Arquivo para a ‘Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA’ Categoria
quarta-feira, junho | 19 | 2013
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/06/dennis_prager_e073471.html
Dennis Prager Explains Why Some Scientists Embrace the Multiverse
EVOLUTION NEWS AND VIEWS - Casey Luskin June 19, 2013 4:15 AM
Mesmo que a invencao do Calculo Probabilistico tenha fornecido a chave mestra que torna todo o impossivel em possivel, cada vez mais intelectuais e cientistas acabam acreditando que este nosso Universo foi feito de maneira rigorosamente adequada para produzir a Vida e a Auto-Consciencia. Assim vai crescendo o nome “Goldlocks universe”, a ideia de que o arranjamento da materia no inicio do Universo e os valores de varios parametros fisicos – tais como a velocidade da luz, a força da atracao gravitacional, a taxa de expansao do Universo – sao justos os valores exatos requeridos para produzir a Vida.
Esta ideia e crnca que se afirma ev a delicia para os intelectuais deistas, principalmente os reunidos em torno do movimento denominado “Intelligent Designer”, pois refor~ca o argumento deles de que o mundo foi previamente programado por uma divindade supernatural. Enquanto isso, os intelectuais ateus rebatem quando o pensamento cientifico sugere a ideia de que existem uma infinidade de outros universos, pois se for assim, sempre que ha infinita quantidade de diferencas individuais se aplica o calculo das probabilidades que torna obrigatorio que todas as possibilidades ocorram, e neste caso, nosso Universo teria sido a possibilidade de sua Historia acabar produzindo esta Vida e esta Auto-Consciencia.
Eu na minha humilde opiniao fico assistindo o debate, me informando sobre todos os avancos de fato nas duas vertentes quando arrolam evidencias cintificas como fenomenos naturais, sem pender para nenhum lado, pois nenhum dos dois se encaixam nos meus raciocinios, e talvez minha posicao agnostica se mantenha mais devido eu ser o unico ser humano que conhece por inteiro a Teoria da Matrix/DNA, a qual fornece uma terceira alternativa, que nao ev apenas meio-termista entre as duas acima, pegando 50% de cada lado para somar seus cem por cento de argumentos e rejeitando outros 50% de cada lado, mas e sim parece ser o final produto do acasalamento entre as duas alternativas acima, portanto, a alaternativa evoluida que supera suas duas antepassadas.
E qual seria esta terceira alternativa?! Se o Universo nao foi programado por uma Inteligencia Suprema Supernatural porque Existe Alem e Acima do Universo, ou se a Vida e Auto-Consciencia nao emergiram aqui como produtos do Acaso Que Reina num Mundo Composto por Infinidade de Universos, entao como se explica esta Historia deste Universo evidentemente tunelado para produzir Vida e Inteligencia?!
Bem, a Matrix/DNA ev a teoria que veio de um semi-macaco saido da selva amazonica, uma teoria ditada pelo espirito da selva ao cerebro de um dos seus produtos brutos. Portanto, sem as incriveis e fantasticas culturas cientifica e religiosas de todas as civilizcoes humanas, tal teoria so poderia ser uma obra considerada infantil, coisa mesmo de crianca no limiar da intelectualidade. De fato, todos os parametros naturais que suportam seus modelos teoricos sao focos de ironia e muito riso nas comunidades evoluidas. Porque sao fenomenos naturais simples observados aqui e agora e que qualquer analfabeto conhece. O proprio metodo principal da teoria foi um retorno a cinco mil anos atras, que erigiu os primeiros passos das religioes e ciencias: anatomia comparada entre dois fatos observados tentando calcular como se relacionam. Mas esta teoria semi-simia fornece a terceira alternativa que pode igualar-se com as outras duas na quantidade de evidencias arroladas alem de obedecer a uma unica linha logica de raciocionio ligando as duas pontas da Historia Universal, o comeco e o final, o Alfa eo Omega. Mas como cetico inveterado eu suspeito de mim ao dizer isso, principalmente porque seria normal que eu tivesse a tendencia de optar por esta teoria, ja que eu mesmo sou o semi-macaco vindo da selva. Obvio. E qual a aterceira alternativa simplista defendida pela mente infantil em relacao a evoluida humanidade?
A terceira alternativa arrola aqui como seu argumento e parametro infra-estrutural o fenomeno natural aqui e agora observado por todos conhecido como gestacao embrionaria ou reproducao sexual. Na primeira fase da evolucao biologica, os ovos botados fora e abandonados a propria sorte eram arquiteturas tuneladas para produzir uma Vida, e na segunda fase desta evolucao os ovos tunelados passaram a serem mantidos dentro de aparatos uterinos exatamente tunelados para produzir Vida e mais tarde ainda, Auto-Consciencia. Arrolando este fenomeno natural como argumento “sine qua nom”, a teoria resolve todas os misterios e responde todas as questoes sobre o porque este Universo parece ter sido tunelado para produzir Vida e Auto-Consciencia, tal como respondem a sua maneira as alternativas do Deus Magico Absoluto e do Acaso Magico Absoluto. Veja bem: todas as questoes sao respondidas por este modelo, desde as questoes modernas que emergem com as teorias quantica e relativistica, com as teorias biologicas da evolucao, embriogenese, RNA-world, etc. assim como todas as questoes que emergem com a eoria do Intelligent designer, tais como a irreducivel complexidade, os tempos astronomicos gerando estranhas possibilidades evolucionarias, e etc. Estou a 30 anos esperando que alguem descubra uma questao que esta teoria nao tenha uma explicacao dentro da sua unica logica de raciocinio.
Essa teoria sera sempre odiada e refutada pelos dois lados. Pelo lado de toda a comunidade academica cientificista – pesquisadores, professores, estudantes, etc. - esta obvio porque sera ignorada e ironizada: ” Depois de eu ter feito tanto sacrificio em tanto estudo desde a escola primaria ate as super-graduadas academias, como ev que poderia um macaco esfarrapado, sujo e barbudo qur nao tem um vintem, vir la da selva com alguma teoria que pudesse de londge se comparar com a minha?! Isto ev ridiculo!” . Ou entao: ” Depois de quase uma vida toda me especializando em teologia que compreende os ensinamentos de todos aqueles que testemunharam Deus, e depois de tanto eu mesmo ter ouvido na minha cabeca a voz mestra de deus, e ter observado este mundo, como ev que um pagao semi-simio porderia saber mais que eu?! E pelo meu lado eu retruco: ” Como poderia ser que mentes desvidas da Natureza real por culturas metaforicas e distanciada dela por camadas de asfalto, gestadas no ar-condicionado e observando artificialidades em laboratorios estaticos e enclausurados, poderiam captar mais da realidade da natureza que alguem que passou sete anos na selva bruta enfrentando o inferno real com mente inqiridora treinada pelo matodo da filosofia naturalista?!” Bem, o certo ev que minha teoria nao alcanca sequer 30% da verdade ultima pela propria natureza do meu cerebro incapaz limitado, mas talvez tambem as outras duas nao alcancem nem 20%, e o certo ev que todas as tres teorias serao tao mudadas que daqui amil anos serao risiveis, ironizadas, irreconheciveis. Mas teorias tem que existirem pois elas sao as unicas guias na longa busca do conhecimento.
Deixada esta introducao bem clara, vamos agora analizar o texto do artigo com link acima, sob a visao de mundo diferente que sugere a Teoria da Matrix/DNA:
Dennis Prager Explains Why Some Scientists Embrace the Multiverse
At National Review Online, popular talk radio host Dennis Prager has a nice article titled “Why Some Scientists Embrace the ‘Multiverse’,” in which he reports on a recent scientific conference he attended:
It was clear that the scientific consensus was that, at the very least, the universe is exquisitely fine-tuned to allow for the possibility of life. It appears that we live in a “Goldilocks universe,” in which both the arrangement of matter at the cosmic beginning and the values of various physical parameters — such as the speed of light, the strength of gravitational attraction, and the expansion rate of the universe — are just right for life. And unless one is frightened of the term, it also appears the universe is designed for biogenesis and human life.
After citing scientists who laud the evidence for fine-tuning — people like Gerald Schroeder (PhD from MIT, where he later taught physics), Michael Turner (astrophysicist at the University of Chicago and Fermilab), Paul Davies (professor of theoretical physics at Arizona State University), Roger Penrose (professor of mathematics at Oxford), and Steven Weinberg (a Nobel Prize winner in physics, and anti-religious agnostic) — Prager concludes that “[u]nless one is a closed-minded atheist (there are open-minded atheists), it is not valid on a purely scientific basis to deny that the universe is improbably fine-tuned to create life, let alone intelligent life.”
So why do some scientists embrace the multiverse? According to Prager, who is Jewish, it’s precisely because they want to avoid the conclusion of design:
They have put forward the notion of a multiverse — the idea that there are many, perhaps an infinite number of, other universes. This idea renders meaningless the fine-tuning and, of course, the design arguments. After all, with an infinite number of universes, a universe with parameters friendly to intelligent life is more likely to arise somewhere by chance.
Prager rejoins:
But there is not a shred of evidence of the existence of these other universes — nor could there be, since contact with another universe is impossible. Therefore, only one conclusion can be drawn: The fact that atheists have resorted to the multiverse argument constitutes a tacit admission that they have lost the argument about design in this universe. The evidence in this universe for design — or, if you will, the fine-tuning that cannot be explained by chance or by “enough time” — is so compelling th: at the only way around it is to suggest that our universe is only one of an infinite number of universes.
Matrix/DNA: Nada temos ou teremos sobre o que existe ou nao existe alem deste Universo entendido como super-aglomerado de aglomerados de galaxias enquanto nao por-mos a nossa cabeca fora dele e poder observar as redondezas com nossos proprios olhos. As duas possibilidades – a de que exista apenas este Universo ou que exista uma infinidade de Universos – sao perfeitamente possiveis dentro de nossa teoria, mas recusamos perder tempo com essa questao porque a consideramos uma metafisica que em nada poderia nos ajudar nas solucoes urgentes que precisamos para nossos problemas praticos aqui e agora. A Matrix/DNA sugere como final e mais racional possibilidade que este Universo seja produto de previo design, da mesma maneira natural que ovos e seres biologicos sao produzidos por previo design. E que da mesma maneira que uma mamae girafa prozuz uma girafinha sem aplicar nenhuma inteligencia e nenhuma magica, assim o elemento misterioso existente antes das origens deste Universo e que produziu este Universo transmite design sem aplicar inteligencia ou magica alguma. Nao entendo qual o problema de voces, civilizados, criarem este conflito…
The great irony of the multiverse, of course, is that it doesn’t really help materialists escape the problem of cosmic fine-tuning. In order to render their postulations of multiple universes plausible, physicists have had to formulate various speculative cosmological theories involving hypothetical “universe-generating” mechanisms.
Matrix/DNA: Hummm… O DNA cresce em tamanho e volume porque o proprio DNA constituido de nucleotideos produz mais nucleotideos e os incorpora a si mesmo. Este fato natural pode racionaklmente sugerir que – se existem multiplos universos e desde que aqui esta comprovado existir o DNA – o mecanismo gerador de universos ao infinito seria alinhar os Universos no formato e funcao da unidade fundamental de informacao do DNA, pelo qual os universos existentes produzem novos e os incorporam a grande figura. Para isso – nas raras vezes que nos permitimos deixar divagar nossa mente pela metafisica naturalista, ou seja, a natureza que se expandiria para alem deste super-aglomerado de galaxias alcancando outros possiveis super-aglomerados – esta questao encontrou uma surpreendente solucao quando calculamos num grafico como seria esse crescimo de universos conservando-se as mesmas leis daqui e encontramos um multiplo universo configurado no mesmo modelo da formula da Matrix/DNA, a qual esta inscrita e sintetizada na configuracao de qualquer simples nucleotideo que ev uniade fundamental d informacao do DNA. Encontra-se assim uma explicacao racional que nunca haviamos visto antes para a possibilidade de um mundo infinito em termos de futuro e tamanho, pois a formula cresce por si mesma ao infinto sem necessitar nada do Nada. Mas nao resolve o problema de um mundo infinito na direcao do passado e do cada vez menor. Isto foi solucionado pela hipotese de outro grafico paralelo – a de um mundo projetado exclusivamente por anti-leis e que existiria apos o fim deste erigido pelo que sobra deste, o qual so existiria apos o fim daquele feito pelo que sobrasria daquele. Mas apesar da elegancia da solucao isto ev metafisica e me recuso a perder tempo nisso sem poder esquecer que neste momento cerca de sete bilhoes de meus irmaos estao sendo ainda torturados nesta absurda concidcao de existencia e morte precisando que eu faca algo util aqui e agora, como sempre nos ensina a constante luta pela sobrevivencia e seguranca na selva.
But universes won’t multiply without good reason. Thus, these “universe generating” mechanisms themselves require prior fine-tuning as a condition of their generating universes. And so, even taken on their own terms, these multiverse theories do not ultimately explain away fine tuning.
Matrix/DNA : Qual a boa e inteligente razao dos mosquitos em se multiplicarem?! Porque a resposta seria diferente para os universos, se existe mais que um? Eu as vezes fico encabulado me perguntando onde essa civilizacao perdeu a navalha de Occan… aprendi na selva que o metodo mais astuto e lucrativo para agarrar um alvo como uma boa caca ev atacar rapido em linha reta sem ficar circundando em volta… isso quase sempre afugenta o alvo e o perdemos de vista. Dessa licao da selva Occam teve a intuicao de elaborar seu metodo bastante racional.
There’s another serious problem with the multiverse hypothesis, as we explain in Discovering Intelligent Design:
Another danger of “multiverse thinking” is that it would effectively destroy the ability of scientists to study nature. A short hypothetical example shows why.Imagine that a team of researchers discovers that 100% of an entire town of 10,000 people got cancer within one year — a “cancer cluster.” For the sake of argument, say they determine that the odds of this occurring just by chance are 1 in 1010,000. Normally, scientists would reason that such low odds establish that chance cannot be the explanation, and that there must be some physical agent causing cancer in the town.
Under multiverse thinking, however, one might as well say, “Imagine there are 1010,000 universes, and our universe just happened to be the one where this unlikely cancer cluster arose — purely by chance!” Should scientists seek a scientific explanation for the cancer cluster, or should they just invent 1010,000 universes where this kind of event becomes probable?
The multiverse advocate might reply, “Well, you can’t say there aren’t 1010,000 universes out there, right?” Right — but that’s the point. There’s no way to test it, and science should not seriously consider untestable theories. Multiverse thinking makes it impossible to rule out chance, which essentially eliminates the basis for drawing scientific conclusions. (p. 59)
Matrix/DNA: Nao entendo como essa conclusao pode ser extraida de tal premissa. Pode existirem multiplos agentes fisicos para diversos tipos de canceres, pode ocorrer de um deles atuar numa cidade, isso pode ser visto tanto como acaso como causa natural, e nada dessa metafisica iria me impedir de buscar uma causa. Se nao existem causas e sim o evento fosse produzido por acaso absoluto, eu morreria buscando e nunca iria encontrar essa resposta final, mas ai nem Deus poderia admitir que o mundo seja tambem produto de acasos absolutos, pois se o fosse, Ele mesmo nao poderia existir ou nada teria a fazer aqui. Essa incerteza nos ev incomoda, mas nao temos outra alternativa senao continuar o metodo cientifico, assim como na selva nao tenho outra alternativa racional senao continuar lutando pela sobrevivencia aqui e agora anes de ficar parando pensando nos senoes que minha razao nao pode resolver. Simples like that! Por outro lado a Historia revela que quando uma sociedade foi dominada por uma religiao o avanco cientifico quase parou. Mas mesmo assim dentre religiosos, por mais deista que fosse, por um imperativo natural continuou alguma pesquisa, sendo exemplos mais marcantes o de Mendel e … o autor de O Fenomeno Humano, cujo nome me fugiu da memoria… algo como Chardin? Ah… Teilhard du Chardin… Como pude me esquecer de um autor que povoou meu imaginario na infancia desde aquele dia que roubei esse livro do padre que estava na Igreja? Preciso urgente de comer uma sopa de neuronios…
Given a choice between destroying the logical basis for doing science, or inferring design, it seems that some scientists opt for the multiverse. - See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/06/dennis_prager_e073471.html#sthash.WlzUVqVV.dpuf
Matrix/DNA: A Ciencia, em si mesma, nao tem nenhuma logica a seguir. Ela apenas existe com a tendencia a se concentrar em observar, identificar novo fenomeno natural e realizar experimentos para saber se o fenomeno ev constante, ou seja, reproduzir o fenomeno. Assim ela ev como o animal irracional que reproduz sua especie apenas como sujeito passivo das forcas naturais, sem nenhum proposito ou sentido logico de per se. Os humanos ev que tentam impor logicas a Ciencia. Por isso gosto da Ciencia praticada por mim, bem animalizada, sem qualquer objetivo racional, e na selva bruta, mesmo que usando um microscopio enferrujado e mais simples que o de Louis Pasteur observando a lama do pantano e uma luneta mais grosseira que a de Galileu observando as noites limpidas povoadas de estrelas que apenas a selva e os desertos nos comtempla. Mas… posso ter feito tudo errado… ou que va terminar em lugar nenhum como pode chegar um dia a Ciencia…, quem sabe?
Postedo na A Grande Causa da Humanidade, Astronomia, Ateísmo, Ciência Acadêmica Oficial, Cosmologia, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Debates Criticas Defesas, Evolução, Filosofia, Intelligent Designer, Origem da Vida, Universo | Sem Comentários »
sábado, abril | 13 | 2013
O teorema de Bayes esta na moda. Você houve os estudantes graduados e intelectuais falarem dele com entusiasmo. Ja falam em “As regras bayenisianas”, ou ” Bayesian reasoning” . Então você vai no Google curioso, querendo saber o que é isso e… descobre que é uma equação Justo e simplesmente uma pequena equação! Raios, porque acham que uma equação desvendou o segredo do Universo…
A pagina que você achou fornece uma definição dessa equação mas não diz o que ela é, ou para o que ela é útil, ou porque seus amigos estão interessados nela. Isto tudo lhe parece mais uma dessas estatísticas do acaso.
Todas as explicações sobre o Teorema de Bayes fornece o mesmo exemplo como utilidade pratica: as mulheres com câncer de mama e a mamografia positiva. E revelam uma novidade inquietante: a maioria dos médicos erram nos seus cálculos das probabilidades! E erram feio: eles dizem que a probabilidade de tal mulher que deu mamografia positiva ter câncer eve de 70% a 80%, quando na verdade é apenas 7,8%!
A explicação pra esse colossal erro – essa incrível ilusão de óptica que nos apanha a todos na mesma armadilha – eve melhor definida pelo autor Eliezer S. Yudkowsky, no website http://yudkowsky.net/rational/bayes
” The most common mistake is to ignore the original fraction of women with breast cancer, and the fraction of women without breast cancer who receive false positives, and focus only on the fraction of women with breast cancer who get positive results. For example, the vast majority of doctors in these studies seem to have thought that if around 80% of women with breast cancer have positive mammographies, then the probability of a women with a positive mammography having breast cancer must be around 80% “.
Em outras palavras, esquece-se a real amostragem, que se inicia com 1000 mulheres comuns, e encontra-se que 10 delas, ou seja, 1% apenas, apresenta câncer de mama. Esse esquecimento faz com que a operação do raciocínio a seguir seja baseado em que 80% das mulheres comuns apresentam câncer de mama.
Então vamos cair na real definição do que é a equação de Bayes: o Teorema de Bayes mostra a relação entre uma probabilidade condicional e a sua inversa; por exemplo, a probabilidade de uma hipótese dada a observação de uma evidência e a probabilidade da evidência dada pela hipótese.
Nos normalmente desconhecemos a primeira causa de tudo o que vemos na Natureza. Por exemplo, desconhecemos qual foi a causa primeira criadora da Vida na Terra. Mas rapidamente esquecemos que desconhecemos a primeira causa e formulamos hipóteses Por exemplo formularam a hipótese de um Deus Supernatural e a hipótese do Acaso Materialista. A partir da hipótese formulada, cada qual sai no mundo atento a tudo que seja evidencia para sua hipótese E cega-se ao que eve evidencia para muitas outras hipóteses No final acumulam-se tantas evidencias que pessoas passam a crer que sua hipótese é a desconhecida primeira causa. A mente destas pessoas passa a viver fundamentada numa mentira – a de que ela ”viu”, “assistiu”, ou ao menos seus ancestrais viram a primeira causa. E torna-se incapaz de lembrar que desconhece a primeira causa.
Essa falha do nosso cérebro em realizar tal operação mental tem sido a causa da desgraça e destruição de muitos povos. Não é a falha de um cérebro individual apenas, é uma falha genética de toda uma população, levando toda uma civilização a um sonho coletivo. Lembrar-se da loucura do nazismo é pouco: todas as civilizações construídas ate hoje ruíram todos os impérios caíram, porque foram construídos sob a inspiração em visões do mundo que não se sintonizaram com o mundo real. Todas caíram sob a força das hipóteses.
Mas o mais inquietante agora, ao menos para essa minha mente desajustada e desajeitada na opinião de todos, eve que nossos filhos estão sendo vitimas de mais uma novo ataque do Teorema de Bayes. Trata-se da cosmovisão, da visão de mundo que os nossos intelectuais empossados nas instituições acadêmicas piamente acreditam e estão transmitindo para todos os alunos da Terra. O que dizem ser “teorias” – como a do Big Bang, da Vida emergindo da não vida ou abiogêneses, da evolução segundo a moderna síntese darwinista, na verdade são hipóteses, pois em todas se desconhece as primeiras causas. Mas sempre se acha o que se procura, e o acumulo de evidencias selecionadas para provar estas hipóteses é tao enorme que já acreditam saber piamente quais foram as primeiras causas.
Os departamentos de educação de todos os países estão se esquecendo de algo fundamental: a primeira forma de vida, realmente completa, que faz jus a qualidade de viva, era um “sistema”. Não era uma massa amorfa, nem uma peça, nem uma parte de um sistema. Mas se esquecem disso e aventaram a hipótese de que ela foi criada por uma massa amorfa como uma sopa primordial, e essa sopa foi criada por um planeta que é uma peça de um sistema estelar, o qual é uma parte de um sistema galáctico…
Atei minha avó sabia que filho de peixe, peixinho terá de ser. Mas sua filha, ou melhor, o cérebro de seus filhos, cegou-se a esse conhecimento quando se estruturou em cima de uma mentira assimilada por ele como verdade. Os cérebros de então foram incapazes de fazerem uma das mais simples operações logicas. Se o primeiro ser vivo foi um sistema, e se todo peixinho é a imagem e semelhança de seu criador, logicamente seu criador tem que ter sido um sistema. Não uma massa, nem uma parte, nem uma peça de algum sistema.
Parece-me que é o mesmo problema do equivoco da amostragem das mulheres comuns e a probabilidade das mulheres com câncer de mama. Esquece-se o ponto inicial de partida, pula-se ele, da-se o famoso e irresponsável grande salto no principio.
Mas é claro, todos os possíveis leitores deste texto dirão que estou mais por fora que umbigo de vedete. Que uma coisa nada tem a ver com a outra. Que sou louco e coisa e tal. Ao invés de eu ficar com raiva, eu torço para que estejam certos. Meu cérebro não evoluiu, continuou a moda antiga como minha avó, ainda acredito que todo peixinho só pode ser filho de algum peixe, por isso procurei com afinco um sistema criador, não o encontrei, sei que ainda desconheço a primeira causa, mas elaborei um modelo de criador no qual vejo uma probabilidade de ser o certo, mas sei que e uma hipótese estou a 30 anos reunindo as evidencias desta hipótese mas nunca me esqueci que não vi a primeira causa, por isso tento acompanhar todas as outras acumulações de evidencias das outras hipóteses pois a qualquer momento pode acontecer que uma evidencia de outra hipótese derrube totalmente por terra a minha visão de mundo e tenha que despeja-la no lixo. Pode acontecer de certificar-me que realmente fui um louco a vida toda, mas isso poderá significar que as nossas crianças não estão novamente caindo na fatal e secular armadilha, que finalmente uma civilização não passara pela costumeira dolorosa cirurgia natural corretora de visões de mundo equivocadas.
Um brinde ao gênio de Thomas Bayes, por conseguir sintetizar uma verdade do tamanho do Universo numa pequenina equação!
Postedo na A Grande Causa da Humanidade, Abiogênese, Ciência Acadêmica Oficial, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Debates Criticas Defesas, educação, Filosofia, Psicologia | Sem Comentários »
segunda-feira, fevereiro | 4 | 2013
Êste artigo foi inspirado numa noticia que acabo de ver na mídia:
Descobertas “bolas de futebol” orbitando estrelas distantes
O telescópio espacial Spitzer, da NASA, enxergou as esferas no sistema binário de estrelas XX Ophiuchi.
Clique nêste link se quiser ver a noticia completa: http://hypescience.com/descobertas-bolas-de-futebol-orbitando-estrelas-distantes/
 Buckyballs Esferas de Carbono Orbitando Estrêlas Binárias Se êle não existisse, as primeiras formas de vida seriam muito ineficientes e não teriam evoluído, nós não estaríamos aqui hoje. Dentre centenas de espécies diferentes de átomos, apenas o Carbono pode ser o iniciante e o suportador de um sistema biológico “vivo”. Porque? Porque êle e não os outros? A explicação que vais conhecer aqui jamais foi dita em qualquer outro lugar e tempo, mas é linda, é mais um daquêles alentos para a vida que nos faz sorrir de satisfação por existir-mos num mundo de tantos segrêdos inteligentes, como são todas as novas explicações que a fórmula da Matrix/DNA está sugerindo para todos os fenômenos naturais.
A NASA está investindo pesado na busca de vida em outros astros, depois que começou a serem descobertos centenas de planetas semelhantes á Terra, indícios de água em Titan e Marte, fragmentos de metóritos vindos do espaço sideral contendo moléculas bases para origem da vida, etc. Mas existe um problema, o qual inclusive motivou auma conferencia e um concurso para se discutir quais são as possíveis formas de vida, qual a melhor definição para o que é “Vida” ?! . Possibilidades de arsênio ( um veneno fatal para nós) compondo o DNA de bactérias deixa a imaginação aberta para possibilidades tão estranhas como a de que pode ter “seres vivos” feitos de ferro, plastico, ou borracha. Eu particularmente gostaria de achar um planeta povoado com seres vivos feitos de… chocolate… e com uma cabeleira de chantilly.
Será que qualquer forma de vida só será possível se suas moléculas fundamentais tiverem como nucleo central o átomo de carbono, como são as moléculas de todos os seres vivo na Terra? A fórmula da Matrix/DNA está dizendo que se uma molécula quiser evoluir para proteína, RNA, etc., ela terá que ter o carbono como elemento principal e inevitável. Porque?
Vamos iniciar recapitulando como é um átomo de carbono, qual o detalhe que só êle tem e o diferencia de todos os demais tipos de átomos.
 Átomo de Carbono Wikipedia ( http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbono ) =
O carbono é um elemento químico, símbolo C , número atômico 6 (6 prótons e 6 elétrons). Dependendo das condições de formação, pode ser encontrado na natureza em diversas formas alotrópicas: carbono amorfo e cristalino, em forma de grafite ou ainda diamante. É o pilar básico da química orgânica, se conhecem cerca de 10 milhões de compostos de carbono, e forma parte de todos os seres vivos.
E agora vamos rever a a cara quimica das primeiras conexões entre átomos que aconteceram na superficie ou nas profundezas oceânicas da Terra que foram crecendo, evoluindo para compostos mais complexos e formaram os primeiros aminoácidos, que foram as unidades fundamentais das proteínas, do DNA…
 Aminoácido e sua Estrutura Geral Os primeiros compostos atômicos chamados de “moléculas” que foram bem suscedidos como aminoácidos e capazes de darem os próximos passos da evolução da Vida foram os que denominamos de bases nitrogenadas, aquelas que se situaram no meio das duas hastes do DNA. São a alanina, a guanina, citozina, timina e a uracila no RNA. vamos mostrar a cara da alanina e apenas mais uma outra delas:
Alanina Aminoácido  Guanina Estrutura Atômica 1 Você está observando aí como foram os lentos passos da evolução? Primeiro se fixou num lugar o Carbono, em seguida foram agregados alguns átomos formando a alanina, depois se acrescentou mais um átomos formando a guanina, e assim por diante, nessa sequencia, mas mantendo a fórmula inicial, se formaram os outros 20 aminoácidos que compõem as proteínas, das quais se chegou ao primeiro sistema celular, o primeiro ser vivo completo. Mas porque, em primeiro lugar se fixou o carbono e não outro átomo qualquer?
Naquela época antes das origens destes primeiros compostos, a Terra era uma desolação, como o desconforto que temos quando vemos as superficies da Lua e de Marte. Apenas os infindáveis oceanos cheios da mesma massa de água, os continentes pelados, de rochas e areia, e alem disso, o ar, os ventos uivandos, as chuvas, algumas tempestades, nada mais. Ficou assim por bilhões de anos. Mas quase como que de repente uma coisa nunca acontecida antes… aconteceu. Se até então todos os átomos da Terra só se ligaram para formar aquelas massas liquidas, sólidas, gazozas, sem formas , sem quaisquer outros propósitos, de repente alguns átomos parece que ficaram tontos, abobalhados, e começaram a se ligarem de uma forma diferente, movidos por intenções, fôrças, diferentes, que nunca haviam estado na Terra antes. Fôrças inéditas, talvez invisiveis, chegaram aqui vindas de algum lugar, isto é tão claro como dois mais dois são quatro. Se estivessem aqui antes nada justifica que não atuassem desde a formação do planeta. Mas que fôrças misteriosas são estas, quais são suas misteriosas fontes?! Deuses astronautas vagando no espaço sideral e plantando sementes de vida para ver se algum astro é fértil? Ou um Deus criador dos Universos desembarcando aqui nêste pontinho insignificante perdido na imensidão cósmica, igual a bilhões de outros, chamado por nós de Planeta Terra, e agachando-se no solo, revirando o barro, assoprando-o, e fazendo aparecer de repente as milhares de formas de vida diferentes, desde a bactérias a dinossauros, pinguins e capivaras, mosquitos, e por ultimo caprichando um pouco mais no sôpro de um montinho de lama e fazendo o ser humano, para ser o senhor da Terra? Ora, isso é reduzir demais a grandeza de um Deus criador de Universos, é subestimar a sua inteligência.
Os ventos não poderiam ser as fôrças que dirigiram átomos a se conectarem de uma nova maneira, primeiro porque sempre existiram e teriam feito isso a bilhões de anos atrás, segundo porque os ventos são desastrados, se fazem algo aqui continuam a fustiga-lo desmanchando-o. As águas dos rios se movem, mas por correrem sempre, tambem desmancham o que fazem. Os oceanos eram parados, não havia ainda a fôrça da Lua movendo suas àguas, produzindo as marés e suas ondas, portanto tambem não foram dêles que veio a fôrça que moveu átomos de carbono para perto de átomos de hidrogênio, nitrogênio, oxigênio, e os obrigaram a compor exatamente um modêlo de novo corpo, e não qualquer outra das milhares de formas possíveis. E não havia outras fôrças por aqui, a não ser algumas que jamais poderiam ter atuado aí, como a gravitação, o campo magnético. Então continua o maior mistério de todos os tempos: quem ou o que desembarcou na Terra naqueles dias?!
Uma novidade aconteceu naquêles tempos, algo que nunca tinha acontecido nos bilhões de anos anteriores. No céu da Terra apareceu a LUA !!! Dizem algumas teorias que ela teria emergido da terra na forma de matéria impulsionada para cima devido à queda de um gigantesco meteórito, outras que foi produto de erupção vulcanica,outras ainda que foi ajuntamento de fragmentos que orbitavam por aqui. Os modêlos cosmológicos da Matrix/DNA sugerem outra explicação, que luas são bebês astronomicos que surgem nos sistemas astronomicos porque seus astros estão sujeitos ao mesmo processo de ciclo de vida que nossos corpos estão, mas isto é outra história. O fato é que quando a LUA apareceu ela trouxe sua fôrça que movimentou as àguas dos oceanos, jogando-as contra as rochas dos continentes e puxando-as de volta… misturando os átomos da terra nas horas de maré alta e dando-lhes tempo para se firmarem nas horas de maré baixa, antes de se desfazerem. Antes da Lua qualquer projeto de vida na terra teria ficado patinando eternamente sem sair do ponto de partida. Sagrada Lua! Ajoelho-me abaixo de ti e prometo que jamais deixarei seres humanos ferirem-na.
Mas só a Lua não seria suficiente para os primeiros compostos evoluirem na direção da extraordinaria engenharia que foram construindo a primeira fantástica célula viva. Tem que ter vindo outras fôrças, enviadas por outras fontes que nunca tinham estado aqui, como a Lua. E assim como a fôrça da Lua veio nas suas duas versões como tudo neste mundo tem sua dualidade oposta, que produziu a maré mas tambem a contra-maré, as outras misteriosas fôrças tambem devem ter vindo completas, em suas versões aos pares. Bem, os modêlos da Matrix/DNA me inspirarem a escrever uma fábula que acho muito bonita sôbre estas fôrças, de onde vieram e em que intensidades, como o Universo inteiro conspirou para que o projeto de Vida aqui vingasse. Chama-se “As Origens dos Sistemas Biológicos” mas por ser longa não posso reproduzir aqui. No entanto, quando eu observava aquela figura com a cara do carbono, me perguntando o porque,o que ele tem de especial que os outros não tem, de repente numa bela madrugada no meio da selva amazônica, uma lampadinha acendeu lá dentro do meu cocuruto. Corrí a buscar as fôlhas de papel onde tinha desenhado a teórica fórmula da Matrix/DNA, coloquei-as lado a lado com o desenho do átomo de carbono, em cima da pedra que usava como a bancada das minhas “altas pesquisas cientificas a base dos mais simples nicroscópios”… e fiquei olhando, olhando, de boca aberta, e de repente soltei um “Oh!”… de admiração. Para o leitor entender o que descobrí e talvez descobrir por si mesmo – qual o fantástico mistério do carbono – terei que trazer a seguir os desenhos que tinha naquela época da Matrix/DNA.
 Matrix/DNA: O template para todos os sistemas naturais, de átomos a nucleotideos a galáxias e células. O circuíto energético padrão. E o desenho do circuito do fluxo interno de informação da fórmula da Matrix/DNA na sua versão de sistema perfeito fechado, na forma de diagrama de software:
 E o desenho do circuito do fluxo interno de informação da fórmula da Matrix/DNA na sua versão de sistema perfeito fechado, na forma de diagrama de software Isto aí é uma fórmula do que seria um punhado de matéria comum mas feita com as informações certas pairando em cima de uma onda de luz comum e recebendo fótons dessa onda de luz, os quais moveriam a matéria no sentido dela repetir as mesmas sequencias de vibrações da onda. Para descobrir o que aconteceria com essa matéria preciso revirar meu baú aqui e lhe mostrar uma outra figura sugerida pela Matrix/DNA. Para chegar ao átomo de carbono, vamos ter que dar uma pequena volta pelos mais profundos segrêdos do Universo e sua Natureza, tocar a mais tênue substancia dêste mundo que é a luz, a qual está me parecendo ultimamente que é os braços e as mãos de Deus nas Suas criações… ou seja lá o que for que cria universos como o nosso.
 Nesta figura você deve imaginar uma fonte qualquer, como por exemplo um vortex, situado à direita dessa linha serpenteante que é a imagem que aparece na tela de um instrumento que capta o avançar de um raio de luz. Não se vê isso a olhos nus por isso sentimos e vemos efeitos de que é um raio dirigido ao mesmo tempo que são ondas concêntricas. O importante é notar que no inicio do raio, no ponto mais próximo da fonte, a luz sai em mais elevado estado vibratório, vemos o gamma-ray, e depois vai diminuindo, enfraquecendo suas vibrações at;e se frabmentar em fótons, depois da frequencia do radio. Pois quando ví uma figura como essa num livro de Física, me acendeu outra vez uma lampadinha dentro do meu cocuruto, peguei os desenhos da Matrix/DNA e montei essa figura, colocando aqueles nomes lá ( F1, F2, genoma, gestação, baby, etc.) Porque? Porque eu ví no avançar desta onda a mesma intensidade de vibração e energia que vejo no avançar de um corpo humano para sua velhice. O que faz mudar as intensidades e formas nos corpos humanos é um processo que denominamos “ciclo vital” e nada me impede supor que o que faz as intensidades e côres de uma onda de luz seja o mesmo processo. Aliás, na luz está a origem do processo que depois passa para todos os corpos materiais, por isso estou teorizando ultimamente que a Luz contem o código da vida, que imprime vida à massa inerte.
Mas o que tem tudo isso a ver com o átomo de carbono, sua abundancia formando seu corpo? Agora vamos chegar lá.
Observe que a fórmula software da Matrix/DNA, na sua versão como sistema perfeito, é um circuito de energia, um canal por dentro do qual passa um fluxo de informação. Ali vemos quadrados intercalados com setas, os quadrados representando a energia em forma de onda e os quadrados representando estas ondas quando se tornam particulas de massa, ou corpos materiais. Vemos na figura azul acima que onde estão os quadrados aparecem os corpos, sejam organelas numa célula, astros no espaço sideral, mas note-se que estes corpos vão sendo transformados, mudando de forma e até composição interna. Ora, transformação de um unico corpo em várias formas difertentes só é possivel se a força de um ciclo vital estiver dentro dêle. Ou uma onda de luz.
Arrepiado(a)? Eu sim.
Mas aí a fórmula nos mostra que um corpo sob ciclo vital se desfaz, se fragmenta, porem se permanecer no mesmo lugar, se for mexido por forças externas, se fosse dirigido a se recompor, a ressuscitar, seria possivel porque todas as informações necessárias estão ali. Então o ciclo se fecharia, formando uma circunferencia fechada, perfeita. E o circuito continuaria a fluir, eternamente. Nêste momento percebemos que nossa fórmul;a de ciclo vital se torna um… SISTEMA! Outro arrepio. Estou cansado de assistir a debates sôbre como a célula se organizou, como funcionaria um processo de auto-organização em sistema. Isto aí na fórmula da Matrix não poderia ocorrer na Terra onde os corpos se desfazem e se mistura, com a terra, mas no espaço sideral, pode. No inicio o céu era povoado por um unico tipo de astro, uma espécie de estrêla formada apenas com os átomos leves. Mas a luz estava nelas ou elas se moviam na luz e a cada vez que a onda avançava mudava a vibração e de cada viração resultava uma forma diferente da mesma estrela. Depois era só esperar que na enorme população com sete tipos de astros diferentes, em algum lugar estes sete astros se encontrassem e iriam se conectar obedecendo no social a mesma sequencia que os fizera no individual. Assim o cilco vital é o criador dos sistemas. Segure o fôlego. A Matrix é uma pestinha, não para quieta, e vai continuar nos bombardeando com sua matraca.
A fórmula nos mostra sete figuras ( pois em sete trechos dividimos uma onda de luz), sendo seis quadrados e um vortex, seis formas alinhadas em circunferencia e uma como meridiano. Mas cada forma executa uma especifica função no sistema, diferente das outras funções das outras formas. Se fosse um corpo vivo diriamos: função da gestação, funcão do nascimento, do crescimento, da maturação, da degeneração, etc. E aqui descobrimos a grande importnacia das funções sistêmicas universais, se parecem com os obreiros do Universo.
Agora vamos observar os átomos. Suponha que a Matrix seja a fórmula que organiza as particulas na forma de sistema atômico. Ela faria muitas tentativas, mas obteria muitos sistemas derivados da forma dela, porque em alguns faltariam particulas que haveria num dado ambiente, noutros sob elevadas temperaturas entrariam muitas particulas, até que finalmente um seria sua cópia fiel. O que significa cópia fiel? Ora, um sistema que tenha nucleo e periferia, e particulas representando cada uma de suas funções universais. Menos a função do meridiano, se ela não quiser um sistema estanque, inutil, que fique se reciclando eternamente sem sair do lugar. Ela precisa de umátomo com exatamente seis particulas. E o unico átomo no mundo, numero atômico seis é o átomo do… Carbono!
O átomo de carbono é a Matrix/DNA descida à Terra na sua forma de átomo. Por isso êle tem tudo para se colocar no centro como o template, pegar os outros átomos com numeros atômicos que perfaçam outra cópia do sistema se forem alinhados na mesma sequencia. átomos que vão de sete a doze, como o Nitrogenio 7, o Oxigênio 11, etc., e sempre usando o meio-átomo Hidrog6enio 1 como cola, ponte, para unir êstes atomos. E assim a Vida avançou.
Agora por favor uma salva de palmas para êste fantástico herói que nos deu a Vida e hoje mantem nossos corpos vivos: o Senhor Carbono! E de quebra demos uma piscadinha e um sorriso de cumplicidade para a Matrix/DNA.
Tags: átomo de carbono, carbono, Matrix/DNA
Postedo na A Grande Causa da Humanidade, Abiogênese, Átomo, Coment/Posts da Matrix/DNA na Internet, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Divulgação do Website e da Matrix/DNA, Evidências da Matrix/DNA, Luz, Origem da Vida, Pesquisas da Matrix/DNA, Vida | Sem Comentários »
sábado, fevereiro | 2 | 2013
Uma explicação bem suscinta de uma imagem e em protuguês. A imagem é esta:
 Human and Earth Life Cycle by MatrixDNA Tudo começa quando uma estrêla morre. Sua massa degradada fica como uma nuvem no espaço. Girando sôbre si mesma devido à rotação da galaxia, surge um rodamoinho no centro. O rodamoinho absorve parte da massa, ao mesmo tempo que cometas nergizados expelidos por gigantes vulcões dos pulsares penetram o rodamoinho. Misturando massa e energia o vortex emite esferas energéticas chamejantes que caem no espaço sideral. São as sementes astronomicas. Avançando no espaço em meio à poeira que vai se agregando e cobrindo a esfera chamejante vão se criando diferentes camadas de densidade pois cada vez mais distante o espaço se esfria. Nêste ponto a semente se tornou um planeta que cai na órbita de alguma estr6ela. A energia da estrela derrete as camadas de gelo criando os oceanos e continua a se infiltrar no planeta até alcançar seu nucleo onde desperta a semente e começam as reações nucleares. Como valvula de escape da pressão surgem vulcões em toda a superficie cada vez maiores, mais potentes.
Emitem magma na forma de esferas chamejantes que ultrapassam o campo gravitacional e caem no espaço na forma de cometas. O planeta nesta fase é um pulsar. Na continuação a ultima camada de rocha do pulsar colapsa e a luminosidade do nucleo se revela no espaço, criando uma estrela supernova, que se distancia da estrela-mãe e vai criar seu próprio sistema, sua familia. Tudo igual ao ciclo de vida humano. Inclusive o processo da reprodução sexual na sua versão mecanica/astronomica de nossos ancestrais. Mas lembre-se que as células tem dois tipos de formação: as primeiras células se formaram por simbiose, depois apenas se replicam. Para galaxias é a mesma coisa, hoje elas se replicam, mas as originais foram formadas por esse processo descoberto pela Matrix/DNA Theory. Moral: a matéria burra da terra não poderia ter inventado sózinha esta extraordinaria engenharia. Ela já estava escrita, desenhada, nas estrêlas.
Postedo na A Grande Causa da Humanidade, Astronomia, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Diálogos Publicos da Matrix/DNA, Divulgação do Website e da Matrix/DNA, Matrix/DNA: Divulg. Posts. Mens. | Sem Comentários »
domingo, janeiro | 27 | 2013
National Center for Scientific Education-USA – http://ncse.com/
Em vários estados americanos estão entrando projetos na Legislação que não apenas abrem as portas, mas que pode vir a ser “OBRIGATÓRIO”, O ENSINO DA TEORIA DA MATRIX/DNA NAS ESCOLAS !!!
“Intelligent design” bills in Missouri, Arizona, Indiana…
http://ncse.com/news/2013/01/intelligent-design-bill-missouri-0014690
January 24th, 2013
” Among the substantive provisions of the bill, applying both to Missouri’s public elementary and secondary schools and to introductory science courses in public institutions of higher education in the state: “If scientific theory concerning biological origin is taught in a course of study, biological evolution and biological intelligent design shall be taught. Other scientific theory or theories of origin may be taught.”
Aí diz: “Outras cientificas teorias ou teorias das origens podem serem ensinadas!”
My God! Nunca havia pensado nisso! Ah… se eu tivesse advogados aqui e agora! Será que Deus está reservando uma surprêsa para mim? Morrer feliz porque deixei plantada uma semente muito melhor da que havia quando nascí? E salvação para todos os futuros órfãos de rua, os da minha classe social?
Antiscience legislation in Arizona
http://ncse.com/news/2013/01/antiscience-legislation-arizona-0014695
January 26th, 2013
XXX
A stealth antiscience bill in Indiana
http://ncse.com/news/2013/01/stealth-antiscience-bill-indiana-0014693
January 25th, 2013
XXX
“Intelligent design” bill in Missouri
http://ncse.com/news/2013/01/intelligent-design-bill-missouri-0014690
January 24th, 2013
A MATRIX/DNA É A UNICA TEORIA NO MUNDO QUE É JUSTAMENTE O MEIO-TÊRMO ENTRE A TEORIA CIENTIFICA DA EVOLUÇÃO E A TEORIA RELIGIOSA CRISTÃ DO INTELIGENTE DESIGNER. ELA PERMITE A EXISTENCIA DAS DUAS POSSIBILIDADES. É A TEORIA DE QUE OS SISTEMAS BIOLÓGICOS (VIDA) VIERAM DE UM PRÉVIO NATURAL NÃO-INTELIGENTE DESIGNER, O QUAL É O BUILDING BLOCK DOS SISTEMAS ASTRONOMICOS CONFORME O NOSSO MODÊLO COSMOLÓGICO. Essa teoria deixa uma porta aberta para a possibilidade de um inteligente designer alem do Universo ao mesmo tempo que deixa a porta aberta para a evolução Darwiniana quando aponta que dentro dêste Universo está ocorrendo um processo natural de reprodução de algo que existia antes do Big Bang!
Ah… como é duro estar sózinho defendendo uma descoberta que não tenho como divulga-la oficialmente! Será que vai acontecer comigo o que aconteceu com Copérnico, Mendel? 50 anos depois de mortos alguem se deparou com coisas escritas por eles que batiam com o conhecimento cientifico da época e os trouxe a publico. De que adianta vencer depois de morto? Se eu tivesse algum apoio… mas assim como algum dos meus modelos já constam do curriculul escolar do Rio Grande do Sul, vou continuar esta luta e talvez vão constar de todas as escolas do mundo… Porque não? Estão aparecendo evidencias comprovando as previsões da teoria em todos os lugares e a cada dia…
Postedo na Ciência Acadêmica Oficial, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Darwinism, Divulgação do Website e da Matrix/DNA, educação, Evolução, Filosofia, Intelligent Designer, Lista Sint Noticias Vitoria p Matrix, Origem da Vida, Teorias Existentes Atuais | Sem Comentários »
quinta-feira, janeiro | 10 | 2013
Science Daily – ( Science news)
How Does Your Garden Glow?
 Pétalas de Flôres exibem côres luminosas por efeito ótico que apenas insetos polinadores vêem - Bees see some flowers in multicolour because of previously unknown iridescence of the petals, usually invisible to the human eye, researchers from the University of Cambridge report this week in Science. O fato é que na Terra nós vemos um fenômeno real: existem mulheres e elas são obcecadas com sua beleza fisica tudo fazendo para melhora-la e o intuito final é sobreviver e melhor obtendo o maximo dos machos. Mas foi a Terra que inventou este fenômeno, esta cena que vemos aqui e agora? Antes do tempo de aparecem humanos na Terra haviam as plantas, que produziam flôres belas, aplicando cosmetologia, como a iridiscencia, para atrair os insetos polinadores. Então vamos percebendo que as origens dêste fenômeno remontam a eras mais antigas, antes do aparecimento das mulheres. Mas ainda assim, continua a questão: foi a Terra que inventou êste fenômeno, quando criou os vegetais?
Segindo os modêlos cosmológicos da Matrix/DNA – se êles estiverem mais próximos da verdade que os mod6elos acadêmicos – não! Não foi a Terra que inventou êste fenômeno! Não foi na Terra que emergiu opela primeira vez corpos matrriais dividios entre masculinos e femininos e não foi na Terra que emergiu êste mecanismo das fêmeas se esforçarem para atrair os melhores machos ou ao menos conseguir a gravidez. Esta mesma cena aparece nos modêlos como existindo já no céu, há bilhões de anos, mesmo antes da Terra surgir! para entender isso vamos copiar aqui o mais simpl6es modêlo cosmológico da Matrix/DNA:
 A Matrix/DNA Universal Como Fórmula Natural dos Sistemas e Ciclos Vitais E para completar uma visualização da mesma fórmula por outro angulo:
 Matrix/DNA: Human and Celestial Primordial Body Life Cycles Pois bem. Talvez terás que clicar nas imagens para vê-las ampliadas. Nas formações das galaxias originais, havia apenas um unico tipo de corpo celeste proveniente da condensação anterior da nebulosa de atomos leves. De alguma maneira êste corpo se assentava numa onda natural de luz, a qual contem sete diferentes tipos de vibrações ( veja neste website o quadro do eletric-magnetic spectrum of light by Matrix/DNA). Rolando sôbre essa onda de luz o corpo se divide em sete diferentes tipos, um tipo de acôrdo com cada tipo de vibração. Acontece que a dinamica da onda de luz é exatamente a mesma que vemos nos corpos vivos, pelo fenômeno conhecido como “ciclo vital” o qual produz sete principais diferentes formas ( feto, bebê, criança, adolescente, etc.). Então, dispondo de muitas cópias daqu6ele corpo inicial e pondo estas cópias a rolarem sob o mecanismo do ciclo vital, a Natureza conseguiu ter multiplas cópias de todas as sete formas e tambem das formas intermediarias, claro. Ora, misturando estas formas, ocorreu entre elas uma simbiose: cada forma tende a se conectar com as suas duas formas mais próximas, dentro do ciclo vital. Adolescente se dá melhor com crianças (sua forma anterior), e jovens adultos ( sua forma posterior). Qyando os astros nas diferentes formas se conectaram formando o mesmo circuito do ciclo vital, 6esye se fechou nas duas pontas criando uma circunferencia fechada. A poeira resultante da fragmentação da sua forma como cadaver ( (estrêla velha) foi conectada com o vórtice nuclear que produz um astro novo e assim surgiu pela primeira vez no Universo um completo e perfeito sistema natural, o qual contem tôdas as sete funções sistêmicas universais ( as fôrças naturais). Acontece que tal sistema tem um corpo, o pulsar, fazendo exatamente o papel do macho num sistema reprodutivo sexualizado! E tem outro corpo, o quasar, fazendo exatamente o papel de fêemea no mesmo processo reprodutivo.
O pulsar é caracterizado por ter a sua superficie locupleta de gigantes vulcões os quais entram em erupção emitindo magma com tanta violencia que 6eles caem no espaço sideral. desta forma, os vulcões são os ancestrais não-vivos da genitalia masculina, o magma é o ancestral do esperma, e o que estes magmas formam no espaço sideral, os cometas, são os espermatozóides do espaço. O quasar ( devia ser dito “a quasar”) é uma aureóla resplandecente vista circundando o nucleo da galaxia, mais conhecido como “horizonte de eventos”. dentro do quasar está o vórtice nuclear, o qual erroneamente esyá sendo teorizado como sendo um buraco negro, comedor de astros e mundos. Dentro do quasar, e mais exatamente. dentro do vórtice conico, a matéria degradada da ultima estr6ela morta é reciclada, misturada com a energia de cometas e depois de varias fases e processos, é emitido uma esfera incandescente. Veio à luz do mundo mais um bebê de astro sideral! Portanto note-se ali tôda a semelhança com as fêmeas biológicas, inclusive a ancestralidade não-viva de sua genitalia, já escrita, desenhada no céu! E tambem é bom notar que os cometas caem na espiral galáctica dirigindo-se ao vórtice nuclear, os que entram fazem a mesma fecundação de óvulos.
A quasar é f6emea das galáxias, é a mulher no céu, é a flor da planta, é a vaidosa mulher humana na Terra. A quasar se enfeita com todas as luzes das estrêlas, torna-se iridescente, bela, magnifica, provocando arrepios e erupções vulcanicas no pulsar à distancia: ela só sobrevive se os cometas emitidos pelo pulsar vierem trazer sua dinamica espiralar e sua energia de magma incandescente. O cometa é om polinador!
Áinda é preciso dizer mais? Se fôsse não me seria possível pois nesta hora meus olhos sempre lacrimejam, é-me impossivel evitá-lo. Êste mundo tem mistérios muito mais profundos do que eu imaginavame à medida que vou aprendendo, me aumentam a admiração por tamanha inteligência que emana desta Natureza Cósmica!
Link para o artigo:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130109124116.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Ftop_news+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Top+News%29&utm_content=FaceBook
XXX
A Matrix/DNA deve se aprofundar na busca de tôdas as informações relacionadas ao fenômeno da iridescência devido estar relacionado com a “LUZ”.
Googlar êste tema e ver tambem êste artigo:
Iridescence enables bees to view flowers in different colours
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/iridescence-enables-bees-to-view-flowers-in-different-colours/
Because most of the petal iridescence measured is at the ultraviolet end of the spectrum, which insects can see but humans cannot, this raises the intriguing possibility that many flowers are actually iridescent although they do not appear so to the human eye.
XXX
WIKIPEDIA:
(Port.) -
Iridescência
Origem: Wikipédia, a enciclopédia livre.
A iridescência é um fenómeno óptico que faz certos tipos de surpefícies reflectirem as cores do arco-íris. A palavra é derivada do grego, Íris na mitologia grega é a personificação do arco-íris e mensageira dos deuses.
A pena do beija-flor, alguns insectos e bolhas de sabão têm essa propriedade.
Materiais iridescentes são popularmente conhecidos como “furta-cor” no Brasil.
Inglês:
xxx: Iridescence (also known as goniochromism) is generally known as the property of certain surfaces that appear to change color as the angle of view or the angle of illumination changes. There are numerous common examples of iridescence; for example, soap bubbles, butterfly wings, and sea shells.
 Iridescência do disco compacto similar à do disco nuclear galáctico?
Tags: flor, iridescência, mulher, quasar
Postedo na Astronomia, Biomimicry, Cosmologia, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Evidências da Matrix/DNA, Fóton, Luz, Pesquisas da Matrix/DNA | Sem Comentários »
sábado, novembro | 24 | 2012
http://www.dna.caltech.edu/courses/cs191/paperscs191/turing.pdf
 Alan Turing Basic Machine  Alan_Turing_photo THE CHEMICAL BASIS OF MOKPHOGENESIS
BY A. M. TURING, F.R.S. University qf Manchester
(Received 9 November 195 1-Revised 15 March 1952)
Introdução dêste autor:
Dezenas ou centenas de vêzes desde munhas leituras na infancia tenho trombado com menções a êste nome – Alan Turing – e descrições. discussões sôbre seu trabalho. Mas agora localizei um “paper” direto de sua autoria e vou tentar arrumar tempo para estudá-lo. Tenho préviamente negativas idéias sôbre suas teorias porque tenho-as visto como suporte do grupo intellectual que boicotou o inicio pioneiro de Ludwig Bertalanffy “A Teoria Geral dos Sistemas” desviando-o da sua ótica sôbre fenômenos e sistemas naturais para a área da cibernética/matemática artifical de sistemas computacionais. Mas vamos agora ver a fonte na origem para ver o que se conclui sob a cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA.
Bom vídeo para “sentir” o autor:
https://vimeo.com/45394167
XXX
Turing têve uma vida trágica, era homossexual e foi condenado pela mentalidade religiosa inglêsa ( mais um crime dos cristãos?), morreu cêdo, como pode ser visto aqui:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing
Turing’s homosexuality resulted in a criminal prosecution in 1952, when homosexual acts were still illegal in the United Kingdom. He accepted treatment with female hormones (chemical castration) as an alternative to prison. Turing died in 1954, just over two weeks before his 42nd birthday, from cyanide poisoning. An inquest determined that his death was suicide; his mother and some others believed his death was accidental. On 10 September 2009, following an Internet campaign, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown made an official public apology on behalf of the British government for “the appalling way he was treated”. As of May 2012 a private member’s bill was before the House of Lords which would grant Turing a statutory pardon if enacted
Algumas defimições de palavras/conceitos mais usados aqui:
Morphogenesis ( Morfogênese ) - (from the Greek morphê shape and genesis creation, literally, “beginning of the shape”) is the biological process that causes an organism to develop its shape. It is one of three fundamental aspects of developmental biology along with the control of cell growth and cellular differentiation.
The process controls the organized spatial distribution of cells during the embryonic development of an organism. Morphogenesis can take place also in a mature organism, in cell culture or inside tumor cell masses. Morphogenesis also describes the development of unicellular life forms that do not have an embryonic stage in their life cycle, or describes the evolution of a body structure within a taxonomic group.
Morphogenetic responses may be induced in organisms by hormones, by environmental chemicals ranging from substances produced by other organisms to toxic chemicals or radionuclides released as pollutants, and other plants, or by mechanical stresses induced by spatial patterning of the cells.
XXXXXX
Morphogen – is a substance governing the pattern of tissue development, and the positions of the various specialized cell types within a tissue. More precisely, a morphogen is a signaling molecule that acts directly on cells to produce specific cellular responses depending on the local concentration of the morphogen.
Since morphogens diffuse through the tissues of an embryo during early development, concentration gradients are set up. These gradients drive the process of differentiation of unspecialised (stem) cells into different cell types, ultimately forming all the tissues and organs of the body.
XXX
Tags: Alan Turing, morfogênese
Postedo na Abiogênese, Biologia Celular, Circuítos Sistêmicos, Computação, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Epigenética, Evolução, Genética, hardware, Origem da Vida, Pesquisas da Matrix/DNA, Sistemas, software | Sem Comentários »
sexta-feira, outubro | 26 | 2012
 Cromossoma humano 2 and seus análogos em outros primatas Todos os outros primatas tem 24 cromossomas (gorilas (G), chimpanzes (C), orangotangos (O), etc.) mas a espécie humana(H) tem apenas 23. Considerando-se que a teoria da evolução esteja correta, esta sugere que a espécie humana tenha evoluido a partir de algum primata. Então porque perderia um cromossoma? A resposta veio quando se descobriu que o 23* cromossoma humano é justamente resultado da fusão entre os 23* e 24* cromossomas dos primatas. Como se pode observar no quadro acima.
Mas o que significaria essa fusão? O que teria provocado essa fusão? E o que dela de fato teria resultado?
Pensando nisso e observando a fórmula da Matrix/DNA me veio uma idéia que pode ser bem próxima da verdadeira resposta final. Trata-se de outra sugestão da fórmula, a de que todos os sistemas materiais, naturais, dêste Universo possuem uma face invisivel a nós, a qual seria justamente a Matrix feita de fótons ( que pode ser a aura aventada pelos orientais). Esta sugestão surgiu quando calculamos como teria siso o processo pelo qual o building block dos sistemas astronomicos teria se infiltrado na sôpa promordial terrestre e dirigido seus átomos a construir o primeiro sistema celular: ele veio na forma de um diagrama de software, fragmentado em seus bits-informação, manifestados na forma de fótons. Daí a sugestão de que a evolução tem sido resultado da interação entre esta face material visivel, que é o hardware, e a outra invisivel, que é o software. Uma, que se encontra fixada na matéria, capta informações do meio ambiente que são tambem absorvidas pela outra que flutua livre e por isso pode incorpora-las e mutar, porem fazendo isso ela modela o hardware em busca de maior capacidade para obter mais informações… um continuo processo de retro-alimentação, feed-back.
Mas à medida que a evolução avança, o aspecto hardware vai sendo cada vez menos util, pois o Universo material tem um limite de informações, e o software passa a buscar informações na sua própria dimensão. Isto significa que o sistema que estiver no tôpo da evolução – como é o caso aqui e agora do corpo humano – torna-se mais “etéreo”, mais software. Em outras palavras significa que o homem torna-se mais conciência e menos animalismo.
Então voltemos ao mistério da fusão. O software vem desde antes do Big Bang interagindo com o hardware através de alguma peça do hardware que é uma porta de entrada e saída para o software. Esta peça teria sido o cromossoma 24 nos primatas. Quando um evento novo forçou a fusão ( e suspeito que este evento tenha sido o agrupamento na caverna originando as familias, emergindo as emoções, sentimentos, morais), o software passou a se expressar com mais fôrça. No dizer da religião antiga oriental, ”a alma dormia no átomo, sonhava nas galaxias, começou a acordar nos animais, e despertou no homem”. Então essa fusão teria sido uma ampliação do software/mente dentro do hardware, ou seja: se antes dormia numa unica peça, pela qual fracamente podia interagir com o organismo, e assim pouco contrôle tinha sôbre instintos, pernas, braços, órgãos sexuais, etc., – agora ela pode, com a fusão dos cromossomas, ou seja, com a fusão da peça “dela” com todas as demais peças do organismo, ter maior controle e poder se expressar com mais força, impondo sua vontade anímica sôbre a vontade material.
Faz sentido para ti? Para mim parece que a coisa tôda tem lógica e é muito importante. Sua importancia vai desde entender melhor o que somos, até a descoberta de como tornar os computadores mais “inteligentes” , talvez até mesmo tendo mais visão do que seria um computador quantico com inteligencia artificial. Por isso vou levar mais essa pesquisa para frente. Vem comigo?
Tags: chimpanzé, cromossoma, gorila, hardware, humano, software
Postedo na Cérebro, Computação, consciência, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, counsciousness, DNA, Evidências da Matrix/DNA, Evolução, Evolucao Cosmologica, Macro Evolução, mente, Origens, Pesquisas da Matrix/DNA, Psicologia | 1 Comentário »
segunda-feira, outubro | 22 | 2012
(Vai lá e clique no botão com o polegar prá cima – claro, se você concordar com meu comentário) Esta é a sexta parte dêste artigo, vide as cinco anteriores, numeros 5,4,3, 2 e 1 tôdas aqui nêste blog com o mesmo titulo) . Foram perdidos muitos posts da Matrix devido uma revisão que desapareceu do blog ( principalmente posts do dia 08). Meus posts estão em três nomes devido problemas na conta do Youtube: Louis Charles Morelli, TheMatrixDNA e Austriak1)
( Deletar PC Cleaner Urgente! Perdí Todos os posts entre 11 e 13)
XXX
Posts modêlos para entrada todos os dias:
All posts here by Matrix/DNA seems “away off the beam”, it makes no sense, the words are out of order, phrases are not connected in comprehensible way. It “seems” because Matrix/DNA is a narrative of this world by a never knew before way for connecting all real natural facts and events observed here and now. Is not the words out of order, it is your way of connecting real facts that is out of order. We need give to our children more power than we had, which is the right naturalistic knowledge
TheMatrixDNA – 8:05 PM – Mon – Nov – 12
The fundamental problem with the observable universal history of evolution is that evolution is product of matter, and matter, we know, has the supreme tendency to get eternal thermodynamic equilibrium. So, must have a force among matter that is odd to matter. How to find it ? Nature must answer this question. And I see the matter inside a fecundated ovule not going to inertia, but moving under evolution. DNA contains this force here. And now we discovered the DNA of Universe: the Matrix/DNA.
TheMatrixDNA – 4:16 PM wed 07
Louis Charles Morelli – 12;48 PM – Sat. – Nov – 03
Question: If the supreme tendency of matter is to accommodate at eternal thermodynamic equilibrium state, which non-material force could exist against this tendency, forcing matter towards complexity and evolution? If there was a God creating this world, why he made matter with this tendency for being the structural substance of this world and the substance of bodies of living beings with the opposite tendency- the tendency for eternal dynamic movement? Atheism and creationism makes no sense?
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
I know the answers. Atheism will say that the Big Bang produced chaos, after that matter is searching its ordered state, and that’s why we see evolution just now. And creationist will say that God created the world in perfect state ( this was not the tendency of matter or living beings) but the sin of Adam/Eve broken the perfection. But, I think that an infinitelly perfect and not mutable world, at ordered state, is the same of “nothing”. It should be a closed system, the supreme selfishness.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Why not asking these supremes questions to Nature? Who else could be more faithful professor? That’s what we did. We spent 7 years at the heart of Amazon jungle asking nature, because there is the last untouchable land that still has the witness of life’s origins. And we got a third alternative, not atheist, neither creationist, but 50% of each one. This Universe is a kind of cosmic egg, the galaxies are the fossils of our ancestors, and the History is “from the Big Bang towards a Big Birth”.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Inside this Universe is occurring a kind of genetic/computational reproduction of that unknown system existing before and beyond this Universe. It is all about the embryogenesis/evolution of a unique natural system, which has a Matrix/DNA. We, human beings ( and maybe a lots of another extra-terrestrial lifeforms), are the genes being expressed just now for building the brain and consciousness of this universal system. We need loving and helping each other, because we will be one.
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.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago 9:55 PM – Wed 17
( 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
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.).
Louis Charles Morelli - 1:21 PM – Friday, 19
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.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Louis Charles Morelli – 1:21 PM – Friday, 19
The monstrous, sanguinary, enemy number one of human specie, terrorist, god of the Bible, was merely projection of human ancient almost salvage personality to the common humans’ dream of ideal supermen. But, every human is different from all others, then, the ancient debate about the ideal god was worked by writers. It was a projection of this earlier fetal evolution in shape of blastula, where billions of diversified cells should converge and be resumed into the first initial cell. Irony!
Louis Charles Morelli – 8:50 PM – Tue – 23
From Matrix/DNA Evolutionary Theory: “Natural Selection is the immediate environmental selection acting by stress guided by natural designers which are non-immediate natural systems, occupying the systems’ hierarchy at sequential inferior and superior levels.” This process goes back and before the Big Bang, triggered by an ex-machine natural system that contains consciousness. If you are a theist and want to call this natural system “God” know that it creates as do humans’ father and mother.
Louis Charles Morelli – 1:56 PM – Fri – 26
It is not rational that people does not accept the visible process of embryogenesis and the whole life cycle of a human being as the exactly mirror of universal evolution. One motive of this deviation of Reason is the missing knowledge that universal evolution is all about the evolution of a unique system that began as merely vortex/matrix, evolved to atom, star system, galaxy, cell system, human, mind, and next… These are different shapes of any natural system under the process of lifecycle.
Alan Clarke: “What’s more amazing is that if Genesis was derived by a dream, it was a dream like no other”
The same “dream” occurred to the creators of I Ching, as to the visionaries of chakras, as to those black holes like vortex related in Secret Doctrine, and they can occur today to natives of Amazon jungle. All of them are flashes of a single pair of nucleotides, which are DNA’s bits, because these units are bits of information for galaxies and atoms also. Kekule’s ring was the same dream
TheMatrixDNA – 5:30 PM – Thu – 08
Não Publicado:
I was thinking about it just now: teaching kids that a supernatural assassin of human beings, causing wars and killing whole tribes, causing floods and killing even the lovely squirrels and butterflies; approving slavery, etc, as a humans’ hero, is just the kind of doctrine that produced the Inquisition, the killings of september 11. If this being exists, he is enemy Number One of human kind and all life, he should be bring on to Justice as terrorist. That’s a bad moral education. Or not?
And posted by: TrueVerdicts 1 hour ago
***NOTE***
If anyone here wishes to debate me, learn from Louis Charles Morelli or Kenith Adam and see how we debate. The rest of you, four-letter-word lightweights (deemed below my pay grade) whom I’ve asked to GO WAY, please can continue to do so.
If you wish to re-insert yourself in my debate, say something constructive with no profanity!
XXXXXXX
I’m sorry and do not mean to offend you – but you do not write english welll enough for your comments and statements to actually mean anything. parsivalshorse in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 6 hours ago
Ok, Parsival. Please, see this: “I found the number 1,618 when searching for a number for the point in time/space occupied by the piece of the perfect closed system circuitry – the Matrix – that has the function of systems’ reproduction. But, then, this number remembered that is very known and famous as “the number Phi”. Sacred geometry, bi-lateral symmetry are some of its names. Why? Then I discovered that the left face of Matrix is reproduced by Phi making the right face. That’s bi-lateral
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
symmetry! Since that Matrix is a kind of universal fractal, repeated everywhere, was explained why people see beautiful and wonder about this number.” This piece with this number is spermatozoon at sexual level, RNAm at cellular level, the base Uracil at DNA level, comets at astronomical level, and particle pion at atomic level. But Phi must be also the force that trigger DNA replication and now I am searching what is this force” I know you will see no meaning here. Due an unknown worldvision
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
I have to agree with parsivals horse. Your use of the language appears to be no more than a collection of words without any meaning. Certain sentences do make sense by themselves but they appear to be floating without a context.
Peter van der Meer in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 36 minutes ago
No, that’s happen also with people that talks my native language but does not know the Universe I am describing. But I am sure that all words and all sentences are perfect connected and located and at the right sequence for any kind of apresentation. And I know how to express ideas, since that at my childhood I got the first place at scholar concourses for writing. I think this strange odd effect that everybody feels would happen when listening the author of I Ching explaining the symbols.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Peter van der Meer (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXXXXX
Beginning of Debates
XXX
“[Natural selection] may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.” Daniel Brooks, as quoted by Roger Lewin, “A Downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Wolf King (Show the comment) 2 hours ago
Brooks was right. There is no creative force, in the meaning that this Universe could have forces able to creating new information from nothing. But, still, speciation is merely reproduction of natural mechanisms, systemic functions, geometric shapes, existents since the beginnings of this world, that were expressed by natural systems unknown to us, and since these systems are hidden from our understanding, the mechanisms were unknown also. We’re discovering them by Matrix/DNA methods
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
It is not an assertion fallacy, you just failed to reflect on it deeply enough. If we break down everything we know to exist into the smallest form of matter possible, physicists still cannot explain its origin. This is a very basic principle, or the law of conservation of mass. Assuming that our scientific understanding applies universally, it is evident that we cannot find an explanation for our existence in its entirety. The same concept applies also for time, space, etc.
Silas Rainville in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 18 hours ago
But we can elaborate falsiable theories that makes sense. it is enough that you has the right knowledge of universal evolution and projects its logics upon the existence before the origins. Because these origins must be a natural and logic effect of that chain of causes and effects that must happened before the origins. That’s what Matrix/DNA Theory did for finding a natural system existing before Big Bang and finding a half-biological/half-mechanical system before life origins.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Silas Rainville 16 hours ago
What you are saying is reasonable, and I agree with you. I am just addressing the basic premise that something cannot not originate from absolutely nothing.
Silas Rainville in reply to TheMatrixDNA 2 hours ago
The curious thing here is that the law of conservation of mass seems be applied also as “the law of conservation of knowledge”. Remembering Godel’s theorem ( nobody can know the thru of a system – which in this issue is the universe – standing inside this system). That’s why I suspect that the human shape will be transformed into new shape/substances for to be able to extrapolate the universe and able to know the thru about it.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Silas Rainville (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
“Because our brain can not process the information of this world as having a beginning, neither the information of this world as having no beginning.”
That is just reasserting your assertion fallacy, all you are doing is doubling down on the same flawed premise. The human brain processes information that much we know, you have yet to show information it can not process. Your premise is an illogical paradox since you are limited to a human brain yourself.
Kenith Adams in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
My brain knew the information coming from some theorists (as Hawking, etc.) that the universe could self-assembling from itself. There are several theorists talking about vibrations arisen from absolute vacuum. All these things suggests a beginning from nothing and my brain could not process it. By other hand theism has spreaded the information that has gods and worlds with no beginning, infinite. My brain could not process this information also. An I can’t see a third alternative. Not fallacies
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Billions of women give birth yes, but they don’t have virgin births…lol
There is no evidence that a rib can make a person, nor that a snake could talk. I don’t make the claim the bible does.. Whether that’s through speech or mind control..
TheRainmaker2001 in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 8 minutes
Yes, there are evidences, metaphorically. But explanations requires a deeper understanding of universe’s pastimes and cosmological evolution. The metaphor of “woman made off man rib” comes from the ancestor mechanism of this process we see here today called “DNA replication”. Imagine the right strand of DNA alone and it appears a vertebrate column with two ribs. That’s the man. For making the left side (woman) need reproduce the first rib. This happened with LUCA billion years ago. Snake also..
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheRainmaker2001 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
was there, inside the body of LUCA. If you look to the photo of LUCA it seems a snake swallowing its own tail. So, the snake is the systemic circuit, which means that it has the identity, the personality of the system. LUCA was a perfect closed system in itself, the extreme expression of selfishness, from who we inherited the selfish gene. And the Fall was due Eve built the system/snake and occupied the place of queen, which is mimicked by any insect society today. Unconscious remembering…
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
@Terncote “[Darwin] let the cat out of the bad and it’s never going back in”
1) That’s a little overstated since natural selection was described by creationist Edward Blythe in two papers (1835 & 1837), years before Darwin published Origin of Species in 1859.
2) Portions of creation theory overlap with Darwin, namely information loss by mutations & natural selection, genetic variation, and changes within species, but not common descent were bacteria can turn into people given 3-4 billion years.
Alan Clarke in reply to Terncote (Show the comment) 7 minutes ago
“not common descent were bacteria can turn into people given 3-4 billion years.”
You are saying that a blastula can’t turn into a human baby given 9 months because his parents are blastulas! Bacterias were merely a reproductive shape intermediary step between the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA), which was not biological and not living at earth surface. If you see the picture of LUCA model from Matrix/DNA Theory you will see the human face previously designed in the sky.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
FROM THE LATEST EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED FUSION SITE IT’S CLEAR THAT THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT A HEAD TO HEAT TELOMERE FUSION OCCURRED WITH EVOLUTION GRADUALLY ELIMINATING THE RECORD OF THE FUSION BY N.S. SINCE TELOMERES WHICH ARE DESIGNED AS TERMINATION POINTS WOULD MITIGATE THE EVENT. THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT 2 CENTROMERE CO-EXISTED WITH N.S. NULLIFYING THE NEGATIVE INFLUENCE OF A SECOND CENTROMERE THAT WOULD MAKE THE CHROMOSOME UNSTABLE.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Steve Malkony (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago
Don’t worry with this rationally acceptable theoretical event because it does not denies your theoretical ID. The final result we see at chrom 2 is just the way Nature records mechanisms and process into matter for this material structure works. A sample of this process is the case when nature discarded the top of reptile evolution – dinosaurs- and went back in time catching the smaller cynodont for continuing evolution to mammals. The ape was discarded as the dinosaur. Previous design.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
LMAO. You just told a fairy tale story. The scientific method of the evil lying atheists/evolutionists is to tell “Lamarckistic” stories. Sorry evil lying deluded atheist, the Real Scientific Method doesn’t use just-so Lamarckistic stories it uses empirical methods. The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation. Loosing DNA you say, that would be devolution. Information can only come from a mind i.e. of God; Mindless and lifeless elements can’t.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago
“The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation.”
Ok, I am going back to Amazon jungle next month for developing my researches, you are invited. I will introduce you to Marilyn, a female orangutan that’s my friend, you can leave with her for two weeks because, for sure, you will die (if not by a snake, at least by malaria) and she will continue alive. Than, from the hell, you will phone to me saying: “Yes, you were right…”
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
LMAO. You just told a fairy tale story. The scientific method of the evil lying atheists/evolutionists is to tell “Lamarckistic” stories. Sorry evil lying deluded atheist, the Real Scientific Method doesn’t use just-so Lamarckistic stories it uses empirical methods. The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation. Loosing DNA you say, that would be devolution. Information can only come from a mind i.e. of God; Mindless and lifeless elements can’t.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago
Ok, now we can change our ideas. Maybe you are right saying that information can only come from a mind. The Matrix/DNA Theory has calculated Universal History in the reverse way, from here and now towards the Big Bang. At the Big Bang I stopped because I know my little brain can not go ahead, rationally. But wasting time, projecting the natural logistic saw here for calculating what’s was going on before the Big Bang, the results suggests a natural system with consciousness. Is it yours God?!
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“Loosing DNA you say, that would be devolution”
The Maxwell Demon is a discovery that it is easier to get new good information than lose the bad ones. DNA is full of repetitive not useful information inserted by retrovirus and inserted by wrong pathways of ancestors that were discarded by evolution. Cleaning these bad informations is not devolution, is the way for the best use of its energy.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation.”
Ok, I am going back to Amazon jungle next month for developing my researches, you are invited. I will introduce you to Marilyn, a female orangutan that’s my friend, you can leave with her for two weeks because, for sure, you will die (if not by a snake, at least by malaria) and she will continue alive. Than, from the hell, you will phone to me saying: “Yes, you were right…”
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You mention research in the Amazon but have you ever been published in a peer reviewed journal? Has your research ever been able to withstand scrutiny?
How is an animal being better adapted to it’s habitat than a human evidence for overall health? Health is not a measure of ones ability to survive a foreign and hostile environment. Contrasting the Orangutang with local tribes of humans that have also adapted to those surroundings is a much fairer comparison but still doesn’t address health.
Kenith Adams in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 12 minutes ago
“You mention research in the Amazon but have you ever been published in a peer reviewed journal?”
My website says at the first page an advice: this job does not pretend to be scientific. Because, the method of comparative anatomy was practiced by Greeks before the emergency of scientific reductionist method and modern Science has rejected my systemic method initialized by Bertalanffy “General Theory of Systems” and the works of Capra, Margullis, etc. It is my right to tell about any theory.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“than a human evidence for overall health?”
My friend, the most healthier does not need medicine and evidence for overall health. It is a product of the environment, well synchronized, that’s it. But my saying that the ape’s bodies is most perfect machine than human body is based also on my models of LUCA, which is the creator of this biosphere and apes. I am seeing in the models that evolution was driven till apes for reproducing LUCA which is the most perfect machine. Humans are out.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
IT SURE IS LAMARCKISM. IF YOU LISTEN TO THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY EVIL EVOLUTIONIST IT IS LAMARCKISM I.E. THE IDEA THE TRAITS WILL PASS ON TO THE OFFSPRING DUE TO USE OR EXPOSURE I.E. THE GIRAFFE HAS A LONG NECK FROM PAST ANCESTOR STRETCHING TO REACH THE LEAVES HIGHER IN THE TREE AND THE LONGER NECK WAS A SURVIVAL ADVANTAGE THAT ALLOWED MORE OFFSPRING THAT THOSE WITH SHORTER NECKS. THIS WAS NICELY FALSIFIED BUT IT IS STILL USED TO DECEIVE THE PUBLIC.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 22 minutes ago
My friend, giraffes has long necks because Nature ( created by your God or other way) permits it.There is a mechanism at light waves electromagnetic spectrum level, which we can see also at systemic astronomical formation level, that is a circuit through which flows information. Any natural system can use this mechanism, can cut it for becoming shorter, or expand it for to be longer. I am telling you: while we can’t go outside this Universe, don’t worry with evolution, ID is safe, Bible not.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
PART 2 OF 2
I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.” Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859; 1984 edition ), p. 184.
WILL YOU RETRACT YOUR EVIL LIES?
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago
I can see no difficult either. One problem of yours is about not thinking in relativistic way. Why the emphasis in the word “montruous”? It is due its size. But it is considered big in relation to what parameter? In relation to a galaxy, whales are microscopic. Perfect suitable for existing as not “monstrous”. So, wales are not montruous bears. And this “Natural Selection” working here is the agent of an environment that was produced by a monster system produced by Eve before the Fall. Right?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
You are indoctrinated with all the atheistic pseudoscience of evolution.
Evolutionist falsely claim a chromosome fusion to make it appear that a human chromosome fusion lead to and is evidence of evolution. “[There're] Millions of differences between human and chimpanzee DNA”. In the Y chromosome, chimps have only two-thirds as many distinct genes or gene families as humans. Also, more than 30% of the chimp Y chromosome lacks an alignable counterpart on the human Y chromosome and vice versa”.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to Steve Malkony (Show the comment) 6 minutes ago
That’s the way evolution works. The chimp’s body is healthier than human body, it is almost a perfect biological machine for facing the real virgin Nature that’s the jungle. So, from the phenotypic aspect it is going “degeneration” which means “losing DNA material”. But we know that from apes to humans DNA has increased its material. Why the paradox? Because since first humans evolution is working at brains and its sensory levels. So, it lacks alignable counterpart and vice versa
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
@parsivalshorse “There simply is no competing theory”
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck
Alan Clarke in reply to parsivalshorse 1 hour ago
This is food for tought and remembers the same great Teilhard that you mentioned in other post. I noticed that suddenly, at the generation of 1970/2000, lots of people were talking the word “matrix”. That’s never had before. Why? There was anything new discovered about matrixes. I required copyrights of my book “Matrix/DNA” at 1980 and 20 years later they did the movie with almost similar idea. It seems that a collective consciousness (Teilhard) wake up for a new fact. People around the world.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 1 second ago
It seems that this unconscious collective mind of Chardin meets the “meme”of Dawkins with the punctuated equilibrium of Gould at same time. Very curious, don’t you think so?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Secondly, (this is crucial) we must assume that everything has an origin, including our reality as a whole. Once we accept the premise that our existence cannot explain itself or account for its own origin, it follows rationally that something outside our scientific realm of understanding must account for its creation. Hopefully I explained this well enough, I apologize if its not clear.
Silas Rainville in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
Unfortunately, your assumptions don’t fit observed reality.
Self-organization is a a fact of nature at all levels.
Emergent phenomenon are all around us.
You are arguing from ignorance.
marksmith1117 in reply to Silas Rainville (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
No. Let’s see a sample of self-organization: Chinatown. People arriving from all different places of China to a same point in spacetime trends to meet, to stands next, to organizes and transforming the environment into a new shape remembering China. So, Chinatown was not self-organization of Chinatown, it was re-organization of informations coming from a past organized system. That’s the way that informations coming from an astronomical organized system has organized the first cell system
TheMatrixDNA in reply to marksmith1117 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You are right, see my post as rebuttal to Marksmith that had criticized you post. There is no self-organization triggering origins of anything.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Silas Rainville (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“The existence of our reality cannot be explained through human thought. ”
That is an assertion fallacy with no basis in reality. Why can’t we understand the existence of our reality?
“Rationally, it seems more reasonable to believe that something outside of our realm of understanding is accountable for the origin of reality. ”
That is the exact opposite of rationale and reasoning. The rational stance is to not accept extraordinary claims with absolutely no evidence.
Kenith Adams in reply to Silas Rainville (Show the comment) 11 hours ago
That is an assertion fallacy with no basis in reality. Why can’t we understand the existence of our reality?
Because our brain can not process the information of this world as having a beginning, neither the information of this world as having no beginning. And our brain can not grasp a third alternative. So, we need wait the evolution of our brain.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
It is not an assertion fallacy, you just failed to reflect on it deeply enough. If we break down everything we know to exist into the smallest form of matter possible, physicists still cannot explain its origin. This is a very basic principle, or the law of conservation of mass. Assuming that our scientific understanding applies universally, it is evident that we cannot find an explanation for our existence in its entirety. The same concept applies also for time, space, etc.
Silas Rainville in reply to Kenith Adams 1 hour ago
But we can elaborate falsiable theories that makes sense. it is enough that you has the right knowledge of universal evolution and projects its logics upon the existence before the origins. Because these origins must be a natural and logic effect of that chain of causes and effects that must happened before the origins. That’s what Matrix/DNA Theory did for finding a natural system existing before Big Bang and finding a half-biological/half-mechanical system before life origins.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Silas Rainville (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
I am not infering any such thing.
I am stating that ENCODE is jumping the gun on thier claims and that, based on what we already do know, thier claims of that much DNA being functional vs simply interactive is premature and I highly doubt it will pan out being correct.
whiteowl1415 in reply to RogerS4JC (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
Why are there long chains of repetitive “letters”? Considering that DNA is the chemical counterface of biological architectures, every letter must be a chemical record corresponding to a real architeture. So, why the long repetitions? Answer: it means extended evolutionary periods of stasis, without significant evolution. So, billions of years can run without any significant change but time does not stop because at any place something is moving and added to time. That’s cosmological evolution.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to whiteowl1415 1 hour ago
No, that is just you spewing garbage.
Why the long repetitions?
Because there is only so many ways you can you 4 letters in a 3,200,000,000 character genome, idiot.
whiteowl1415 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 39 minutes ago
You are saying that 3.200,000,000 character genome is a building made with iron, cement, cheese and marmalade, idiot.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 31 minutes ago
You called DNA a “building block”.
Idiot.
marksmith1117 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 28 minutes ago
Never I said that. DNA is not a building block. It is the biological counterpart of a universal Matrix that we can see using our intelligence at every natural system, from atoms to galaxies. You misunderstood it, idiot.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to marksmith1117 (Show the comment) 5 minutes ago
No, I am saying the sequenced part of it, the bases, are composed of guanine, adenine, thymine, and cytosine (G,A,T,C)..Idiot
whiteowl1415 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 19 minutes ago
I ammmmm sssssayiiiiiing thhhhhhe sammmmmmmmmmme thiiiiiiing. Excuse-me, these repetitions of letters is because I am written relativistically in cosmological evolutionary time which is ways more longer than your time. Do you understand, idiot?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 minute ago
Heck no. He meant guanine, thymine, cytosine, and adenine (G,A,T,C)
NuggetKazooie in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 14 minutes ago
And I mean the something. These molecules at nucleotides are material tools made by natural forces called “universal functions” because these forces are the motions that organizes inertial matter into systems. What he is suggesting is that the building of 3.200.000.000 letters represents things, substances, that were out of the long universal chain of causes and effects ( aka “evolution”) He is saying that this building is made of iron and cheese.because probability does not forbidden it.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Its a chemical chain that when fed though the right cellular systems tell the body how and when to make everything it needs.
ActuatedGear in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 29 minutes ago in playlistNew Releases
Very good, I agree. It makes something that your computer do when you are writing a text in Word. But chemical chain alone as the computer’s hardware alone couldn’t do it. Both needs a software. See the diagram of this natural software at Matrix/DNA Theory.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to ActuatedGear (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“Never I said that. DNA is not a building block” TheMatrixDNA in reply to marksmith1117 17 minutes ago
…..
” DNA is merely a pile of building blocks”
– TheMatrixDNA in reply to marksmith1117 (Show the comment) 6 days ago
…..
Liar?
Or just STUPID?
I say BOTH.
marksmith1117 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 24 minutes ago
That’s not DNA as building block, stupid! Horizontals laterals pairs of nucleotides are biological building blocks as unit of informations because they are the same configuration of those seven astronomical bodies organized as systems by the vital cycles process which is triggered by any electromagnetic spectrum of light wave…, my brother so stupid like I am because we, both, don’t know the Truth. Piles, like DNA, are mass of systems, not systems itself. And biological information are packets
TheMatrixDNA in reply to marksmith1117 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Yeah….
1) You draw a bad annalogy that DNA is like a Building
2) You draw a bad anaology to language… 2a) Because the 4 letters in DNA are not the same as using the 26 letters in the english alphabet 2b) Because it isn’t actualy a language, it is chemical reactions that some idiot compared to a language in the same type of bad analogy you just did
whiteowl1415 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 37 minutes ago
1) Not if you see the human body as a building; 2a) it is not the same when you are talking metaphysical ideas. Those chemical basis are real tools performing real actions; 2b) It is not a language as the misunderstanding that DNA should be a code expressing a message. Each nucleotide-pair derives from a universal perfect closed system formula as fractals that are diversified for composing new larger fractal.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Birney was right about the scepticism. Gregory says, “80 percent is the figure only if your definition is so loose as to be all but meaningless.” Larry Moran from the University of Toronto adds, “Functional” simply means a little bit of DNA that’s been identified in an assay of some sort or another. That’s a remarkably silly definition of function and if you’re using it to discount junk DNA it’s downright disingenuous.”
Carrie Coco 3 hours ago
That 80 percent covers many classes of sequence that were thought to be essentially functionless. These include introns – the parts of a gene that are cut out at the RNA stage, and don’t contribute to a protein’s manufacture. “The idea that introns are definitely deadweight isn’t true,” says Birney.
Carrie Coco 3 hours ago
So, that 80 percent figure… Let’s build up to it.
We know that 1.5 percent of the genome codes for proteins. That much is clearly functional and we’ve known that for a while. ENCODE also looked for places in the genome where proteins stick to DNA – sites where, most likely, the proteins are switching a gene on or off. They found 4 million such switches, which together account for 8.5 percent of the genome.* (
Carrie Coco 4 hours ago
(Birney: “You can’t move for switches.”) That’s already higher than anyone was expecting, and it sets a pretty conservative lower bound for the part of the genome that definitively does something.
Carrie Coco in reply to Carrie Coco (Show the comment) 4 hours ago
In fact, because ENCODE hasn’t looked at every possible type of cell or every possible protein that sticks to DNA, this figure is almost certainly too low. Birney’s estimate is that it’s out by half. This means that the total proportion of the genome that either creates a protein or sticks to one, is around 20 percent.
Carrie Coco in reply to Carrie Coco (Show the comment) 4 hours ago
To get from 20 to 80 percent, we include all the other elements that ENCODE looked for – not just the sequences that have proteins latched onto them, but those that affects how DNA is packaged and those that are transcribed at all. Birney says, “[That figure] best coveys the difference between a genome made mostly of dead wood and one that is alive with activity.” [Update 5/9/12 23:00: For Birney's own, very measured, take on this, check out his post. ]
Carrie Coco in reply to Carrie Coco (Show the comment) 4 hours ago
I think that scientists of ENCODE and elsewhere are not thinking rationally about DNA and Nature as a whole. That’s the reason that is keeping very slow those researches and experiments. Matrix/DNA Theory is a new and novel naturalistic thinking that suggests a different picture. What’s DNA? Merely a pile of a simple system (nucleotide-horizontal-pair) diversified into millions of different shapes connected into separated groups (genes) that resembles the same system-formula, that are
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Carrie Coco (Show the comment) 1 second ago
aligned as two helix because they are assembled over a template: a simple wave of light. This “pile” is the record of events that were the experiences of this systemic formula through time and space. But this history did not began here and biologically, it began at the Big Bang. So, the atomic and cosmological evolution are recorded in that region we call “junk-DNA” in a time that DNA was not biological but a kind of physical Matrix. Here we see why proteins stick to genes also.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Evolution is both a fact and a theoryThe fact is that it has happened. See the fossil record and also see Stephen J Gould’s paper, Evolution as a Fact and a Theory.The fact is that it has happened as per the fossil record.The theory is the mechanism for how it has happened. That is natural selection, sexual selection, etc.Creationists like to mix these two points up..The scientific community considers evolution a fact.The only people who reject evolution do so for reasons that are not scientific
TheRainmaker2001 in reply to epicnegroable (Show the comment) 6 minutes ago
Great post! The difference between the real and observed natural process of evolution and the theory called “Darwinian”, or even the Modern Synthesis. Congratulations you have written in good English what I was trying to say. The real mechanisms seen today here and now that constitutes the interpretation of Evolution are not the whole mechanisms that acts over evolution. So, there is a distance between evolution and modern interpretation of it ( called “theory’). Astronomy will solve it.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheRainmaker2001 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Astronomy has nothing to do with the mechanisms of heritable traits in living organisms.
marksmith1117 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 32 minutes ago
You are right in relation to shorter times. But Astronomy has alterations that are altering our astronomical systems that are altering our environmental biosphere that are causing mutations at genomes by a kind of punctuated jumps See the mechanisms of alterations at matrix/DNA cosmological models) . So, you are wrong at longer times, that’s why modern evolution theory is not complete and can not shut up the arguments from creationists that are bringing on gaps seen in this theory.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to marksmith1117 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.
GOD DID NOT CLAIM TO “WRITE” THE BIBLE.
GOD INSTRUCTED HIS PROPHETS TO WRITE WHAT HE SAID IN A BOOK, OR MEN WROTE WHAT THEY SAW, HEAR, AND EXPERIENCED IN A BOOK WITH THE INSPIRATION FROM GOD.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to arthurjeremypearson (Show the comment) 9 hours ago
So, is God inspiring salvage natives of the jungle till today? Because the scenes and symbols that were the sources for genesis narrative are talked by those natives as were talked by orientals thousands years ago when they elaborated the narratives of I Ching, chakras, etc. These sources are images end events about the software aspect of matter/energy that pops up as fast flashes into primordial minds remembering their ancestry when we were non biological system. See sources Matrix/DNA models
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN 2 hours ago
XXX
Everyone believes in God, but not everyone believes in the His Free Gift. Everything is clearly seen… “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse…” (Romans 1:20) People that claim to not believe in God actually do believe, but they try to persuade themselves that He doesn’t exist. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” Rom 1:22
caycug1 in reply to Tom Adams (Show the comment) 59 minutes ago
Maybe you are right, all of us should appreciate that should be a God, souls, we should be eternal, etc. “Yours “Romans” citation is very smart and appropriated here. It is an advice against the creationism expressed by texts in the Bible. Why? For the invisible things of him are clearly seen… but…where are they seen? In the reign of imaginations of those Bible’s writers? No. It is clearly seen in Nature. Genesis is a not honesty try to jump the observation of Nature as Science do it.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to caycug1 37 minutes ago
” Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” (Romans 1:25) Nature is not God. God is a Spirit.
caycug1 in reply to TheMatrixDNA 28 minutes ago
If God wanted that you – human creature – know him as spirit, he should not create you as fresh meat and this material world for you to discover him. He did you and nature in this way for you studying here, learning here. Trying to escape from here and going straight to the spiritual realm is escaping from the classroom. Scientists are more god sons of God than creationists.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to caycug1 (Show the comment) 14 minutes ago
“God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:24)
caycug1 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 27 minutes ago
John was wrong and God showed it when not attending his prayers for to save the women and childrens at Cezar’s arena by being eaten by lions.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to caycug1 (Show the comment) 11 minutes ago
And Jesus Christ, like John, learned that it is not good deviating humans minds towards spirituals imaginations through the hard and painful way. This is phrase at the crux: “Yahveh, Yahweh, why had you abandoned me?” Answer from Yahveh should be: “Humans’ brains are not made and not able to grasp the infinite dimensions. You were lying and prejudicing their evolution. As are you doing now when teaching creationism to children that will face evolution at school. Just my humble opinion.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
““We talk about the ‘march from monad to man’ (old-style language again) as though evolution followed continuous pathways to progress along unbroken lineages. Nothing could be further from reality…..Moreover life shows no trend to complexity in the usual sense — only an asymmetrical expansion of diversity around a starting point constrained to be simple.”
–Stephen Jay Gould
odinata in reply to John Heininger (Show the comment) 7 hours ago
Gould was very smarter discoverying puntuacted equillibrium, but he had no knowledge of data for understanding how and why evolution makes biological system to progress towards complexity. In fact there is a parameter for approving Gould: division of DNA. When the left side builts the right side. The new right molecule seems an asymmetrical expansion of diversity around a starting point, simple, as is the chemical soup. But, as science can change pigments and making pink babies, Nature does it.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to odinata (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“If there is no increase in complexity, you have no genetic increase or evolutionary assention,..”
Gibberish.
Stephen Jay Gould notes that MOST evolution is not in a direction of “increased complexity”.
odinata in reply to John Heininger (Show the comment) 7 hours ago
Gould was right referring to biological systems if they were the drivers of their evolution. The complexity is in the environment, the informations for complexity are in the air, coming from the Newtonian cosmological mechanics. Everything here are forced to mimicks the sky, the larger system that Earths belongs to. That’s why organisms works as machines, insects societies works as machines, and we are building the mechanical social system of “The Brave New World”. But “mind” is a mutation.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to odinata (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
““There is no progress in evolution. The fact of evolutionary change through time doesn’t represent progress as we know it. Progress is not inevitable. Much of evolution is downward in terms of morphological complexity, rather than upward. We’re not marching toward some greater thing. The actual history of life is awfully damn curious in the light of our usual expectation that there’s some predictable drive toward a generally increasing complexity in time.”
–Stephen Jay Gould
odinata in reply to John Heininger (Show the comment) 7 hours ago
Gould was analyzing biological evolution as a biological observer located at this biological biosphere. No such observer will grasp the final results of evolutionary process, because, as established by Godel’s theorem, nobody can understand a system or process standing inside it. And this is just the biggest mistake of all evolutionists, when separating biological from cosmological evolution. You see progress in evolution if you go out from here as observer, as did Matrix/DNA Theory
TheMatrixDNA in reply to odinata (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
“Your world gets complicated when you don’t believe in evolution” Ok, “science” is observation. We never observed dinosaurs, so we have to take REAL science and use it to support our faith, whether it be in a big bang or a big flood. But mr Nye, you would accept math as a nearly immovable science. It is a constant; equasions don’t lie. Look at the probability of a big bang jumpstarting life, and then you shall have your answer. Your belief is just as much a faith-based relief as us “ignorants”
ShunkawakanOkawingha 15 minutes ago
Mr. Shunk, you are right saying that Math is linear, constant. But Evolution is not, it is curve. The line of Evolution of matter organizing systems since the starting point of a Big Bang in a Cartesian Graphic having times and space as coordinates draw a final design. just the image of DNA. At short spaces it seems straight (phosphorus strands), but at larger spaces you see the whole being curved, till reversing, as the strands of DNA do it with its sugars. Math does not interpret evolution.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to ShunkawakanOkawingha (Show the comment) 1 second ago
@”starting point of a Big Bang in a Cartesian Graphic having times and space as”
Stop this word salad nonsense!
How the fuck does SPACE get represented as a CARTESIAN graphic?
emfederin in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 27 minutes ago
“Look at the probability of a big bang jumpstarting life”
Mr. Shunk, please, look at the probability of that microscopic lump at the middle of a “giant”ovule, which lump explodes like a big bang, genes are free and begins the works for producing a new life. The probability should be zero, but you know it happens. If Nature is showing here that it happens ( and if you believes that this Nature was created by a God, it means that God is showing it) why don’t you believe in Nature?!
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Ok, my conrade emfederin, brother in the faith of the lovely, tiny, lord PinkUnicorn. Try this:
Draw a single cartesian graphic where a vertical line is transversed by a horizontal line. At the vertical put the name “time” and other will be space. At the exact point of the axis, writes “Big Bang”. Now, begins a third line starting at the point of the axis and applies everything you know about quantum, relativistic, genetic, etc, aspects of matter. You will discover big secrets.Pink bless you
TheMatrixDNA in reply to emfederin (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
brownian motion?
citation?
I’m tired of tracking down irrelevance here…
Tom Adams in reply to TheMatrixDNA 51 minutes ago
The movements of animals are interpreted as random by those that does not know the movements and forces of particles of atoms that composes the body of animals. Different from random Brownian motions. Brownian motions is part of particles theory which will be, also, known not be random when Science will know better the quantum dimension. But it is not enough to know atomic theory for understanding animals at Amazon jungle: You need know the shower of new laws that these atoms take from Milk Way
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Tom Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
whatever science you have is derived from the Holy Scriptures which fostered truth rather than lies…
why do you lie to yourself, anyways?
Tom Adams in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 48 minutes ago
The truth fostered by the Holly Scriptures has produced the monstrous Christians crusades and Inquisition, the maintaining of social systems based on slavery because those scriptures, for five times, says that slavery is God approved, etc. No, my friend, I love my brothers of my species and I want the best for all without any racist discrimination, so, I need another source of truth that fits humans conditions. This source is Nature, but not the chaotic and salvage face of Nature here.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Tom Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Are you suggesting the ‘everything’ follows the same patterns? Patterns revolving around Phi? Like flowers on a plant that can be reduced to an intricate repeating pattern? Like the face of the Matrix!
Peter van der Meer in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 18 minutes ago
That’s why the method of comparative anatomy among living and non-living systems are suggesting to me. As merely a theory, I could be on the wrong way. If the Matrix formula I had showed at my website is right and really existent ( I am testing against facts) DNA is merely the biological shape of a more deeper universal system (Matrix) that has organized matter into systems applying electromagnetic spectrum of light waves. The problem of these patterns – this formula is under evolution, mutating
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Peter van der Meer (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
@”There is another approach for trying to understand the connections, interactions and variations between magnetic fields of planets and stars – projecting what we know about interactions between nucleus and electrons of atoms, but calculating the interferences from Milk Way”
WTF does that even MEAN??? It’s nothing but gibberish. Are you an author who has a book to sell by any chance?
emfederin in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 7 minutes ago
You can’t understand a talk about Orion’s lifeform and civilization without seeing pictures and graphics for clarifying the concepts. It is so different, never imagined before. So, why I am here talking about Matrix/DNA worldvision if I can’t bring the pictures and graphics? Because, like one day you will be obligated to survive with the Orion’s lifeform, and it is better staying prepared for, also at the next corner of paradigms shift, you will be obligated to survive in this Matrix/DNA world
TheMatrixDNA in reply to emfederin (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
“Here is the place that every one brings his theoretical worldvision…”
For something to be a theory it has to have evidenciary suport.
Evolution is a Theory.
Everything else being spouted here are as-hoc arguments that remain unsupported
whiteowl1415 in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 7 hours ago
That’s funny! Creationists says that atheists must bring on evidences. Atheists shows millions of evidences and creationists repeats that atheists must bring on evidences. But atheists does the same thing about others theories. They repeats at nauseum asking for evidences, Matrix/DNA Theory brings on thousands of evidences, and they says it is as-hoc arguments without rationally debunking these evidences. War of worldvisions! Beautiful!
TheMatrixDNA in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
NASA refutes HTBK.
“NASA has renamed twin satellites, originally known as the Radiation Storm Belt Probes, to the Van Allen Probes in honor of James Van Allen, the scientist who helped launch the field of magnetospheric science. The Van Allen Probes have turned on and tested all instruments and are beginning their prime science mission: observing the giant belts of radiation around Earth in order to understand what causes them to swell and shrink in response to incoming radiation from the sun.”
NuggetKazooie 35 minutes ago
There is another approach for trying to understand the connections, interactions and variations between magnetic fields of planets and stars – projecting what we know about interactions between nucleus and electrons of atoms, but calculating the interferences from Milk Way. The problem for Science now is that they does not know the Matrix/DNA theoretical model of this galaxy for grasping those influences.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
FAILED PROPHETS OF EVOLUTION
“evolution as a whole doubtless had a general direction, from simple to complex” – T. Dobzhansky
500 MILLION YEAR OLD BUG BRAIN FOSSIL — “the 3in long fossil shows that insects evolved to have complex brains much earlier than previously thought… The discovery, which is reported in the October edition of the journal Nature, suggests insect brains evolved from a previously complex structure to a more simple one, rather than the other way round, researchers said.”
Alan Clarke 5 hours ago
This is more one evidence for Matrix/DNA Theory. In fact, insects had evolved brains due grasping more bits-informations from environmental photons coming from LUCA, the whole astronomical system here. Why the reversed evolution? Because insects went the wrong way, repeating the sin of Adam/Eve at the Garden Paradise. They became a closed system, the extreme expression of selfishness, and we can see it at the automated social systems of bees and ants, which are exactly copies of LUCA.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Wiki; In western Classical Antiquity, theism was the fundamental belief that supported the divine right of the state (Polis, later the Roman Empire). Historically, any person who did not believe in any deity supported by the state was fair game to accusations of atheism, a capital crime. For political reasons, Socrates in Athens (399 BCE) was accused of being ‘atheos’ (“refusing to acknowledge the gods recognized by the state”).
Yeah, probably not a good idea to write anything down lol.
mewrenchturner in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
Yes, but then, creationists uses this history for argument that religion from Gods words and rules expressed in the commandments were the source for that morality applied by kings that socialized salvage people into social systems. But how the salvage kings and illiterates bible’s authors had the intelligence for elaborating systems’ rules? Matrix/DNA found an explanation when discovering that salvages natives in jungle ” see” flows of natural systems organizations and applies them socially.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to mewrenchturner (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
That’s a valid point, Nugget, against the creationist theory. But this broad array of not enough conditions for starting and maintaining/catalysing the primordial processes required for starting life needs a lot of calculations for “how Earth’s primordial soup got all of them”.
But, the rational way is observing how Nature works. Every time she produces a new life she produces an egg inside a womb and inserts seeds. For abiogenesis is missing the knowledge about the seed… the Matrix/DNA
TheMatrixDNA in reply to NuggetKazooie 10 hours ago
What really is the Matrix/DNA theory? Far as I’ve heard it doesn’t sound coherent at all.
My point is valid, since it helps disprove creation because, if the Nebula Theory is true, then it would make sense that there are other worlds that can be hospitable. If the seven days theory is true, then we should see signs we were created, like: We’re the only hospitable place here, Saturn’s rings should be be the same age, etc etc.
NuggetKazooie in reply to TheMatrixDNA 10 hours ago
I am suggesting that the egg could be Earth, the womb could be the solar system. If so, what’s and where is the system, the species, the father/mother, that furnished the seed, where the solar system ( the womb) is located? These questions makes us lifting our eyes and see beyond: the galactic system. But how and why this astronomical system, this hypothetical last non-living ancestor could be similar to the first living being ( a cell system) and how it was transmitted to here? That’s Matrix.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to NuggetKazooie 10 hours ago
So the Matrix/DNA is just a metaphorical theory?
NuggetKazooie in reply to TheMatrixDNA 8 minutes ago
What exactly is the matrix/DNA theory?
NuggetKazooie in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 11 minutes ago
The first living being was a complete system with certain properties, as genetic code, reproduction, metabolism, homeostasis, etc. What has produced this system? Since that this system makes news systems using himself as template, he must be produced by the same process. Then, which was the template that produced this first living system? The template needs to show all those properties, everything less evolved. Then I designed the template: it is a new cosmological theoretical model.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Because the teachers of Biology and Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution didn’t have answers for my questions. One does not need be a creationist for not agree or not see sense in those explanations. So, I went searching better answers for myself. And I found then at the level where Biology was created: the astronomical level. You never will understand Biology, DNA, life and evolution if you ignores their creator. And with this fault, you never will be able to convince creationists.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 18 hours ago
Really? Well given that there is no such thing as the ‘Neo Darwinian Theory of Evolution’ – how can that possibly be true?
parsivalshorse in reply to TheMatrixDNA 3 minutes ago
This is not a honesty tactic. You know what I am talking about. Names does not matter, facts, yes. If you are supposing that I am not actually informed about every aspect of this scientific theory today you are wrong. Included I have noticed that the interpretations of this natural process called evolution was broken into two parts: cosmological and biological evolution. That’s very wrong because you can’t explains biological evolution without the mechanisms and effects coming from the whole.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
( êste debate foi o mais interessante e perdí todas as cópias quando caiu a luz. voltar a copiar)
XXX
DO YOU EVEN TRACK WHAT HE HAS DONE? DO YOU SUPPORT PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION, ABORTION FOR ANY REASON, OR HOMO UNIONS? ONLY THE SPERM OF THE BIOLOGICAL FATHER AND THE EGG OF THE BIOLOGICAL MOTHER CAN BE MARRIED AS GOD DESIGNED. ONLY THIS MARRIAGE IF NOT KILLED IN THE WOMB PRODUCES/MAINTAINS THE HUMANKIND/SPECIES.
TWO OR MORE MALES SHARING BODY CAVITIES, GENTLES AND FLUIDS WILL NOT PRODUCE A HUMAN AND THE SAME IS TRUE FOR WOMEN.
NO CHILD SHOULD BE SUBJECTED TO THIS IN THE WORLD OR SUCH AS PARENTS.
HISTRUTHBEKNOWN in reply to emfederin (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
Nope. Yours “God” has designed hermaphrodites too, where there are no biological fathers/mothers and still can produces/maintain the species. But this is an interesting issue. The creators of biological systems at Earth had a hermaphroditic configuration and working mechanism that self-recycles them, which mechanism is the ancestor of sexual reproduction. See Matrix/DNA “photo” of that creators.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
@”My guess is you didn’t read any of the 61 arguments”
Answering for myself, you’d be right.
Creationist sites offering evidences against various scientific establishments is about as believable a source as “free energy” websites offering evidences against thermodynamics.
When these articles hit the pages of Nature or Scientific American, then they would be worthy of investigation.
Until then, if there’s any real evidences revealed, they’re buried under timewasting crap.
emfederin in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 20 minutes ago
That’s very bad! What is happening today with the dictatorship of scholar worldvision. This modern mindset that took the controls of human scientific enterprise will leads Humanity to the repugnant “Brave New World under the rules of Big Mother”, like the ants and bees societies, because the scholar staff does not know the natural system that is still driven evolution here, which is like the Newtonian cosmological machine. Creationism makes no sense today but our brain can’t grasp the Truth yet
TheMatrixDNA in reply to emfederin (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
@TheMatrixDNA “core of Genesis has the same source of Kekulé inspiration”
What’s more amazing is that if Genesis was derived by a dream, it was a dream like no other:
GENESIS BASED ON A DREAM? (1 of 3) — These are the names of Esau’s sons; Eliphaz the son of Adah the wife of Esau, Reuel the son of Bashemath the wife of Esau.And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz. And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek: these were the sons
Alan Clarke in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 17 minutes ago
Alan, that’s non sequitur. The humans interpretations based in that “dream” were the source for the imaginative effort trying to understand the mysteries of past times, like the creation of the world and men.Since that the flashes flowing in their minds were about ancestry registered in DNA memories, and relative to past dimensions (astronomical, atomic, etc) this stranger worlds leads to magical thinking. You are sharing genesis into two: talking about real people at Earth, not initial Genesis
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Adam/Eve were the illiterate interpretations of ancient men still with fresh brains that can bring to memories the ancient times of ours non-living ancestors ( astronomical systems, atoms systems, etc.) Natives in Amazon jungle has the same visions today, as had the hindus/chineses with the same images used for to elaborate the symbols of I Ching. Go read the Secret Doctrine, about Schion ben Jochai, thousands years before the Bible, and see the models of Matrix/DNA, who were Adam/Eve.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
I understand that you are not arguing for creationism or ID, but why is it that your posts always seem to confuse and conflate cosmological notions with biology?
parsivalshorse in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
Because the teachers of Biology and Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution didn’t have answers for my questions. One does not need be a creationist for not agree or not see sense in those explanations. So, I went searching better answers for myself. And I found then at the level where Biology was created: the astronomical level. You never will understand Biology, DNA, life and evolution if you ignores their creator. And with this fault, you never will be able to convince creationists.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Well you could argue that there should be millions of transitional species in the fossil record but we see none. Of course evo/bios claim there are and put up a few dozen examples but they don’t hold up as proof because of the lack of genetic lineage. The greats facts evo’s use to support their views is the one you’re using and that is “it is fact” and there is no disputing it which is laughable at best.
BigWater59 in reply to Usul573 (Show the comment) 7 hours ago
“lack of genetic lineage”
Is that true? Are you saying that the transitional fossils are enough for believing in evolution, but at genetic level it is proved that there is no genetic sequence? If so, the explanation is clear: there is no genetic lineage in relation to biological systems because they are related to LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor, as described in Matrix/DNA models. Mutations are caused by insertion of new shapes of nucleotides which are LUCA’s related and punctuated.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
i was asking for why are commets still here
how can diseases evolve if they are not on there host
patuer disprove the theory of spontaneous generation because darwin thought putting a piece of raw meat into a container and he thought that was proof for spontanius generation.darwin thought insects evolve from bits of food.
jony2jack1 in reply to narco73 21 hours ago
Comets are not created as the Modern Astronomic model suggest, by the oort cloud. They are produced by any old planet becoming a pulsar that has giant volcanoes and no gravity for hold on the magma expelled. Diseases by viruses: virus are a bit of Matrix/DNA genome, corresponding to Function 5, the function of reproduction, they emerge due sun’s energy and if pulled from their environment they attacks cells. Pasteur killed the photons of life in his experiment. ( Answers from Matrix/DNA models
TheMatrixDNA in reply to jony2jack1 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Speed of Light:
An article in Nature talks about the possibility of the speed of light changing over the history of the universe. Where this stems from is observational evidence that the “fine structure constant” has changed. The fine structure constant determines the exact wavelength of fine structure lines in the spectra of atoms, and measurements of the spectra of quasars suggest that it many have decreased by 0.00072 +/- 0.00018 % over the past 6-10 billion years (ref the Nature article)
DarwinsFriend 6 hours ago
That was suggested by Matrix/DNA Theory 30 years ago and the explanation is very clear. Any wave of light has seven different frequencies. When a wave is absorbed by a inertial portion of matter (like this universe), each part of that matter moves and dance accordingly to its local frequency. But, the whole wave spectrum is just a life’s cycle, so, light brings movement and life to matter. Universe is evolving under the rules of a life’s cycle. The velocity of frequencies decreases over time.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to DarwinsFriend (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Pigliucci, Gould, Long and Eldredge are on a list compiled for ICR by Henry Morris PhD (in hydraulic engineering and he pumps the BS out!). A quick search into talkorigins gives refutations of all these tired creationists talking points.
Gould said the equilibrium was more punctuated than Darwin supposed, so creationist scream “Evolutionists at war!” and “Gould discounted the fossil record” and so on and so forth, ad nauseum. Gould was justifiably pissed off at all the laughable quotemining.
ergonomover 26 minutes ago
For understanding why evolution shows long times of equilibrium and sometimes sharp changes is necessary to know that:1) There is the hierarchy of systems; 2) This hierarchy makes that invisibles systems are interfering upon biological evolution ; 3) The terrestrial biosphere evolves designed by a template, which is an astronomical system ancestor of biological systems; 4) This invisible system is a closed, perfect machine. If does not happen beneficial mutations by chance, the template do it.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to ergonomover (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Couple of questions… 1. Do you seriously think that teaching Kids that they are simply a trillion year old lab experiment and have no purpose in being alive is somehow going to keep them paying attention in school and give they a desire to learn more??? 2. If evolution is true… Shouldn’t there be thousands of transitional fossils all over the world?? Not just one or two apes with human teeth here and there?! I’m just saying you might want to look at this a little more fairly 
Godskid7642 3 minutes ago
You are right, we can not agree our kids being exposed to such “science class”. But the hypothesis of we being 13,7 billions years old and the purpose of life is not the purpose suggested in the Bible are well substantiated by factual evidences. Then, what we should chose to our kids? The right teaching: “we don’t know how this Universe began ( it it began one day), and we don’t know what kind of forces leads aminoacids to develop the first living being. I will talk about several theories…”
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Godskid7642 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
question … they say God just is, and some laugh, and I’ve listened about the Big Bang, and wonder where did the hot and dense state which expanded come from? or was it just there? Much like some feel God is? What if, there is a whole other level of being and our God is just one of many in his realm,and we are just his ant farm and this universe is just his school project? I’m going to go with following Christ just to be safe, because forbid it that man made an error in their thinking
TheRealRussG 12 minutes ago
“I’ve listened about the Big Bang, and wonder where did the hot and dense state which expanded come from? or was it just there?”
The unique faithful and best teacher we have is Nature. Ask this question to Her. I did it and She showed a hot and dense state of a genome coming from my parents and initializing the construction of my body. What it would mean? That’s this universe is like an ova, the Big Bang is like the explosion of envelope spermatozoon at the center of this ovule… No need gods.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheRealRussG (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Just my opinion on the religious dying to express themselves without being asked:
There’s a little guy at the gym I go to every morning that’s the official greeter. He professes to be a devout Catholic and must know everything about everyone – all the time – every time. Inane questions for everyone. If you get new socks – nobody else will notice, but Pepe’ is right on the story. He tells you about the socks he’s purchased in his life, prices, stores he’s shopped for socks in, and every single one of the people that he’s encountered going there, while there, and everyone he saw and talked to on the way home.
Really? Is that living?
It’s just a question, but Pepe’s routine is alien to my species (coherent – productive – time conscious human being) and I view him as an emotional vampire.over-emphasizes little things that happen to them all the time, but some folks, like my little gym buddy, make a science out of it.
Now when he approaches – I send him immediately on his way to his next victim. He never works out – he just talks, and talks and talks. That’s what his belief system has given him.
(This old bastard says “Fuck That.”)
Is that what true Communism is all about? Being totally obsessive about saying hi to everybody like a Wal-Mart greeter, asking them how their doing, how their dog’s toenail problem is coming along and sharing every thought (like I’m doing now?) that comes into tour scull? WTF?
DarwinsFriend in reply to DarwinsFriend 3 hours ago
My sorry, you are in bad situation at your gym with such guy. I can’t support them, either. So, since I am reduced to live outside academic environment, I went losing all friends. And I arrive to a point that I can’t support friendship with women also, because they never talks an issue that I am interested. That’s bad, I went to a wrong way. The human intellect has two first ways: extreme expansion or extreme introspection. The right one for surviving better should be a middle term. Right?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to DarwinsFriend 1 hour ago
Yes – that is right.
My bitch is that some religious folks have zero boundaries.
Even common wolves have boundaries. They’re conscious of borders they don’t cross – territory that’s forbidden. Step across a certain line – get bit. I was raised to respect others space.
I’m not promoting being anti-social, but walking up on me with your gigantic bullshit line is just fucking rude.
DarwinsFriend in reply to TheMatrixDNA 2 minutes ago
So, it seems we have a new theory: Every person has the tendency to expands towards two extremes. If one does not control the expansion of an imaginary supernatural worldview ( like creationism, bible) it can not control the belief that he knows the truth about each factual detail, which means no control of introspective tendency. If one ( my wrong experience) can not control the expansion towards macro and micro dimensions of Nature, he can’t control the escape from factual immediate details(?)
TheMatrixDNA in reply to DarwinsFriend (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Name the “imaginary model” of DNA that you reject.
Is it the Double Helix?
IS it that it contains genetic information?
Is it that it is inherited?
What?
marksmith1117 in reply to John Brown (Show the comment) 1 minute ago
DNA is not a code, in the sense that genes should be operating symbols of a living message. DNA is merely a pile of building blocks (horizontal par of nucleotides) which is merely the material configuration of a universal formula for natural systems. Each nucleotide-pair has something different, derived from the first, like happened in cell’s diversification starting with a single cell. The first came from Earth and the system it belongs to. And there is lots more wrong concepts about DNA.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to marksmith1117 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
@whiteowl “[Genesis should not be taught] in a science class”
I don’t disagree with that. However, if a person gets a scientific idea from the Bible, or a dream (Friedrich Kekulé, principal founder of the theory of chemical structure, discovered the ring shape of the benzene molecule after having a dream of a snake seizing its own tail), he should be allowed to present & test his hypothesis in a science forum without having his source of inspiration ridiculed.
Alan Clarke in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 31 minutes ago
You got a point. The fundamental ideas-core of Genesis has the same source of Kekulé inspiration and I discovered it after watching natives in Amazon. Kekulé had not a dream: the formula came as flash of images to his consciousness produced by DNA at his brain after extreme effort searching it. Benzene is a ring with 6 carbons that is just the configuration of a nucleotide which is the configuration of the world before life’s origins. Jochai, the Bible’s inspirator, had the same experience.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
SECULAR RELIGION — “ideas, theories or philosophies which involve no spiritual component yet possess qualities similar to those of a religion. Such qualities include DOGMA, a system of indoctrination…designated enemies… The secular religion [fills] a role which would be satisfied by a church or another religious authority.” – Wikipedia (emphasis mine)
DOGMA EXAMPLES:
@XGralgrathor “There is only one scientific theory”
@jjukil “there is only the one theory, and no competing explanations”
Alan Clarke in reply to XGralgrathor (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
Stating facts is not dogma, ignoring facts is. Both your examples are just plain truth not dogma. Is 1 + 1 = 2 dogma to you?
Kenith Adams in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 59 minutes ago
Stating facts saw here and now by human beings as observers as foundations for general theories, natural laws, creates dogmas. For instance, we know here the chaotic state of Nature, its production is this salvage, bad-designed biosphere. But, Reason suggests that this is only 33% of the final Truth, because must have the state of order and the third state, which is the result of interactions between the two extremes. And we can see only from the perspective of two frequencies of light.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
how nice you cut out the middle portion. but like we keep saying by all means. jjukil say there is the one theory and no competing explanations. but there COULD be. please provide evidence for one!
tsub0dai in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment) 59 minutes ago
Any new theory that will revolutionize the worldview suggested by Modern Darwinism will be rejected by you and all scholar staff. It will take one hundred years accumulating evidences and will wait a big discovery that will make to notice the theory. There is now the Matrix/DNA Theory: “The configuration model of the building block of primordial galaxies, considering astronomic bodies under life’s cycles, is just the ancestor of the configuration of nucleotides, so, DNA is a universal Matrix.”
TheMatrixDNA in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“There is now the Matrix/DNA Theory”
Since there is no such thing as a Matrix/DNA theory but a mere hypothesis that no one takes seriously and has no evidence to back it up, why are you making a false claim?
Atharkas in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 12 minutes ago
That’s just what I am saying: a new theory, without accurate analysis, will be rejected by the academic staff. Example? There is a website for this theory with hundreds of deeper insights as evidences and hundreds more for being added, every day a new scientific paper or a Hubble’s photo is revealed as new evidence. The indoctrination by the reductionist method is such that you forgot that the word “theory” outside this method has other definition: keep the original Greek definition.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Atharkas (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Your whole comment is nothing but a giant assertion fallacy with no foundation in reality. None of your claims are backed by evidence ergo reason does not suggest any of it.
Kenith Adams in reply to TheMatrixDNA 24 minutes ago
This is just a “creationist religious response”. It is not different the way Tom Adams are here criticizing the worldview created by Darwinism. Our “reality”is merely a fraction of the whole and if you can not see it, that’s indicative some fantasy is working your mind. This chaos around “human reality”is just what is being projected by people like Hawking upon Nature in the ordered cosmological state and theorizing ghosts black holes, cannibal galaxies, explosive Big Bangs, etc. Wrong way…
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Kenith Adams (Show the comment) 1 second ago
*pat pat*
Look, your hypothesis has no relevance to reality, it’s alright.
A website do not constitute a peer review basis. Hypothesis are shred all the time in science when they cannot stand the scientific method. It’s alright, it was an idea, but it failed, that is all.
Atharkas in reply to TheMatrixDNA 2 minutes ago
The “peer review system” is based upon the reductionist method, which reaches only 33% of real Nature. For instance, the “systemic method” was killed after Bertalanffy “General Theory of Systems” by theoretical Mathematics. The staff of medieval Church was applying the same peer review biased system over Science. But the Matrix/DNA idea is also theoretical, so it could fail. Not while it is becoming stronger every day based upon peer reviewed papers, despite they are limited to reductionism
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Atharkas (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Thank you for showing you don’t know what peer review is.
Come back when you have an actual argument.
Atharkas in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 4 minutes ago
At my website there is a lot of articles of scientists and students against the peer review system. Come back when you get knowledge about them.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Atharkas (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Wow, people who failed to have their study pass the peer review being against peer review…
I would have never imagined it!
Atharkas in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 29 seconds ago
Nope. It is several examples of approved peer-review that later was proved to be false, and lots of rejected peer review of studies that later was proved to be correct…Don’t you know that?!
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Atharkas (Show the comment) 1 second ago
So? It’s still the best way to test the different hypothesis. Sorry, but no one takes seriously your idea due to it’s lack of evidence and explanatory power of observable phenomenon, get over it.
Atharkas in reply to TheMatrixDNA 38 minutes ago
So that the peer review scholar system is not the parameter for analyzing new theories and those occurrences prove it. I am waiting in the last 30 years any observable natural phenomenon that could not be explained by Matrix/DNA models. Bring on one, please… and then, no problem, I will trow them to the garbage.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Atharkas (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
So ID failed before it established a single example of irreducible complexity, or even got as far as formulating a testable hypothesis. There is no ID theory, there never was an ID theory.
parsivalshorse in reply to Dylan Alexander (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
Ok. What do you think about this news at:
Science Daily – Avalanche of Reactions at the Origin of Life
The scientists says:
“Life arises when, subsequently, a whole cascade of further couplings takes place.
As opposed to the notion of a cool prebiotic broth, the first metabolism was not dependent on accidental events or an accumulation of essential components over thousands of years.”
Ins’t it irreducible complexity? Vulcanic flow + minerals + organic elements. Reduced to Earth?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse 1:53 AM – Tue – 06 – Nov
No that isn’t irreducible complexity. Nor did scientists ever argue that organic chemicals form by accident in the first place. Neither chemistry nor evolution are random processes. Most of those reactions in the cascade you refer to have been observed to occur naturally.
parsivalshorse in reply to TheMatrixDNA 2 minutes ago
At earth, for life begins was need: vulcanic flow, water for producing minerals from rocks, the exactly mineral catalyst, carbon… A star at the right age, a planet at the right distance and orbit… Several details coming convergent to the same point at time/space. And maybe the right location of solar system in relation to the galaxy. So, it is reducible to what? The Universe?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
To be blunt – I can’t even imagine why you would think that that article is in any way relevant to irreducible complexity.
parsivalshorse in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago
For getting the final result ( aminoacids and ability to replicate and diversifying) you need a cosmological configuration. That’s why Oparin elaborated the theory of reduced environment and Miller tried to compose it. But the pieces that composes this configuration comes from different parts, so far away as terrestrial vulcanic flows and stable/old solar system, which is determined by galaxies. If there is no ID you need to show the element beyond the galaxy that can produce this configuration
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
That’s not irreducible complexity – that’s the ‘fine tuning’ argument. And given the size of the universe the probability of all of those conditions being met at some point over the last 13 billion years is very, very high indeed.
parsivalshorse in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 10 minutes ago
I have not understood the difference between ID and fine tuning argument (FTA) . FTA is the supposition that all those conditions are derived from elements that were present one minute after the Big Bang. The Big Bang was an event that separated everything condensed in a dense point. If those conditions developed separated and converged here for production of life, and you try to reduce those aminoacids to ancestors, everything is irreducible. Or not?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Parsival, this is not a creationist argument, neither I belief in ID. I am only trying to justify that my theory, which suggests a LUCA as being the building block of astronomical systems, makes sense. Thanks by this kind of testing the rationalization of this theory.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Jesus was Jewish, all of the apostles were Jewish. The bible is a Jewish book. People have always had false notions that are not in the bible. Christianity can not take responsibility for false assumptions. No man could take Jesus life he laid it down willingly. That is why he came, to die for mans sins. That being said, evolution is still just a false religion, and not a science.
illegalconspiracy in reply to Carrie Coco (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago
If you have power, could you permit the drug dealers around the school of yours children? God permitted the serpent around his sons, so, he has no power. Would you have the courage for sending your son to be tortured and killed by salvage tribes? God did it, so he is a monstrous. That’s why a book written by hewish and from salvage times does not can be accepted by western mindset: its different moral, ethics, culture.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to illegalconspiracy (Show the comment) 1 second ago
God allows free will, just like he allows you to believe the farce of evolution… He will not force you to believe anything. It is your choice, and mans choices that we will be judged for. That is what scares evolutionist they don’t want any kind of accountability.
illegalconspiracy in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 6 minutes ago
It is the same saying that you permit the drug dealers around the school of yours children because you allows free will… I don’t. That’s why you believe in the bible and I will never be able to accept it.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to illegalconspiracy (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You accept that NOTHING CREATED everything you should be able to accept just about anything, but the truth. That is your right. God will not force you to believe anything. That is your choice. Notice how you choose to believe what you will.
illegalconspiracy in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment) 11 minutes ago
No, I am agnostic, I don’t believe, I have no believes. My brain can not process a world that had a begin or a world that had no begin. Same for gods. And there is no third alternative. So, I am convinced that I will die without know the thru, if there is one. Now, that someone comes to me saying that talked and saw gods… that’s absurd!
TheMatrixDNA in reply to illegalconspiracy (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
falling behind?
such extremism!
please document your mythology
creation will always be an option
because we can’t even prove primordial stew (or snot) to any real standard other than it might work real soon now
the deadly rsn…
imagine the unverse as a network capable of transmitting signals from star to star…
signals which could trigger radiation that could cause genetic mutations…
see!
there is a scenario that is equivalent (actually superior) to the primordial stew superstition…
Tom Adams in reply to herschalshep (Show the comment) 7 minutes ago
My Dog! Tom has enunciated a deeper secret of Nature, which neither Science knows yet! How Tom got it?! That’s revelation? God is talking here through Tom Adams? Really, in the Universe there is an astronomical system with a network that is the ancestor of the first cell system. And that network is irradiated towards planets’ surface from stars. At least is what are suggesting the models of Matrix/DNA Theory.
Where did you get this idea from, Tom?
TheMatrixDNA in reply to Tom Adams 6:19 Pm – mon – 05
XXX
Amphibians are Proof of evolution.
As the world started to oxygenate plant life took hold on land. Since there were no predators life started to branch out to exploit the plants on land. Dew to stronger effects of gravity animals evolved vertebrate and lungs.
People are made of mostly water, and water is the most vital source of life, not to mention all the diversity in the oceans.
Animals are’t made from stone, they are made of soft tissues that can acclimate to the forces at work on
MrButtlettuce 22 seconds ago
That’s a theory. Since there were no vertebrates neither fossil of those primordial plants in the ocean, there are no scientific statement, yet. Matrix/DNA Theory suggests that life began somewhere at the beach, just upon the frontiers of rocks/water. Some kinds went to land, others to water, others. like amphibians stood at the same point. For life begins is necessary the convergence of all physics/chemistries forces of the Universe to a unique spatial/temporal neutral point.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to MrButtlettuce 5:58 Pm – Mon – 05
XXX
1. Mutations happen (as well as natural variation) but this is not evolution. Mutations cannot cause a creature to gain new genetic information that wasn’t already in the overall genome to begin with.
2. You can prove scientific theories by experiment and observation. ideas alone are not science.
3. Donkeys and horses are different species but they’re still the same kind. no experiment has ever shown one creature turning into a new kind.
4. Evolution is a very intrinsic yet impossible idea.
quest4reason in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment) 3 days ago
1. Mutations happen (as well as natural variation) but this is not evolution. Mutations cannot cause a creature to gain new genetic information that wasn’t already in the overall genome to begin with.”
You are right, this Universe can not create information from nothing. But the biological genome is not the complete universal genome, then, still there are informations disponible in the air, for new beneficial mutations. See the univ. genome at Matrix/DNA Theory.
TheMatrixDNA in reply to 5:57 PM, Mon, 05,
XXX
RogerS4JC 3 days ago
@XGralgrathor “Gould was wrong about that. His understanding of the evolutionary model was less complete than that of an evolutionary biologist today.”
Then let’s look at a more up-to-date understanding:
‘The Movies in Our Eyes’, Scientific American, Mar 2007
“For decades, scientists have likened our visual-processing machinery to a television camera: the eye’s lens focuses incoming light onto an array of photoreceptors in the retina.
Pg 1. Continued>
RogerS4JC 3 days ago
Pg 2 continued>
These light detectors magically convert those photons into electrical signals that are sent along the optic nerve to the brain for processing. But recent experiments by the two of us and others indicate that this analogy is inadequate. The retina actually performs a significant amount of preprocessing right inside the eye and then sends a series of partial representations to the brain for interpretation…
continued>
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Preprocessing! That’s just the prevision suggested by Matrix/DNA formula 30 years ago, before this paper. But, the preprocessing process does not sends different interpretations of wholes, only partials (like 44 chromos?). So why reprocessing if there is no variations? Because the whole process uses the same mechanism of recycling and embryogenesis used in that formula. ( See the systemic circuit between F7 and F2). The image may have the same distortion between parents and a new baby
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
The image “dies”at the retina, due entropy attacking the light wave carrying the image. These are the processes at the retina. Then its “cadaver fragments” are transported as electrical signals to the brain. At the brain occurs the process of recycling, when the image borns again. It is the same process by which stars and babies are born from previous similar templates.
XXX
Alan Clarke 3 days ago
@whiteowl1415 “We have an evolutionary path for the eyes”
I noticed you used “path” in the singular. Wikipedia says, “complex image-forming eyes evolved some 50 to 100 times.” Nature can build crystals but the idea of non-directed, non-intelligent processes (following physical laws) building an eye from scratch out of earth’s elements seems unlikely. To say it happened 50 – 100 times strains the limits of credulity.
CREDULITY – a tendency to be too ready to believe that something is real or true
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Alan, the evolution of biological eyes becomes clear and acceptable if you know the evolution of a universal natural system since the Big Bang. Aren’t you a builder of electronic sensory systems? If you know the universal formula for natural systems (see it at Matrix/DNA Theory) you can have good ideas for innovation. 10 billions years ago there were astronomical “bodies”performing the function of primitive eyes or vision: all information and images of a system pass inside the big eye at F1.
XXX
fowzie777 3 hours ago
here’s why evolution is false. its simple. ready?
at the heart of evolution is this basic, irrational claim.
“randomness produces increasing order and complexity.” in order to prove this statement true, intelligent people set up very structured, (non-random), experiments to show that it required no intelligence in the first place. I’d say that at the best that is circular reasoning and at worst its pretty close to the definition of insanity.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
“randomness produces increasing order and complexity.”
If someone said that based in neo-Darwinian theory I agree with you: it seems highly improbable when facing evidences here and now. But it does not mean that the natural process of evolution does not occurs, it suggests flaws in those theoretical mechanisms. The Matrix/DNA evolutionary theory is suggesting others mechanisms that shows, when a random mutation occurs it is selected or discarded accordingly to cosmological reproductive purpose
XXX
MrButtlettuce 3 hours ago
Polar bears, arctic foxes, all have white fur.
Why are kangaroos only found in australia?
Why if you introduce a foreign species from Asia it’ll totally screw up the Eco system in America.
Awnser: Because different adaptions are needed for particular environments and animals took off in different branches due to isolation.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Ok. Is this answer a proof that had no previous design for different shapes? Still not because there is a most real evidence suggesting previous design. Embryogenesis is an accepted natural real parameter happening in short time that could be the copy of a process happening at longer time. At blastula we see different elements ( proteins, chemicals reactions, etc.) emerging from particular environments (cells diversifications). It is due a previous design hidden in the genome. Why not?
XXX
OldaurGold 27 minutes ago
Could someone clarify the miller experiment? did the miller experiment produce only a few amino acids or all 20 amino acids and nucleotides?
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Go to Wikipedia and type “Miller–Urey experiment”. But don’t worry if you prefer the idea of previous and non visible design driven the experiment, still it is possible. And the real scientific facts leaves open the possibility that this design is coming from before the Big Bang from an unknown source. The problem is for biblical creationists and for Intelligent Designer, because evidences suggests it has been a natural process of cosmological evolution, no evidences of intelligence and magics.
XXX
Nullifidian 1 day ago
All right. In that case, what is your refutation of *all* the evidence that has been adduced to demonstrate evolution and common descent? In order to demonstrate that evolution is a “fallacy”, it seems like this is a necessary prerequisite.
I’ll give you a head start: how do you explain the 100,000 base translocation from chromosome 1 to chromosome Y that is shared between chimps and humans, but not gorillas, macaques, monkeys, orangs, etc. (who only have the sequence on chromosome 1)?
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Great, Mr. Nullifidian! Yours question produced another question and I did again a quick view in those chromosomes and elaborated more one hypothesis inside Matrix/DNA Theory, about the emergence of human consciousness: this fusion means that, first time in all universal evolution, the aspects of software and hardware presents at any natural system were most fused, most closely mixed, and this event made that the software became almost material like the hardware, being strong expressed. Great!
Nooohhh… if this hypothesis is real fact, it means that the aspect of software was “sleeping” all past time in those primates with 24 chromosomes. Just at the 24th. Comparison with our computers, the 24th chromosome should be the piece of hardware where the diagram of softwares are projected. And suddenly, this computer’s software piece splits among all pieces, It does not needs any more the mind of Bill Gates for evolving. If this event is possible, will be here the starting of AI? Hells…
XXX
TrueVerdicts 2 hours ago
Evolution understands life in a whole different way; and in an effort to legitimize the original mistake, scientists continue to make claims that are extremely nonsensical. There is not ONE WAY of understanding the Universe, and science’s original evolutionistic approach to it is not THE uncontested truth of The Universe told us by s/he/that/those who made The Universe (if any) — Evolution is quite flawed.
parallelsdumaurier 1 hour ago
You said. Evolution understands life in a whole different way? Different than what?
Science is a roll up your sleeves endeavour. That’s why religion and philosophy have been so inadequate at explaining the true nature of reality. You can’t understand reality just by sitting in your comfy chair and imagine it all into existence.
Eventually your going to have to get up of your arse and go and search for the answers.
Arguments from ignorance are for the lazy and the weak minded.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
You said: “Evolution understands life in a whole different way?” And a user asked – ” Different than what?”
My answer would be: Different from the real life, which is not different from the Cosmos that produced it. ToE has shared Universal History in two separated blocks without any evolutionary links between two blocks. The abyss between Cosmological Evolution and Biological Evolution that ToE created has been fulfilled with mystic, like absolute randomness and blind evolution.
XXX
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
That’s funny! Are you suggesting that this Nature we see here is not the job of God? And that the job of God was the perfect garden of Eden? And you conclude that I will never understand god ( if he exist) studying Nature here? You are almost right because Nature here is half-Nature, his face’s side of chaos> There is another half face – the state of order – we can’t see here. Maybe this hidden face is the garden, why not? If you read Matrix/DNA models you will see the garden and what it means.
XXX
TrueVerdicts 14 minutes ago
You and I have been able to genuinely debate, and agree to disagree. Which is great. My premise is that Humans are beyond just biological; and evolution does not begin to explain the intangible capabilities of Humans. Thus, one is within his/her right to entertain different possibilities. And, I reject the notion that one who does not subscribe to Evolution is an imbecile; because it’s quite imbecilic to say that ‘atom’ causes one to ‘envy’? <=That’s just one example.
Louis Charles Morelli 3 seconds ago
Yes, and thanks because I have learned with you. When you say “I do not subscribe to evolution” we disagree. I subscribe to the process of natural evolution, but does not in relation to neo-Darwinian theory about this process because I think that my personal investigation studying natural systems in Amazon jungle for 7 years with the modern scientific knowledge about genetics, cosmology,etc. that Darwin did not have when in Galapagos, suggested a more complex theory and deserves be tested.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
You said: “My premise is that Humans are beyond just biological”
It is just what are suggesting my theoretical models and results. But when a new human being is developing inside a womb, the shape of embryo shows properties and elements( as brain and wishes) that its own shape as blastula did not showed. From where the fetus got the ability of intelligence? From a superior ex-machine system that is not visible inside the womb, but is encrypted into fetus’ DNA, which has evolved from a matrix.
XXX
TrueVerdicts 21 minutes ago
I unequivocally disagree. It is simple reasoning… and any study which attempts to prove that they are, is bias and in error. ‘Atom’ has no bear on ‘morals’ or ‘greed’ or ‘hatred’ or ‘laughter’. Absolutely none!
It’s a simple equation: If all things are physics/biological, then why do all things NOT display these attributes but Humans? Do you see the discourse? There is an intervention which took place allowing for these abilities in Humans.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
“If all things are physics/biological, then why do all things NOT display these attributes but Humans?”
When I have a question like that, my best and faithful professor is Nature. Ask it to Nature. I did it and saw new attributes being displayed facing my eyes, inside the womb of a pregnant woman. Who else I could believe if not on Nature? In the fetus emerges consciousness, but the parents are not inside the womb doing interventions, neither used intelligence for making babies. Wombs=Universes
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Once time I read a phrase, I think that it is in the Bible: “If you want know Me, study my job because the personality of an artist is projected over his creation”. I am seeing Science studying Nature and my creationists friends neglecting Nature because they have all answers. If is there a God and if this Nature is his product, scientists are obeying God and going straight to real understanding about how he thinks than those that think are smart and can jump to conclusions with no homework.
XXX
TrueVerdicts 8 minutes ago
First, what you are witnessing in your examples are the results of certain Universal Laws.For example, the ‘killing of other pieces/substances for the good of that system’ you talk about is a result of either Self-Protect or Self-Nourishment which all living entities follow. These are Universal Laws.They don’t do it because they know that it’s “bad vs good”.Lions don’t kill for the good of life; they kill under the law of Self-Nourishment. & black hole cleaning galaxies is an unproven hypothesis
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
I think you are projecting your specific position as observer which is bio-intelligent centrism over the Universe for the sake of seeing beyond the Universe a metaphysical intelligence creating those universal laws and hence humans life and intelligence. If I am right, you need know that I am not against your worldview, I have no knowledge of real scientific proved facts denying yours world view. But my worldview suggests an ex-machine system acting naturally.
XXX
TrueVerdicts 1 week ago
2) If you’re looking for something PROFOUND about what I’ve been saying, it is that: if you were just biological/evolved, you would not have instinctively known this law. It would’ve been foreign to you as it is to a tree or a lion or any other entity you can think of.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Nope. Non-intelligent and even non-living systems shows their pieces, elements, parts, killing other pieces/substances for the good of that system. Samples? The liver cleaning the organism, the lysosomes cleaning the cell system, a black hole cleaning the galaxy. Lions are the biosphere’s system function ( cleaning the system) that produced livers, lysosomes, black holes at another naturals systems. In the Matrix/DNA universal formula for systems this is the Function number 7.
Onithyr 1 week ago
“you would not have instinctively known this law”
Wow, so you just completely ignore one of humanities greatest evolutionary advantages, that is the ability to work in cohesive groups. I mentioned the very biological source of empathy, we have a name for people who are born without it, they’re called psychopaths.
Oh, and humans aren’t the only social animals of this type. Even piranha’s know not to kill each other.
Exactly. Cohesive groups. These groups are the merely natural graduated steps for formation of a new system, in this case, human social system, family system, etc. TrueVerdicts is advocating the idea that only humans have intelligence because intelligence has a metaphysical source, then, we are not apes. I am not against this hypothesis, I have no proof against it, but he does not know that biological instincts are merely evolution from physical forces responsible for matter into systems.
TrueVerdicts 1 week ago
2) Lastly, the fact that piranhas don’t kill each other is an instance of another universal law. There are many universals laws decreed by Time-Space. The 3 main ones being: Self-nourishment, Self-protection, Procreation — which all living beings do instinctively.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Universal laws are natural physical forces. And you can see the origins of the seven natural forces popping up from any natural vortex, included those appearing at yours yard. I already said why time and space are not “entities” per se, they are units of measurement created by human beings. Time and Space does not decreed anything. Brute natural forces are the counterpart of tribal primitive agreements and universal complex laws are the counterpart of modern social complex legislations.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
You are right and you must do not change what had learned in school. Here we are talking about theories. My theoretical models are suggesting at least seven forces, not proved yet. For example, the process that fragments a closed system, creating internal chaos, re-arrangements of its bits-information, mutation, and lifting up order from chaos with a new system employs other forces than the strong, electromagnetic, weak, and gravitational. Theories…
XXX
TrueVerdicts 1 week ago
2) What tree do you know of that knows that those things are bad, or what rock, or what dolphin, or what star? Yet, they, and everything, are all physics/biological, right? To conclude: These laws that you NOW take for granted are not an act of physics. Someone will be thinking in bed tonight, when this will hit him!
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
They are an act of Physics. Morals, altruism, selfishness, what’s right or what’s wrong, all of these things are visible in natural systems existents prior of life, practiced by atoms or stars. For understanding why and how they are physics forces you need know the universal template upon which all shapes of natural systems are naturally built ( the matrix diagram/software showed in Matrix/DNA website). If is there something metaphysical, ex-machine, it is beyond this Universe.
XXX
BigWater59 1 hour ago
I am not against evolution but every argument leads back to intelligence. For example if environmental stress is forcing a change on a species how does natural selection know what direction to change or what to change? It could be that a species needs fins or doesn’t legs then we have to assume NS is going to make the correct change which only leads to intelligence driving NS. If it was totally random then NS could devolve any species it wanted causing continues mass extinctions.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
From Matrix/DNA Evolutionary Theory: “Natural Selection is the immediate environmental selection acting by stress guided by natural designers which are non-immediate natural systems, occupying the systems’ hierarchy at sequential inferior and superior levels.” This process goes back and before the Big Bang, triggered by an ex-machine natural system that contains consciousness. If you are a theist and want to call this natural system “God” know that it creates as do humans’ father and mother.
XXX
TrueVerdicts 12 minutes ago
A user here named whiteowl1415 whom I’ve deemed below me, to whom I will not respond, suggested that he has come to know of other animals that innovate — meaning they’ve engineered something, and have subsequently made it better over time for their societies — such as the way humans have turned chariots into sophisticated automobiles. I’d like to know if others here support that and can give examples. Please don’t say monkeys use tools, as this is invalid
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
What do you think about bees and ants social systems? They are not social systems? And were there any kind of social systems before living beings, even before bees? If not, do you agree that they engineered the first social system, or, at least, they made better a system that is subsequent advancement from symbioses of cells’ organelles?
Atharkas 19 minutes ago
Do you mean, per instance, the fact that ants actually use agriculture to grow mushrooms for their consumptions?
TrueVerdicts 2 minutes ago
They’ve always done that since ants were ants. Try again!
Humans used to use shovels and picks, now we use robotic machinery.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Yes but any other species less complex (I will not say “less evolved”, if you are a creationist) than ants were not applying less complex agriculture. If you are creationist you will say that God created ants with knowledge of agriculture, and then, I am out from debate. I see ants as the first to discover this “technology” ( of course, we can see something in bacterias, corals, but let’s us keeping here)
TrueVerdicts 19 minutes ago
They’ve always done that since ants were ants. Try again!
Humans used to use shovels and picks, now we use robotic machinery.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
And maybe humans will stop at robotic machinery with artificial intelligence for agriculture. But it is possible that other most evolved specie can making arrangements of atoms from a chair into arrangements of lettuce, only using mind’s forces and light waves. Why not? This most evolved specie can be a transcendent shape of an evolutionary lineage that had human specie as ancestor. So, humans sensors have technological limits, which explains the technological limits of ants also. Or not?
XXX
OldaurGold 6 minutes ago
Mind is an abstract, immaterialish thing. these things can’t evolve, but physical features can to a certain extent
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago
Wrong. Mind is the natural counterpart of biological system correspondent to what’s software in artificial computational system. And softwares are evolving. Just my opinion. By the way, if mind was abstract, immaterialish thing, how could you making affirmations about its properties, as “it can’t evolve”?
XXX
PinkUnicornIsLord 2 minutes ago
I won’t worry. I know our lord is just and wise. Praised be his Neighs. They ring through the heavens, and are the actual cause of background red shift.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago – 10:23 PM – Wed -24
Since you mentioned CMB ( I was thinking that this background sound was due our Lord falling in love with Tom and saying “ooooooommmm…”) what if we change thoughts about meanings of human existence? Is it in topic here? My theory: Our scientific tools (optical telescope) are grasping the microwave region of the radio spectrum and not all regions because this tools are projections of our natural limited sensors. Universal evolution will go from BIg Bang (red) towards Big Birth (Y ray). No?
XXX
All such chemical elements are already found IN biological evolution, we’re composed of molecules. Everything in this planet came from star formation. Common knowledge in physics.To deny that is simple idiocy. There is no reason to think chemicals have to be “mindful” and “think” in order for biochemistry to take effect. Biochemistry is simple chemical reactions. There is no law of biogeneisis that says life can’t come from increasing complex molecules. Enough with your ignorance.
T8fgzz in reply to HISTRUTHBEKNOWN 1 hour ago
Question: Since everything in this planet came from star formation, why would be not possible that the observed chemical processes in abiogenesis were just the same process that Nature had applied before for getting formation of stars? Why would not be possible that those chemical reactions contained hidden variables driven the process towards cell’s formation? Chemical reactions are based atoms, which purpose is getting eternal thermodynamic equilibrium, so aren’t they a chemistry-stopper?
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to T8fgzz (Show the comment) 1 second ago
stars are not chemical processes, they are nuclear ones.
ExtantFrodo in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 54 minutes ago
You are right, I should be clear that I am talking about physical processes, which can be chemical and nuclear. The evolution from pure physical nuclear reactions to the novelty of physical organic chemical reactions was based merely over the fact that astronomical bodies were made with only two states of matter (solid and gaseous) and organic molecules/systems were made with a new state, the liquid. At least it is what is suggesting the models of Matrix/DNA Theory.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to ExtantFrodo (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Hey everyone! Bill needs brainwashed children who can’t think for themselves. He needs children to conform and “accept” that there is no God and they are part of an everlasting “evolution” which has never been proven. The evolution Bill is talking about is in fact a fantasy theory, no one has ever observed a plant turning into an animal, no one has ever observed a star being born, there are no fossils that have ever been found of a species turning into another species. Bill needs a slap!
thekiwicloud 5 hours ago
I don’t think Bill said “there is no God”. He is against biblical creationism, but it does not means that is not possible a great intelligence creating universes with computer/genetic programs included for these universes developing forms of life and intelligence. You are right: somewhere in evolution theory suggests that first came plants and from them came animals but did not explain how. Matrix/DNA Theory explains it very well. It is about the origins of animal and vegetal cells.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to thekiwicloud (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“no one has ever observed a star being born”
You are right, and never Humanity will see it, since that these cosmological processes takes millions years. Then, the maximum that we can do is elaborating theories with gaps, holes, but under a unique logics that suggests what shapes must be the missing links. Modern Nebulae Theory suggests the processes of stars formation from nebulae of dust under rotation, but this is spontaneous generation. Matrix/DNA Theory suggestion is more rational.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 second
“there are no fossils that have ever been found of a species turning into another species”
Ok, let’s suppose that the millions of similar fossils are not enough for proving a jump from one shape into other. We will abandon the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution? There is no known rational acceptable alternative. There is Matrix/DNA Theory that brings “punctuation jumps”+ mechanisms of cosmological evolution that produces mutations/muscles/cartilages and a new fossil. This is an alternative.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 second
XXX
Red Herring.
Nice attempt to divert from the presented fact that Life becomes tuned to its enviroment through natural selection not the enviroment is tuned to life.
Earth’s early atmosphere was nihospitable to most life we see today.
Plant life developed ad did just fine for a LONG time bfore animals were even possible.
Photosynthesis alterd the atmosphere and animal emerged in the NEW enviroment
Enviroment isn’t fine tuned it is in constant flux
whiteowl1415 in reply to RogerS4JC (Show the comment) 21 minutes ago
That’s funny! What’s truth? Life becomes tuned to its environment or the environment us tuned to life? My wise grandfather always said: “You must suspect of any two extremes alternatives. The right one is a third, hidden, equilibrium alternative”.That’s just the case here. Plants’ life becomes tuned to earlier reduced environment, plants changed this environment in the way for this environment to be tuned to animals life. Plants were copies of astronomical closed system, animals are opened ones
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Some day when you have evidence of this copy of the system crap let us know.
As to what is truth…
In some cases you grandfather’s advise holds true, but not others.
If I say the sky is blue and another says it is yellow that doesn not equate to it being green.
Life tunes to enviroment: FACT
Enviroment is altered by amany factors including the impact of Life: FACT
Life adapts to the new enviroment: FACT
These are as demonstrably true as the sky being blue.
It is non-negotiable
whiteowl1415 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 11 minutes ago
You said: “If I say the sky is blue and another says it is yellow that doesn’t not equate to it being green.”
But…but… the sky is not blue neither yellow, the color is in the eyes of the observer. This Universe obeys evolution by the same process your body changes shapes ruled by the process of life’s cycle. This process comes from the life’s cycle of a light wave, having seven colors, but as observer you see only from the perspective of one wave’s frequency. The sky is white, my friend.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You said: ” 1) Life tunes to environment: FACT”. 2)Enviroment is altered by many factors including the impact of Life: FACT; 3) Life adapts to the new enviroment: FACT.
That’s just what I said. The problem is with yours first proposition. What kind of pre-existent life tuned to environment? At abiogenesis? If the theory says that life came from non-life? But, still you are right. There was no life coming from non-life, but biological systems coming from Newtonian system machine. No miracles.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to whiteowl1415 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
RogerS4JC: “Information quantity & density? in a single cell is TOO MUCH DATA, beyond the possibility for abiogenesis apart from a source of intelligence.”
So, while atheists are seeing evidence for blind evolution you are seeing evidence for supernatural intelligence? I can understand these reasoned deviations far away of Nature due human consciousness is still a baby that was born minutes ago in relation to universal nature’s time, like any baby transforms every object in tolls/phantasies.
Louis Charles Morelli – 8:10 PM – Tue – 23
XXX
Do not tell me that my beliefs are wrong and I’ll do the same…whether you think the Bible is a big book of stories put not…its your opinion and that’s great but don’t tell me what I believe is wrong:)
tiffani ross-bean 52 minutes ago
Resposta em 5 posts não publicada
Tiffani, these people here inquiring you does not understand yours healthy mind, I am sorry. I will tell a history about the writers of the Bible. A long time ago, humans were more naturals than we are today, their minds was like an empty book ( I know this because I lived 7 years in Amazon jungle among apes and natives studying their instints and psychology). They had a special sensitivity for grasping things we have lost. Then, monges from China, India, Hebrews, were having flashes of (cont.)
… memory from our past, long, long time ago, when our ancestor was a kind of spirit and his body was a whole galaxy. These flashes comes to mind due a strong event that happened with that ancestors, called “The Fall”. But, the shapes of our ancestors and their world were totally different ( I have the pictures at my website), and the non continuous flashes were like symbols, they made those writers thinking a lot, trying to identificate what their dreams were about. They told the dreams to students, disciples, and they tried also to solve the dreams.
Now I was designing those revelations from natives and I got the real picture showed by those flashes. About 4 billions ago, there was the Garden Paradise. It was a selfish astronomical closed system, the original galaxy. There were two beings in shape of flows of information (softwares? spirits?), one male, other female – Adam and Eve. They built the selfish Paradise suggested by a “Serpent”. Now, look to the pictures. The Serpent swalling its own tail is a shape of that system’s circuitry, but if you see the Paradise from other angle (cont)
it seems a Tree, like any spiral vortex galaxy. But if you see from above it seems an Apple, despite it is just the world in shape of that Serpent and also a tree. The center of that system was a quasar containing a black hole, which is the astronomical symbol for hardware as female and her anatomy. Like the beam queen, the female ruled that system while Adam had as anatomical hardware in shape of a Pulsar containing giants volcanos (male sexual organ) emitting magma (his genome) that flyies in space like comets (spermatozoons) towards the female quasar.
The garden paradise was built by Eve who convinced Adam it was the best world. But it was the extreme selfsness, a closed system, that broaken comunication with everything else, and closed the doors to their evolution. Then, entropy attacked the system, the Garden Paradise. It began to be fragmented in its surfaces bits of information, running towards the center. The system was collapsing into itself. These bits fail over planets surfaces and worked like genes, re-organizing themselves luke the shape of the old paradise, but the new enviroment was hard, made mutations, they lift up as opened systems. The time wasted from the Fall of that ancestor till the time of life’s origins was known as “abiogenesis”
And the thing that lifted up was the first living cell system. Now, why the scenes saw by sparsest non continuous flashes of memory were transformed in the genesis account? wrong interpretations of what we see but can not understand, they are things from other worlds and times. The disciples of Schimeon Ben Jochai, the hebrew that told his visions were the founders of judaism, esoterism, cabalism, etc.
FIM
XXX
In a scientific study just released by the University of Copenhagen, and funded by the Templeton Foundation. A 150 year sampling of devoutly creationist brains has yielded some surprising results. Observations and analysis have concluded that creationist’s brains are diminishing both in interconnections and cognitive function. The findings have been attributed to a loss of mass, and predictions indicate that within 300 years creationist’s brains will become vestigial.
parallelsdumaurier – 10:31 PM – Mon – 22
Be evolution totally blind or obeying some ex-biological purpose, what we see here and now is that all Nature’s efforts are being applied to the development of human brains. And through human brains is developing consciousness. The models of Matrix/DNA Theory suggests an explanation. Biological systems are product from the entropic decay of something called “Newtonian machine”, a closed system, spreaded in bits-informations and delivered to new environment (planets’ surfaces). These (cont.)
bits are diversified, each one having a unit of the ancestor’s selfishness. 7 billions of bits of a big selfishness = human beings today. Facing one another, conflicting, will cure this sin and all of us will be one, an opened system. Then, my first purpose in this life is helping Nature’s efforts to develop brain and its product, consciousness. Yours news is the worst. We need doing all efforts for the freedom and welfare of humans, because all of them are indispensable for our own success.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parallelsdumaurier – 1:34 am – 23 – Tue
Not at all – there are millions of other organisms evolving along with us. We are by no means the focus of Nature’s efforts – if anything micro-organisms dominate the biosphere.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 52 minutes ago
Good point. We need making comparisons between micro-organisms development and apes/humans DNA development. My last informations is that human species DNA is evolving faster. Maybe the DNA’s micro-organisms are merely arriving to a final limit permitted by this modern environment/atmosphere. Or maybe at any planets where life emerged, all micro-organism will evolve into humans and when they gets consciousness, all leaves the planet… finding better places in the Universe. What do you think?
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 3 minutes ago
Yes they do and that is why we ask where do we see any of them “evolving” UP??? we do not. they all continue to remain basically the same.
we can witness this with amber we find that contains mosquitos and many other forms of life. They look no different from todays, although, some were larger but nonetheless the same.
living fossils that have not changed.
JoelMckay69 in reply to parsivalshorse 3 hours ago
the fact you think that evolution has anything to do with up is beyond me.There’s no such thing as up in evolutionary terms you think insects have remained the same? by all means find me dragonflies with a 2ft wingspan. just because a mosquito looks the same?…really? are you gonna tell me we’re gonna find t-rexes and smilidon’s roaming around? and giant sloths?
tsub0dai in reply to JoelMckay69 (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
Well we do see other organisms evolving, scientists have observed speciation events (macro-evolution) many many times. Organisms evolve according to selective pressures, some slowly and some quickly – but there is no end point to evolution, and no reason to think that it is a process that has stopped.
parsivalshorse in reply to JoelMckay69 (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
The domination is not measured by quantities, and yes, by increased complexity. Matrix/DNA explains it. The diversification of stars are like the diversification of cells in a blastula. Each star has a bit differential, which is responsible by its unique function in this Universe’s system. When a star radiates its bits-information for evolution of biological systems, which accounts is their small differential bits, the resting are merely mass. The Sun is like anion, each time radiates a layer
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Well where did you get that ‘latest information’ from? It sounds like it came from a layperson who thinks that there is some kind of imaginary limit to how much DNA can evolve?
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
I said “human DNA is evolving faster than micro-organisms DNA”, and thinking about the increased size of DNA since the apes DNA. Not said that microorganisms stopped evolving, I don’t have information about that. You don’t need an imaginary limit to how much DNA can evolve, only think about this: micro-organisms evolved at early atmosphere and environment, these things has changed, so, it is probable that their speed of evolution has changed also. Human increases in DNA is about brains. Or not?
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
For chrissake! You STILL don’t get it!!!
Things don’t HAVE to evolve. And just because a mosquito today looks exactly like a mosquito eons ago doesn’t mean that some mosquitoes in a different environment didn’t evolve into something completely different.
The fact remains: Today we have mosquitoes, humans and rabbits, when eons ago there is no record of ANYTHING but single-celled creatures.
How do you explain THAT? The implications are undeniable.
emfederin in reply to JoelMckay69 (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
What do you mean by ‘the diversification of stars’ – do you mean fusion shifting elements further up the periodic table? Stars don’t ‘radiate information’, information is something that you learn from something – not a physical property. For example – you can get information by examining tree rings, but tree rings are not information.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
You need remember that this is not a debate among scientists, it is between Bill Nye and us, common fathers/mothers. So, the definition of words like “theory”, “information” that you were trained in scientific fields need be forgot and looking for the definition that the common person are using. Good see Wikipedia here. To me, information still is the old Latin definition in its turn derived from the verb “informare” (to inform) in the sense of “to give form to the mind” which is physical (cont
Information appeared in this Universe in shape of half-material vortexes containing 7 brutes forces that evolved to natural forces known today and after that to the seven life’s properties. Each vortex has a specific number resulting from the mixing of expression, intensity of those forces. So, information are bits, real and concrete physical bits that gives forms to particles, matter, systems. Stars transmits its own body and history through radiation, so their emitted bits are informations.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 6:02 – AM – Tue – 23
Sure it is information on the age of the tree and what environments it has gone through in the past.
BigWater59 in reply to parsivalshorse 3 hours ago
@”Sure it is information on the age of the tree and what environments it has gone through in the past”
He’s referring to the technical definition of the word “information”, you illiterate dickwad. All you just did was prove parsi’s point that you can extract information from informationless elements.
emfederin in reply to BigWater59 3 hours ago
To me makes no sense saying that star is “information less elements”. By the way, the problem maybe is about different definitions of “information”as I suggested in the post above. For instance, how we know a star’s age and is lights- years away? Who is sending that information? And what is the substance of this information? Symbols? Code? No, it is physical bit belonging to the star’s body. Or not? By the way, Matrix/DNA Theory is suggesting that stars are more alive than we think.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to emfederin (Show the comment) 1 second ago
What do you mean “nature efforts”?
BigWater59 in reply to parsivalshorse 3 hours ago
You need to ask Louis, it was his term.
parsivalshorse in reply to BigWater59 (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
Maybe the words “Nature’s efforts” are wrong here. I should say “the last Nature’s evolutionary bias” has been observed lately. My readings have saying that human DNA has increased its size faster than apes, lately. If it is right, what is being registered in this DNA? I think that apes as working functional bodies are better developed than humans bodies. What’s being evolved is sensors systems and psychology, all about brain and consciousness. Wrong?
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
What a crock. If this was true creationist would have diminished their brain capacity a long time ago by these standards. Creationism has been around much longer than modern science and yet we still move forward in all areas of development.
BigWater59 in reply to parallelsdumaurier 1 hour ago
What on earth has the size of DNA got to do with anything? DNA is a polymer – there are sponges with longer DNA strands than us. Please tell me why DNA size is in any way relevant?
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 2 minutes ago
Let me think myself. DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system. If any specie keeps the size of its DNA, in any way it is evolving, because it means no new information are being added. It this specie is changing, it is not evolving, only mixing existent informations by fuzzy logics. If any species has increased the size of DNA it could mean that the added information is not new information but only more bits of same junk mass. But, there is no evolution if not increased non-junk DNA
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“in shape of half-material vortexes containing 7 brutes forces that evolved to natural forces known today”
Incorrect. To the best of our knowledge, all of the fundamental forces of nature derive from one single force. This has been demonstrated experimentally for all three forces except gravity.
“the seven life’s properties”
Define please.
“Stars transmits its own body and history through radiation”
Stars don’t “transmit” anything through radiation except energy. False analogy.
Joshua White in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 47 minutes ago
You said: “Stars don’t transmit anything through radiation except energy.” Ok, let’s see that. We have different theoretical cosmological models, and my models suggests that initial astronomical bodies had life’s cycles and a star contains all information of those different seven shapes of astronomical bodies. The whole galactic system is encrypted inside a star and radiation due entropy makes those informations being emitted as photons. That’s what creates life at planetaries surfaces.Theories
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You said: “the seven life’s properties, define please.” The initial quantum vortex at the Big Bang were divided in two big groups: those spin right and those left. This is about phenotype. besides that division there were the diversification of all them, due each one having a final number resulting from the mixing of that properties. One was curved motion, the other was rectilinear motion: one was fast, the other slow, and so on. This is genotype. Digestion, sex, metabolism all life’s properties
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You said: “all of the fundamental forces of nature derive from one single force”. That’s what I said. But the unique force can be a quantum vortex. Only when you try to analyse deeper what’s a quantum vortex you find, theoretically but rationally, that all natural forces are encrypted into that unique force. Matrix/DNA models suggests that the production of these vortexes are waves/rays of light. Any spectrum shows seven different frequencies – which are the projection of vortex’s forces.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
No, not at all – I completely and utterly reject your claim that scientific terms and their meanings should be dispensed with – this thread is about science education.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 50 seconds ago
Bill Nye is saying: “fathers/mothers don’t tell creationism to yours kids”. It is about general education, at home and at school. And most fathers/mothers does not speak scientific definitions. It is not the case for dispensing scientific definitions, it is the opposite: this is an opportunity for scientific education included scientific meanings. But does not try to dispense the common traditional definitions because science had appropriated these terms. Science is not the owner of these words.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“My readings had saying that human DNA has increased its size faster than apes, lately.”
Citation please.
If human DNA was to change substantially the result would no longer be human. Period.
Joshua White in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 32 minutes ago
Then… what? Are you saying that human shape are/will not change?! Are you suggesting that human is the last shape possible for evolution? You don’t know the E.T. I have hidden at home. He is almost pure energy, he is like a ball, almost only “head”. And he said that thousands years ago their ancestors, in their planet, were humans like we are today. Of course, we are a provisional shape… and so, our DNA. DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal no-biological Matrix, my friend…
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
you are wrong. Human generations span decades whereas micro-organisms reproduce every 20 minutes. Greater populations means much more diversity which ultimately means bacteria have faster evolution.
ExtantFrodo2 in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
The environment causing mutations, natural selection and finally evolution of human beings is different from the environment of micro-organisms. And thanks God…(ooops, my fault, sorry) – thanks Nature that it is in this way. Have you thought what would happens with our bodies if those millions of microorganisms inside our bodies evolved fast? Spaceships crossing the space among our cells, species acquiring the size of dinosaurs? My God…(ops…excuse-me again). We don’t know this issue yet.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to ExtantFrodo2 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
“Let me think myself. DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system.” – No Louis, it is not.
“If any specie keeps the size of its DNA, in any way it is evolving, because it means no new information are being added.” – No Louis, DNA is not information, information is not a property of matter.
No offence Louis, but a few basic biology lessons and then you will at least know what DNA is and understand the basic principles behind evolution.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 2 hours ago
You said: “DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system.” – No Louis, it is not.”
Parsi, we are debating theories, not real knowledge. You are based in abiogenesis theory, where nucleotides should be product of long evolution of chemicals reactions and DNA the result of nucleotides replications. Am I right? I am based in Matrix/DNA Theory which suggests a model of building blocks of non-living systems (atoms, galaxies) driving those chemicals, exactly like nucleotides. Who knows?
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You said: “No Louis, DNA is not information, information is not a property of matter.”
Again. difference between theories and definitions of words. My theory is suggesting that the process by which the half-mechanical/half-biological system productor of biological systems at planetaries surfaces is a genetic process where a kind of systems’ software is transmitted to models the new biological hardware. DNA as hardware is not information but the genetics instructions are physical information
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You said: “No offence Louis, but a few basic biology lessons and then you will at least know what DNA is and understand the basic principles behind evolution.”
Thanks by no offense, I know it is hard to heard these weirds things. I had studied Biology, Evolution, Physics, Geology, Astronomy, all scientific fields and reading thousands of papers for 30 years, every day. I know I am not debating real scientific proved facts, only different interpretations of those facts. Maybe my theory is wrong.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Please define “quantum vortex”, because what you’re describing is definitely not a quantum vortex as understood in contemporary physics. Without that, I cannot address the rest of your post.
Joshua White in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
What’s “quantum vortex”? Two things: 1) all matter is reduced to particles, all particles are reduced to ghost vortexes; 2) The processes of atomic’s nuclei between protons and neutrons, as interpreted by the Nobel Hideki Yukawa, if such processes are projected over those ghost vortex, watching the results of vortexes interactions and development towards quarks, leptons, light, etc, we got all life’s principles, all natural forces and the universal formula of natural systems. They are “genes”
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
1. Quantum spin is a solely quantum mechanical property and is not “left” or “right”. It has no analogous counterpart in classical physics.
2. You again bring up quantum vortices, and demonstrate that you don’t understand what a quantum vortex is.
3. Your use of the terms “genotype”, “phenotype”, “digestion”, “sex”, and “metabolism” in this context all belie your purported understanding of cosmology and quantum physics.
Joshua White in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
You: 1. Quantum spin is a solely quantum mechanical property and is not “left” or “right”.
In physics, a quantum is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. Behind this, one finds the fundamental notion that a physical property may be “quantized,”. Maybe in QM it has other meaning, but QM is not the owner of the word “quantum”. The last non-matter unit are vortex, they have physical forces, they rotates and produces waves of light in two reversal directions…
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You: “2. You again bring up quantum vortices, and demonstrate that you don’t understand what a quantum vortex is.”
Please, separates the words “quantum” and “vortex” because I think you are very literate in quantum mechanics and forgot the origins and common usage of those words. Now you can go Wikipedia and read the chapters of those two words. I know I am wrong, but there is no way when connecting data with new method if not using existent words. Think about vortices forming in dark matter…
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
You: “3. Your use of the terms “genotype”, “phenotype”, “digestion”, “sex”, and “metabolism” in this context all belie your purported understanding of cosmology and quantum physics.”
Exactly and thanks by wasting yours time with me. It is a hard testing for my models also. Those words are biological centered. I have projected “biocentrism” over cosmology and Physics’ phenomena instead modern scientific method of projecting Physics, Mathematics, Cosmology, over biological phenomena. Two theories
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Joshua White in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 hour ago
Ok, Joshua, the topic here is what we think is the best for teaching to our kids. I think first of all we need teaching the real scientific proved facts and i know you agree with that. But then the kids makes deeper questions about the whole existence, we have no facts known yet, we have theories. I make sure they know the scientific theories but I also talk about my own theory which has one citation: The Universal Matrix of Natural Systems and Vital Cycles (if you Google it )
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
There is no life force within a star, let alone a conscious one. And no Stars do not fucking create life on planet surface. There is no theory as we know it does not happen.
Jack fauen in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
Yes, no conscious one, of course, the future forces used for formation of consciousness were not expressed in stars, yet. “Life force” is a wrong name, the right should be “natural forces”. “Life” is a wrong word, the right is “biological systems” for separating the systems’ shapes we have here from the systems’ shapes that are our ancestors (atoms, galaxies, etc.) Stars does not create life because there is no origins of life. Everything is a continuous chain of events coming since Big Bang.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Jack fauen (Show the comment) 1 second ago
That sounds remarkably like garbage.
lookingfordagobah in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
As said a creationist in 1872 when read “The origins of Species” first time.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to lookingfordagobah (Show the comment) 1 second ago
No Louis, none of those things are information – you could gain information by studying them – but they are NOT information.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 2 hours ago
Maybe you are only thinking about packages of bits of information… Information, from the viewpoint of my theory, starts with those bits that triggered the Big Bang. They are the unique thing ex-machine existent inside this Universe, since they came as bits from a fragmented system that was existing before the Universe, maybe another universe. Working like genes today (which are package of zillions of bits information) they works building this Universe towards I don’t know…
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Exactly Louis – most fathers and mothers do not understand science, and so should NOT interfere with the science curriculum. Bill Nye is right BECAUSE most parents do not understand enough about science.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
I think should be a good idea watching this vídeo: Kent Hovind – Debate 13 – Dr. Hovind vs. Professor of Anthropology Dr. Robert Trivers (Round 1). I think yours strategy is the same of Dr. Robert Triviers, and it was a bad strategy. Dr. Triviers knows he is right about evolution but tried to impose a new and weird information quick and fast, without previous appropriate preparation, to fathers/mothers modeled by wrong information. In the eyes of those fathers/mothers, Hovind earned.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
I have skimmed the website you indicated. All I can say is, if you have evidence to back up your assertions, submit your papers for peer review. That’s where the real test of your idea’s mettle will be.
Joshua White in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 37 minutes ago
Thanks for doing that. If everything is wrong, at least it shows that one can explains every natural phenomena and event saw here if applies the reverse logics in relation to the logics applied by Physics when searching a theory of everything.Physic-centrism or biocentrism? The Universe is merely the result of moving physical forces or is tunelled for life and so, like a biological egg? Or like an ancestor’s body and we are the bacterias living inside its body? I will test it till my death.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
Exactly who conflates cosmology with biology? The two disciplines have nothing to do with each other. I think you’re confused if you really believe that biologists have anything to do with cosmology. As for physics and mathematics, well, mathematics is a tool used in *every* scientific discipline, and biology and biochemistry follows the physical laws, so that argument is kind of moot.
Joshua White in reply to Louis Charles Morelli 1 hour ago
Joshua, cosmology and biology are words invented by humans. The separation between the natural phenomena related to Earth and the system it belongs to and natural phenomena related to those things created by Earth and its system is only a human behavior not a Nature behavior. I think that it is rational thinking that this astronomical system created the first cell system by the same process of evolution that reptiles created mammals. Biologists want understand mammals without knowing reptiles?
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to Joshua White (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Because there is obvious evidence around us. I’m not too good at explaining it at the moment. If you want to know more, go to wwwDOTreasonsDOTorg
Unless you haven’t noticed, evolution can easily be disproved, way easier then they try to disprove Creationism.
God put it there… And isn’t it kind of amazing how our Earth is JUST the right distance from the Sun to support life and have water?
SpockLover27 in reply to DarwinsFriend (Show the comment) 2 hours ago
You said: “And isn’t it kind of amazing how our Earth is JUST the right distance from the Sun to support life and have water?”
Sorry but there is other website than reason.org suggesting that the reverse is the right one: a pre-life put the Earth at the right distance from the Sun for walking free here, like humans beings makes roads for better walking. The problem of reason.org is that they does not know the real pre-biological system that the Sun and Earth belongs to.
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to SpockLover27 (Show the comment) 1 second ago
No Louis – as I have repeated;ly explained to you, information is not a property of matter at all. We get information from examining things, but the things we examine are not information. I realise that you are not using english as your first language, so please let me assure you that you are just using the word ‘information’ innappropriately.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 31 minutes ago
No Louis – as I have repeated;ly explained to you, information is not a property of matter at all. We get information from examining things, but the things we examine are not information. I realise that you are not using english as your first language, so please let me assure you that you are just using the word ‘information’ innappropriately.
parsivalshorse in reply to Louis Charles Morelli (Show the comment) 31 minutes ago
You are based in string theory or any modern theory, then, you could be right. But… all these theories are projection of Physics-centrism, where the Universe is forced to be modeled and explained by Physics alone. My theory was elaborated doing the reverse way over the same evidences/facts: biocentrism forcing the model of this Universe. Here the final results suggests that “information is not a property of matter” as you said, but matter is a property of ex-machine “natural” information
Louis Charles Morelli in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 second ago
XXX
Posts Contra Creationism:
Such transitional forms are beneficial. Without them there is too huge of a gap to leap in a single bound.
I started as a Young Earth Creationist, moved a bit to become an Old Earth Creationist, moved a bit more to become an Intelligent Design Proponent, moved a bit more to become a “quasi-directed Panspermia” proponent, moved a bit more to become an evolutionist, and finally moved a bit more to become an atheist.
DNAunion in reply to parallelsdumaurier (Show the comment) 21 hours ago
In a scientific study just released by the University of Copenhagen, and funded by the Templeton Foundation. A 150 year sampling of devoutly creationist brains has yielded some surprising results. Observations and analysis have concluded that creationist’s brains are diminishing both in interconnections and cognitive function. The findings have been attributed to a loss of mass, and predictions indicate that within 300 years creationist’s brains will become vestigial.
According to wikipedia
A 2009 poll showed that almost a quarter of Australians believe “the biblical account of human origins” over the Darwinian account. 42 percent of Australians believe in a “wholly scientific” explanation for the origins of life, while 32 percent believe in an evolutionary process “guided by God”. A 2010 survey conducted by Auspoll and the Australian Academy of Science found that 79% of Australians believe in evolution (71% believe it is currently occurring, 8% believe in evolution but do not think it is currently occurring), 11% were not sure and 10% stated they do not believe in evolution
narco73 in reply to narco73 (Show the comment) 3 hours ago
XXX
Esclarecendo a Teoria da Evolução
That is another of the Laws within The theory…Natural Selection.
The Theory is composed of….
Law of Evolution: Things change
Law of Natural selection: Things suitable to the enviroment surive while the nonviable do not
Law of Gradualism: Changes are extremely slow
Law of Multiplication of Speicies: New species develop
Law of Common Descent: Life shares ancestory.
They get grouped into the theory and creationists over look the laws often =(
whiteowl1415 in reply to XGralgrathor 8 hours ago
XXX
Aborto:
Besides the fact that women are not brood mares for other women, her’s some statistics about adoption not working NOW.
There are at least 400,000 children in foster care in the US at all times. childtrends(dot)org UNICEF estimates the number of orphans at 210 million in the world today. 86 million orphans in India 44 million orphans in Africa by 2010 10 million orphans in Mexico 35,000 children die everyday from hunger and malnutrition.
geezusispan in reply to RogerS4JC (Show the comment) 2 days ago
XXXXXX
Contra Criacionismo:
It is inevitable that the current worldview of delusional Christians will evolve until it finally ceases to exist, just as Christianity will cease to exist. Humans now have unrestricted access to knowledge and scientific facts that previous generations did not. The Christian Church became all powerful and all consuming through keeping knowledge and facts away from humans. It swelled its ranks by forcing millions to convert or be murdered. The Church can no longer control humanity in these ways.
Reality4Me 6 hours ago in playlist New Releases 2
XXXXXXX
Novas Informações:
@parsivalshorse “There simply is no competing theory”
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck
Alan Clarke in reply to parsivalshorse (Show the comment) 1 hour ago
Tags: Ateísmo, Bill Nye, criacionismo, Evolução
Postedo na A Grande Causa da Humanidade, Abiogênese, Assuntos Fora da Matrix/DNA, Astronomia, Ateísmo, Big Bang Theory, biologia, Ciência Acadêmica Oficial, Coment/Posts da Matrix/DNA na Internet, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, counsciousness, Darwinism, Debates Criticas Defesas, DNA, educação, Esoterismo e Mistica, Evolução, Filosofia, Intelligent Designer, Origem da Vida, religiões | Sem Comentários »
terça-feira, setembro | 25 | 2012
A observação do ecossistema da selva amazônica durante sete anos por êste autor o levou a uma intuição: se aplicar o velho método da anatomia comparada entre os conhecidos sistemas vivos e não-vivos será possível conhecer cada um melhor porque pode-se projetar o que se conhece em um sôbre o que está escondido no outro e vice-versa. Como efeito inesperado, o método o levou a projetar um modêlo do que seria um sistema-link entre vivos e não-vivos supondo-se que tenha havido uma unica linhagem de evolução linear desde o Big Bang até o ser humano. A analise do modêlo teórico surpreendeu devido sua racionalidade, lógica funcional, capacidade de predições corretas e a sugestão para se ampliar tudo o que se pensava conhecer até então. Uma das sugestões dos modêlos é que êste teórico link ( denomiando LUCA: the Last Universal Common Ancestor de todos os sistemas biológicos), emite informações para a superficie terrestre obedecendo o natural processo da transmissão genética e reprodução. Porem devido ser um sistema meio-mecânico/meio-biológico e muito primitivo, seu “genoma” não é transmitido encerrado dentro de um envoltório como os cromossomas biológicos, mas sim seus bits-informação são espalhados no espaço sideral e chegam a um mesmo ponto em diferentes épocas do tempo. Isto faria com que um unico sustema se diversifique em milhões de sistemas derivados, todos mutados, incompletos e mais complexos, quando comparados com LUCA. Por êste modêlo, vírus são pequenos pacotes de bits-informação relacionados com a Função Sistêmica numero 4, a qual consiste em reproduzir sistemas após penetrar sistemas que possuam a Função numero 1. Em vista disso é perfeitamente possivel que muitos dos casos de “saltos evolutivos” notados por Stephen Jay Gould em sua teoria do “equilibrio pontuado” sejam causados pelo que na teoria da Modern Synthesis é denominado ERVs. E assim abrimos aqui mais um campo de pesquisa para a Matrix/DNA começando por uma rápida introdução através da Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endogenous_retrovirus
Endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) are sequences in the genome that are derived from ancient viral infections of germ cells in mammals and other vertebrates; as such their proviruses are passed on to the next generation and now remain in the genome.
 ERVs Virus Incorporados ao Genoma
Tags: ERV, Evolução
Postedo na Abiogênese, Biologia Celular, Cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA, Darwinism, DNA, Evidências da Matrix/DNA, Evolução, Genética, LUCA, Macro Evolução, Pesquisas da Matrix/DNA, vírus | Sem Comentários »
|
