one of the oldest living plant clones the plant has been cloning itself for at least 43,600 years.

That’s easy to understand for those who knows the universal formula for natural systems. Organisms with two chromosomes means that one is the left side and other is the right side of that formula, which can be seen as a face ( this is evolution from the primordial double particles with spins left and right). What would happen if the organism has two same sides of a face? The two original sides never could be linked into new face. When a chromosome falls he does not reproduces but self-recycles.

XXX

Guys, these debates in the comment section are ridiculous. Just let the ignorant creationists think what they want. I know it’s hard not to tell them they’re wrong constantly, but most of them are stubborn and won’t listen to fact. Just let them think what they want, and hopefully one day they will open there eyes.

They will open their eyes when NASA will discover the true cosmological model and all of us will discover that the narrative of Adam/Even in the Paradise is a narrative of a real event happened 4 billions years ago. But then, they will discover that the event was distorted due human interpretation of things that were not known in the time Bible was written. The event is registered in our memory, encrypted in our DNA and ancient authors of Bible got obscures flashes of a thermodynamic system.

XXX

A spirit which was planted into mankind like a seed. Mankind was given the option of freewill “the knowledge of good and evil” knowing that we would take it and be condemned. What we do with this freewill is the test. Will we use it to bring “life” into the world and bear fruit or will we use it for personal gain and take life from the world becoming a weed. When the harvest comes it is the fruit that will be taken because they have proven they are sons of God. This is the christian Idea of God

My life’s experience in this world and the world I have seen does not support the christian theory. The suffering and torture I have seen upon my loved people of my species makes me hate any kind of god. If I meet any god I go immediately to war trying to destroy it because if exists a god he is responsible for torturing me and my brothers. My method of investigation has suggested the existence of a ex-machine consciousness but totally natural, and absent here.

XXX

God is the witness to the creation and claims so in the Bible. Adam is an eyewitness to the animals God made for him to name; Adam is the eyewitness to the first operation on a human to remove the compatible genetic material used to make Eve his perfect human companion. Adam and Eve are witnesses to the dialog with God and warning, and expulsion from the Garden of Eden for rebellion etc. as recorded in the Bible.

My biggest intellectual problem is that I never will understand how the contents of this stupid fiction book called “Bible” works like a viral meme that penetrates a human brain destroying the hard-wired configuration built by Nature and builds a new totally silly hard-wired configuration! My great lord PinkUnicorn, please, resuscitate Freud, Jung or someone else able to investigate and finding the cure for this disgrace that has caused such prejudice to Humanity.

XXX

Evolution is the belief that everything came from nothing for no reason at all. Furthermore, the so-called “scientific theory” of evolution is worhtless on a couple of counts. First, it can make no predictions about the future. Consequently, it can’t be evaluated like other scienticfic theories, which do make predictions about the future. Real scientific theories actually take a stance on the future, and thus, are subject to being modified. No so with evolution.

Evolution can make prediction about the future and Nature supports this prediction. In a Cartesian graphic having as coordinates time and space and the point of intersection being considered the starting point (the Big Bang), we see a system evolving till arriving here and now as conscious system. The line makes a curve and returns to the initial point but matter/energy are discarded likely is the placenta and we see a Big Birth, of a conscious being. Everything equal embryogenese. Need more?

XXX

If we deny evolution, or don’t evolve at all, our entire civilization would fall apart, and lead to a self destructive humanity.

But… if you accept Darwinian Theory of Evolution in such manner like think the most healthy and right-wing people today, as the unique Truth, you will build a social system mimicking the rules of what is seeing in Nature here and now. The salvage world shared between predator and prey, justifying your privileged status. This will be the world of Big Brother ruling the Brave New World. You need improve ToE, by leading it to see the rules of an ordered Nature in Cosmos. That’s Matrix/DNA Theory

you mean the world that murders 259,000,000 inconvenient people and 453,000,000 inconvenient babies

I know that religions taking the power and building social systems have only tortured human beings with slavery and is backwards in relation to human progress. I think that the two worldviews, when becomes fundamentalism, when a person think that this little human brain of this microscopic living being walking over the surface of this lost planetary point in this immense world full of universes should be able to know the final Truth, are both dangerous. Improve ToE.

I think the fossils we have are enough to prove biological evolution. But I don’t see logic in the idea that evolution was invented by the stupid matter of this lost planet. So, I went search if evolution was not existing before Biology here. The method used is comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems. The results ( which has the possibility of being wrong) leave me to see the same evolution at cosmological level, arising at the Big Bang. Then I think that ToE can be improved.

“improve ToE”

When a fossil is found, we do.

I think the fossils we have are enough to prove biological evolution. But I don’t see logic in the idea that evolution was invented by the stupid matter of this lost planet. So, I went search if evolution was not existing before Biology here. The method used is comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems. The results ( which has the possibility of being wrong) leave me to see the same evolution at cosmological level, arising at the Big Bang. Then I think that ToE can be improved.

do galaxies replicate with inheritance? Are they subject to natural selection

Hummm…the cosmological model of Matrix/DNA reveals the history of evolution of replication’s mechanism. Before any natural system reached the technology for self-replication there was the mechanism of self-recycling. In this mechanism, a system needs to die for its copy arise. It is easy to see it: a stellar system dies decomposed into dust, the dust is a nebulae and from this nebulae new stellar system arises, equal the anterior. We can improve ToE, if we go to our ancestor stars…and beyond

Maybe life requires “the stupid matter of this lost planet.” for life to emerge. A necessary step from a Galaxy, through a planet, to living organisms.

I’m a semi-retired artist.

The problem is with the word “life”. The cosmological models of Matrix/DNA shows that makes no sense to say that a cell is alive and a galaxy or an atom is not. Of sure, there are the difference of complexity, like the difference of a living cell and a living ape. All properties observed here in organisms we can see its principles – expressed or not – in those ancestors systems. A portion of matter of planets can not build a biological system, mas the system to which Earths belongs, can do.

Evolution didn’t need to be invented. It has to occur whenever you have variant replicators that are non-randomly culled. This happens in biology hence evolution occurs in biology.

That’s what we conclude rationally from Biology learned in school. I thought in this way too. But I made my own research, the research suggests new things that makes sense, and points to things that I was believing to be true and today makes no sense. One is that this Universe can not created new information beyond those that were here at the Big Bang. Evolution is a natural process composed by mechanisms and my results shows these mechanisms arisen at the Big Bang. It was not invented nowhere.

XXX

Question to atheists: What is wrong with the following affirmation?:

A chicken is the “ex-machine previous natural genetic design” of the embryo inside her egg that will be a chicken tomorrow”.

If nothing wrong, why should be wrong the following affirmation: ” God is the previous design like a conscious and intelligent chicken ex-machine existing outside this universe which is a cosmic egg and we, human beings, are the genes building his conscious son”. (???)

XXX

Plz enlighten me. How can 2 people start a race of 7 billion? lol

You know their kids wouldn’t be inbred but they’d have to fuck with each other so the second gen would start to be inbred and the 3rd would start to have various diseases. The 4th and 5th gen would start to produce mutated kids not capable of life and by the 6th everyone would die.

Either god made more Adam and Eves with different genomes to fuck with the original Adam and Eves kids or humanity wouldn’t exist today. lol

XXX

Austriak1 -Do you understand a semantics argument? Are you claiming a “god” designed life? For some reason I can’t post directly to you…

Semantics is the study of meaning. Meaning is what the source or sender expresses, communicates, or conveys in their message to the observer or receiver, and what the receiver infers from the current context. I think I understand. No, I am not claiming a god designed life. And you are going to the same pathway of others persons that has English as native language. Why the word “design” leads you straight to the idea of intelligent design by God? Don’t you accept “genetic previous natural design?

“Where is the scientific bases?”

You mean when you compare anatomy, when you compare the genomes, the circulatory system, the common ERVs?

XXXXXX

I don’t understand why the creationists are so afraid to admit we are animals and related to all other life on Earth. Besides all the scientific proof. It’s just obvious to me…

I read a scientific book long ago relating a symposium among scientists, mathematicians ( I think Wiener and Rosenthal was there) when they conclude that in no way matter and energy, still organized in shape of human brain, could produce consciousness. In that time I found the evidences and calculations very reasonable. Then I think, there is no doubt that our physical flesh/bone body came from primates, but consciousness was something coming from outside biological evolution. It is not obvious.

All life came from other life. Is it right? If so, the formula for making the second life was in the first life (you know, the DNA, etc)..Right? I have called this formula “design” and people that had English as native language have criticized me, saying it is not design. Looking at dictionaries I saw that English definitions only uses the sense as human intelligent design, reduced to business, job. In Italian, design also means any natural shape, as drawn. Do you know better name for formula ?

We don’t know the source of life. Some believe that is a built in feature , that energy and matter will eventually organize into life. There are more questions than answers… The point of the video is to NOT teach creationism as an answer to life, because there is NO evidence for it.

geezusispan in reply to Austriak1 1 minute ago

I agree everything. But I was not talking about the source of life, I was talking about life from life, biological evolution. I said here yesterday that a chicken is a “previous natural ex-machine design” in relation to the embryo inside her egg”. Same way is human parents in relation to an human embryo inside a womb. Do you agree? People here thrown me stones because the words “design”and “ex-machine”. Why? I think the problem is different meanings of words in different languages. Or not?

You said: “I don’t understand why the creationists are so afraid to admit we are animals”. I told about the final conclusion in that scientific symposium that matter can not extrapolates for to be conscious of itself because I don’t understand how materialists (atheists) can reduce human beings to “improved apes”. No “soul”. It is here that creationists hates atheists, all hopes of some meaning for existence goes down. Maybe we are apes, I have no problem with it. Where is the scientific bases?

“Where is the scientific bases?”

You mean when you compare anatomy, when you compare the genomes, the circulatory system, the common ERVs?

I mean: where is the scientific bases for believing that humans are merely improved apes and consciousness is produced by matter when matter became conscious of itself? I asked it based in two premises:1) modern neurology has not found how neurons are linked with the mind; 2) When and how scientists proved that the results of that scientific symposium is wrong?

What I gave you is evidence that we are apes (us, homo sapiens).

However, are you suggesting that the other species are not conscious of themselves and their surrounding?

Good point. I know what you are talking about: several scientific experiments and observations suggesting other species are conscious. But the difference between human production and apes production, the question if apes have dreams when sleeping like us, the concept of “mind”, the difference between thoughts without inter-connections and continuous thought, etc., reveals a “jump” that open the possibility of insertion of informations into human brain coming from outside biological matter.

You need look no further than the identically broken GULO gene we share in common with other apes.

I know. But this is not the most weird thing about shared genes. There is other…incredible! We share the selfish gene in common with ancient galaxies. Wait…I will explain… Selfishness is the state of closed systems. The opposite is altruism=opened systems. And in the whole universal history there is only one event were a portion of matter is organized as closed system: the building block of galaxies. Seven bodies inter-connected composing a system, isolated and self-recycling. Our ancestor

The big bang was our ancestor, in a sense. I don’t think we inherited any of our psychological traits from it though.

Good point. But the Big Bang was not our ancestor. It was an event that is the ancestor of the event that starts the first moment of our own body: fecundation. The Universe only knows to make things in the way itself was made. We can trace backwards all our psychological traits to primary instincts of animals, then to tendencies and functions of non-living systems as atoms and galaxies. And if you like the Physics of the Nobel Hideki Yukawa, you see its ancestors at matter origins.

It seems that is a contradiction between the hypothesis that consciousness could not be produced by matter alone and the hypothesis that all our psychological traits can be traced backwards towards the origins of matter. But in the whole scope of this new worldview there is no contradiction here. Psychological traits emerges from our own material brain, while consciousness is other thing, like a retrograde gene that begins acting later, but could be existing since before the Big Bang.

I think I’d have to be on acid to make sense of that.

Maybe you discover fast how make sense of that remembering that galaxies are under entropy, which causes its fragmentation into particles, these particles are irradiated by cosmic and stellar radiation, they fail upon primordial soups at planets’ surface and when those particles get together again, they try to driven atoms towards the reproduction of their antique system. In this way, from the mud, a falling galaxy lift up as a cell system… so, those particles works like genes.

‘We can trace backwards all our psychological traits to primary instincts of animals, then to tendencies and functions of non-living systems as atoms and galaxies.”

It’s fun to think about but, hard to prove. If you are leading up to a intelligent designer, please don’t.

No I have not seen intelligent design in this new version of Universal Natural History. We can use an analogy: a chicken is the “previous ex-machine natural design” in relation to the embryo that evolves inside her egg. But… chickens does not applies intelligence for making their babies. Since that those cosmological models are suggesting this Universe is a kind of cosmic egg where is occurring a process o genetic/computational reproduction… Nature does not needs intelligence for working.

XXX

I’m sorry, but nothing in what you said makes us different from the other apes (since we, homo sapiens, are apes).

You are right. here in Amazon jungle, everyday in the evening when I arrive at the cave from hunting, my girlfriend – a lovely orangotanga called Maryllin – is at the door waiting for me with opened arms and reading the new poem that she wrote for me.

Since other apes do display social interactions (to the point where genocides actually occurs between populations), uses tools and communicate between each other, I am afraid your sarcasm is lost.

Ok… sorry by the joke, it was not sarcasm intended. I am trying to remember that two scientific premises, two scientific indications that we don’t be stressed to believe something yet. Of course, physically, flash meat appearance, we are merely improved apes. But I have my own method of research and the theoretical models are suggesting that there are a new natural systems acting over biological evolution here, and consciousness should be product of informations coming from this system.

If you do have actual data, then why not actually do experiments, several times (don’t forge the blind testing), and, in the case the results still goes along your hypthesis, write the papers and get them peer reviewed?

My friend, only now Science has proved that some Darwin’s predictions was right. At life he only could accumulate evidences. It is because at his time had no scientific resources for experimentation, testing the theory of evolution, which was too much advanced for that time. Ok, Darwin was in the right track, he saw the right patterns an he earned. I am seeing patterns pointing to another idea too much advanced for this time. I am accumulating evidences. But maybe I am in the wrong track.

No you have Hypothetical models, not Theoretical ones

They are not Theoretical without preer reviewed experimentations.

Regardelss, we have the Fact that conciousness is the cumulative result of chemical interactions.

You are more advanced than modern neurology, which has not found how neurons relates with consciousness. You are using the word “theory, in the strict definition inside scientific community and I use the word with the definition that ancient Greeks gave to this word when they coined it and how we define it in naturalistic philosophy The Greeks philosophers were the owner of this word. My advice in my website is that my job has no scientific pretensions, I am not a scientist. it is about Nature.

XXX

It’s him. He’s not trying to hide it, really. He has “Matrix/DNA” as his profile name. According to him, Youtube spontaneously deleted his old account for some reason. Don’t know why, he seems like a rather harmless crank to me.

I don’t said Youtube deleted my account. I was trying to fusion an old lost account with the new one and I got it, but I need to fix the problem that the name kept is the old one. By the way I am trying to defending my worldview like everybody is trying to defend their here. My suggestion is teaching only ToE in science class, but we need bring back a class of philosophy, the study of evolution of human thought, where others worldview can be informed, included ID theory and Matrix/DNA Theory..

Maybe he just thinks they did. He doesn’t strike me as the most computer-savvy person, having looked at his website (which was hacked by some Turks and he’s never bothered to fix it).

But still, if you click through to his new profile, it does read “Matrix/DNA” so he’s not trying to hide his identity. Instead, he’s proud of his so-called ‘discovery’ and wants to publicize it as much as he can.

Ohhh… you said something that is the most interest for me. Actually my website was hacked, prejudicing about 15.000 people/month from whole world that was visiting, doing some research. I don’t understand nothing about websites and my time is very busy, so, my question: is it possible to fix it? Do you know how? Know someone that can do it? I am not proud and did any discovery: the theory is suggesting new approaches to diseases and technologies as automated systems. It can improve something.

If they deleted his old account, then why can I access it? Either way he’s just a nut, I ignore him as I don’t expect anyone to take him seriously anyway.

XXX

We have a complex problem here, which needs to be solved through an educated debate. Evolution is a process that we can see in embryogenesis: one initial cell is shared into a diversification of different cells, shapes are transformed into other shapes in the way that the first initial shape (cell, blastula, ) is not recognizable in the later shapes. The built body does not comes to light in shape of blastula, neither fetus, it only comes to light in shape of a final human being, this is…

result from forces coming from the surrounding environment, and we call it “natural selection”. But… this evolution is merely steps of a larger process: reproduction. So, the whole universal evolution can be a process of ex-machine reproduction. So, the scientific community needs looking for right terms to deal publicly with this issue. Theory is a word employed by scientists, but today we know it is not a theory, anymore. In the other hand, we don’t know if it is “evolution”or “reproduction”?

XXX

Evolutionists believe a talking snake is less credible than a talking gorilla/man that climbed out of a prehistoric petri dish .

Talking is not invention of gorillas. Millions years ago “genes” were “talking”among themselves and billions years ago, before DNA’s emergence here, the ancestral of DNA had its elements talking among themselves in the sky. But for transforming this “talking” into sounds waves in manner that humans can heard, the DNA need the apparatus of voice, which snakes does not have. Talking snakes is a fiction, not rational, and talking primates becoming humans is rational.

XXX

“all atrocity IS man’s fault.”

Natural disasters is just one example of atrocities that are not human’s fault.

” We have caused all the worlds problems.”

No, we haven’t. You’re just melodramatic.

Yeah…Just at this moment somewhere in Amazon jungle a beautiful, sweet, but self-indefensible capybara is running, desperate trying to escape, from a horrible beast that attacked her. The horror of the worlds, the big horrible mouth will eat her still alive in the next minute.This is human fault? If you was there, watching, and having power for stopping the massacre, would you do nothing?! If there is a God watching everything, why this God don’t do anything? There isn’t God watching.

Unless you can explain how man, a product of nature, is responsible for the atrocities of nature, you have grounds to claim it.

To the ‘God can’t be watching’ comments, pretty much the same thing : just because you can’t fathom something, that isn’t an argument against it.