There are bad things for kids in Bill’s beliefs also. Non-human moral values like “the good design is justified when eats the bad ones”. And salvage competition. In Nature evolution does not works bottom-up only.There is a hierarchic systems superposition, every system is composed by minor system and is inside bigger systems. Then, every evolutionary steps seems bottom-up from a local observer viewpoint, but it reveals being up-down for a bigger observer that is seeing the whole. Nanotechnology.
Aviso: O limite de 500 caracteres no Youtube impede um post de uma cosmovisão estranha, desconhecida, que teria de descer a muitos detalhes para explicar suas conclusões. Portanto tais posts parecem virem de lunáticos, ao observador/julgador imediatista. Aqui nos sentimos agradecidos pelos bons efeitos do discurso de Bill Nye porem tem maus efeitos tambem. Defeitos em seu discurso:
1) Condiciona a mente de crianças com a crença de que a Natureza caminha cegamente, pois sistemas emergeriam por chance nos niveis menores, microscópicos, e a partir daí estariam sujeitos a forças competitivas para sobrevivencia, sendo que aqueles melhores desenhados no momento que emergem comem os piores desenhados. Isto passa à criança a crença num mundo onde competir seria a regra imposta e a aplicação da astucia, da força bruta seria justificada. Isto leva a racismos, idéias de genética superior, e fornece aos que querem poder sem fazer seu trabalho justificativas para seus atos contra os mais fracos. Etc.
Acontece que a interpretação de Bill Nye sôbre como a natureza funciona pode estar errada por ser imediatista, lilmitada a um pequeno observador situado num infimo ponto do espaço-tempo, sem ter a visão de horizontes mais amplos e portanto um maior entendimento de como a natureza funciona. Para se interpretar os resultados biológicos aqui é preciso sentar=se em algum ponto alem da galaxia e dos 4 bilhões de anos da origem e evolução biológica, pois as razões estão nas mãos do criador e não da criatura. Foi a galaxia que criou os sistemas biológicos dentro dela, ou ao menos ela é o molde que dirige as formas que a ela se adaptam. E a galaxia é uma má criadora, sdua ideologia, suas regras não convem à espécies inteligentes.
A evolução avança “de baixo para cima”? Existe um processo natural observavel aqui e agora onde se observa a evolução fazendo o caminho contrario, avançando de cima para baixo, mas que para todo observador assistindo o processo localizado ao mesmo nivel do processo parecerá um movimento “de baixo para cima”. me refiro ao processo da embriogenese humana. Imagine uma espécie de micróbios inteligentes vivendo dentro da barriga de uma mulher grávida. Desde que eles vivem apenas alguns dias, muitas gerações passarão durante os nove meses de gravidez. Eles assistirão “emergir” do liquido amniótico sistemas como genes, verão uma massa disforme como a blastula, dela emergirá formas, estas se transformarão em órgãos, etc. Cada órgão vivo parecerá um ser vivo gigante como dinossauros, ou melhor, estrêlas-do-mar, medulas, polvos, que não se movem mas comem o que existe nas redondezas e crescem. ACREDITARÃO PIAMENTE QUE ESSE PROCESSO EVOLUCIONARIO QUE ASSISTEM AVANÇA A PARTIR DA BASE, DA BLASTULA, NA DIREÇÃO DE FORMAS CADA VEZ MAIORES E MAIS COMPLEXAS. Mas para um observador situado fora do ambiente onde se dá o processo, tudo será ao contrário. Êle está vendo a espécie humana, o pai distante, o corpo da mãe alem daquele universo dos micróbios, sabe que aquela espécie humana foi miniaturizada, comprimida, dentro de microscópicos squinhos cromossomicos, invisiveis aos microbios, mas que estão ali no meio da blastula, e eles são os instrumentos do verdadeiro criador e diretor daquele processo evolucionario. Assim acontece em relação à galaxia Via Láctea e os sistemas biológicos que emergiram e evoluem na superficie da Terra. A falta da consideração e do entendimento da galaxia leva Bill Nye a incutir errados e perigosos valores morais nas crianças, pois paras a humanidade não convem reproduzir aqui uma maquina estupida como a galaxia e se tornar mais uma mera peça funcional estupida dela. Se o ensino religioso deísta-criaciocionista está evidentemente errado, tambem o está o ensino religioso ateísta-evolucionista. A Matrix/DNA é a opção do meio-têrmo, a mais inteligente e a que melhor convem à Humanidade.
I am asking permission to commentators, to Bill Nye and Youtube, for adding one approach, which is forgotten here. We are adults debating what we should transmit/transfer from our experience of life to our loved next generations. But, what about the other side? There are no children here speaking for themselves. We should try “empathy”, changing informations about “who are them”, thinking from their “mysterious” wishes, and making comparisons between their bias and the real world as we know it.
When I try to think from the “children perspectives”and the world that is waiting for them, some issues comes quick to my mind. First of all, the issue about over-population.This world will become very unsuitable for them. It seems this issue is solved in first world of Europe, but till Europe will face the effects of world over-population. We need acting over education at third world countries. What we will teach: the control by scientific methods or this “non-control” by their religions?
Apes, are healthier and perfect physical machine than human beings.They are the fittest for getting better life at this biosphere built by a kind of perfect machine, described by Newtonian mechanics. But human mind is a natural production that changed the environment, in a way that apes aren’t more adapted.Then, physically, there are degradation of the inherited ape with 75% of bad mutations and 24 neutrals. Humans are the dark reverse light at the same avenue that is advancing the white light
No. It just implies that the common ancestor of all living beings is in the sky. Which means that had no abiogenesis, but, cosmological embryogenesis with a big mutation due the ancestor was made with solid and gaseous states of matter, and the first living being was nurtured in a womb where emerged the liquid state, hence chemistry.
Well…it is not in the sky in relation to earth, because earth is part of it. It is in sky like you are just now. Have you thought about that? The “womb” for the first living being was this planet…in this cosmic region. Stellar systems and galaxies were nurtured in environment existing only solid and gaseous states. At least organic Chemistry is a recent emerged process. Something wrong here?
No human names for world views. My method was applied by the forst time in Human History: comparative anatomy among all natural systems, from atoms to galaxies to brains… and now, consciousness. Academic Science is missing to do that and the result is very bad: they had shared Universal Natural History into two separated blocks, with no evolutionary link between them. That’s why they can’t understand the emergence of life here. matrix/DNA has a better rational theory about
Comparative anatomy of natural systems. Galaxies are merely one of those. This method is rational because it is the right thing to do if you make the rational question: the first living being was a system, the cell system. So, its creator must be a system. Which natural systems were existing at that time? Which is the most suitable for to be the past evolutionary link? The right question brings on the right answer.
Super-nova is not explosion and emergence of a new star. It is the opposite:implosion. Of a dark giant planet turned on a pulsar. All planets has as nucleus the germ of a star, which nuclear reactions goes eating the layers of rocks from inside to outside. When the last layer is tiny, it collapses and the internal light is released to the external world. A new baby was born. Our ancestor made everything like we do now.
I’m all for this “ancestor” theory of yours… but what does this “ancestor” consist of?
Is it/he/she material or immaterial? If material, then which elements make up this “ancestor”?
Is this ancestor anthropomorphic or is it some kind of amorphous gaseous blob that floated around in an eternal vacuum until it “decided” to fart out the universe?
This ancestor is seen when galaxies are observed from Biological perspective, I mean, by the reverse way of evolution, knowing the last product (cells) and calculating the ancestors…It is the opposite way used by Physics perspective.There was a nebulae of lighter atoms about 12 billions years ago. The nebulae made the first lightest stars. These stars were under forces that imprint the process of life cycles. They changed shapes and composed an almost living system. Lots of evidences for it.
But why are you looking at galaxies from the “Biological perspective”?
You do realize that you’re simply making an “analogy” between “biology” and “astronomy”?
Then I hope you realize that in most schools of Logic, analogies are considered technically “fallacious” (though you can come up with “good” and “bad” analogies)… Why? Because you’re ultimately comparing apples to oranges. Yours falls under “False Analogy”.
Dave, the human idea about evolution was made based in analogy between species, fossils, DNA, etc. Why? It is the unique rational alternative we have for inquiring the unknown past times. Where Biological systems came from? Be it what to be, it was inside an astronomical system. You will not agree with that if you believe in magics, by gods or randomness. So, if biological came from astronomical, the principles for biological must be hidden in the astronomical. That’s so clear!
Ok. Just because we call a cell a “system” and a galaxy a “system” doesn’t imply that they have some relationship.
I’m not saying they aren’t related, I mean obviously a cell is part of some galaxy…
But to claim that the name “system” creates some kind of palpable relationship between the two is REALLY stretching it.
What about this cool “Lean System Success Plan” i can buy online for 100 dollars that guarantees I will lose 10 lbs in one month? It’s called a “system” too! Is it relevant? NO
It really doesn’t imply, but, implying that a cell system came from a non-system, like the primordial soup, is less rational.I think what is missing for modern academic Science is knowledge about natural systems. I think there are only three: atomic, astronomic and biological. I had aligned them in this sequence for you notice that there was a movement from the simple to most complex in right chronological time. This is evolution. Universal Natural MacroEvolution. There is genetic relationship
Yes Adam had a uterus. All males have it. Encrypted In the genes. It is not expressed because the gene for phallus is expressed two times. If you see the cosmological model of the state of the world when the Bible says that Adam existed you will see that those primordial galaxies were hermaphrodite, Adam and Eve encrypted. Things are more, lots more complex than you think…sorry.
But yours body once time could be fitted on the head of a pin, Goo. Why not the Universe? The smaller initial size of the Universe is not food for atheism, it is food for agnosticism and creationism. What was existing before your body being smaller than a pin? Yours parents, right? Why not the Universe? You need to understand that nature applies nanotechnology ( making a big body as a microscope one) and giantology ( making a microscope body being a big one)
This issue is very important because if we knew the truth about the sun we could built a mechanical copy getting another kind of energy. And an important factor should be a better understanding about life origins and operations. There is a problem with the method used today: they are calculating the sun from Physics perspective only. But, since that all life is dependable of Sun’s energy, and life was created by this energy also, we need the biological perspective of the sun, made by Matrix/DNA
I just let it play out and continue as is. In a way, I’m sure it is kind of mean. My area is neuropsych, though, and I intend to study clinical psych (in fact, just got an RA position in a neuropsych and social cognition lab so we’ll see how that goes). From what I understand so far about it, cognitive behavioral therapy is actually fairly difficult and challenging, in that the therapist or clinician challenges the client’s beliefs and cognitions where they are maladaptive.
How do you know that the client’s beliefs and cognition are the wrong ones and not the social system’s beliefs, which erected the wrong social system?!
Because the cognitions are maladaptive. Examples would be, “I am worthlesss”, “I am God”, or “I hear voices which tell me to kill myself”. Also, cultural considerations are made. For instance, an American might say that a particular Japanese person is neurotically shy when it may turn out that he is just culturally reserved. I will learn a lot more about this later, but I know some now. Just please know my knowledge is incomplete.
Ok. I think the area of neuropsych is very important for future of human kind but it needs urgent self-analyses. You will think that this idea is odd, but, for neuropsych professionals to understand what is going on in the brain they will need study astronomy also. Nature produced the brain which neurons must mirror the connections among natural phenomena for to be healthier. Culture can works as a kind of malignant virus, when culture has the wrong interpretation of reality. Am I wrong?
I don’t understand your idea of self-analyses in terms of astronomy. You are correct that neuropsych scientists and clinicians must understand the brain. We do, however, spend a great deal of time understanding basic brain processes such as neurodevelopment and the basic concepts in learning like plasticity, sensitization, and habituation with model animals in controlled experiments such as those done with aplysia.
I will try to explain, but, be advised, it is merely my theory. I am trying to follow the everyday new discoveries published by neuropsych scientists and clinicians.But I apply the knowledge of the brain for trying to understand the Universe and vice-verse.The brain is shared into two hemispheres. Do you know why Nature did it this way? The building block of galaxies is shared into two hemispheres also, the connections between them help us to understand the connections here. Same functions
Well, the idea of culture being wrong about something is very touchy. There are psychologists who devote themselves to cultural psychology, such as culturally specific mental illnesses. The definition of a mental illness may help here, which is that it is only a mental illness if it 1. Causes you mental stress and 2. Interferes with your daily functioning.
And how is the definition of the whole society mental illness? How to diagnose the social mental illness? How we know if a social behavior is naturally healthier or more one collective mental illness that is not synchronized with the laws of Nature? But.. there is no way for to know what is Nature here and now if we don’t know what is our astronomical system. For instance, the cosmological model resulting from a biological perspective is different from the cosmological model made by Physics
You need understand that civilizations are built by a specific interpretation of the world = culture. All human interpretation of the world must be wrong, with some few degree of rightness.But, human beings have the resource of self-cure, or self-correction. When an individual is under this process of social self-correction, his behavior will be not normal in relation to that “wrong” civilization, which causes stress. What we can do? The patient is the society, not the individual
No, it is not so simple like that. Only for yours sake: Physicists Find Evidence That The Universe Is A ‘Giant Brain’ – If you are interested, Google it. The fact that human brains are not an entire whole, or that is not shared into 3, 4, 19 parts is because this bi-lateral symmetry is a constant pattern of natural systems, from galaxies to biological systems.
“No, it doesn’t quite mean that the universe is ‘thinking’ – but as has been previously pointed out online, it might just mean there’s more similarity between the very small and the very large than first appearances suggest.”
And the piece of speculation you are basing your claim on is “might just mean”. Hardly concrete evidence
Yes, but it doesn’t quite mean that the universe is “not” thinking also. We don’t know. My personal investigation using anatomy comparative method already suggested that the first cell is an exactly copy of primordial galaxies – if astronomical bodies are under the process of life cycle formation. I have lots of evidences suggesting it is. And “if” the cell is a copy of galaxies, the brain must be a copy of Universes. There is nothing more reasonable: the creature is the face of the creator
All I know is how the two hemispheres develop in neurodevelopment but I will look up that paper. Is that the title of the paper and do you have the authors and/or journal it came from?
This is a big opportunity for you being a famous and helpful professional for Humanity. I am suggesting a new approach for neuropsych area that nobody tried before. I can’t do it because I am researching thousands of other issues and I have no knowledge/resources you have about this field.
I disagree. That would be an opportunity for me to commit career suicide before I even start. I would prefer by continuing to study cognitive rehabilitation in post surgical epileptics and learn what I can from that experience.
Ohhh…sorry, I was forgetting to talk only the things that are safe for you being a good synchronized citizen of your “health” society. I have committed my career suicide, it is very painful, I ‘must not suggest to others doing it.There are centuries people are “studying” cognitive rehabilitation and it does not works yet, without forcing the cure with drugs. be a good professional following this mindset, it is about money.
What? I don’t understand your first comment. I can, however, say that cognitive rehabilitation is a very specific therapy that has not been around for centuries and is a valid form of therapy. We are looking at a specific implementation of cognitive rehabilitation. Cognitive rehabilitation works based on the idea that the brain is plastic, which wasn’t known centuries ago.
I am not resumed to cognitive rehabilitation therapy, which deals with injured brains ( If I remember it right) but I am thinking the broad sense of cognitive remediation therapy which deals with traditional diseases like schizophrenia, ADHD, and major depressive disorder.
For yours sake: The US Department of Defense has declared that cognitive rehabilitation therapy is scientifically unproved. As a result, it refuses to cover the cost of cognitive rehabilitation for brain-injured veterans
It is enough paste the title at Google. It does not talks about two hemispheres, this issue is about Matrix/DNA Theory’s models. If you see the configuration of a bi-lateral pair of nucleotides you see two hemispheres. Remember that brains are evolutionary result from evolution of nucleotides. If you try to understand how was the state of the world that created nucleotides, you need a cosmological model. If you get the right one, you will understand each division and function in the brain.
The way to tell if a society is healthy or not is simple. Is society (objectively) growing or declining. If it’s growing it’s healthy. “naturally healthier” is a subjective judgement, requiring you to impose your personal values which are not necessarily valid in the society you are commenting on.
So, when the dinosaurs society were growing it was naturally healthier? ( Don’t tell me that fare tale about meteorites) Same for lions, wales, eagles… all of then going to extinction. No, growing in not indicative that nature is happy and will support a species. It can grow in wrong way. Besides that, who is growing now and well adapted to this environment will be sick and destroyed by the next environment due natural changes.
I disagree. That would be an opportunity for me to commit career suicide before I even start. I would prefer by continuing to study cognitive rehabilitation in post surgical epileptics and learn what I can from that experience.
Actually, you can study neurodevelopment in early organisms and in humans to understand how the brain developed over time, from the nerve ganglion in some flatworms to our brains. In order to understand the organization and function of the brain, you need to study the brain using various methods, including neuroimaging, nothing more.
Nothing more? In order to understand the organization and function of the brain we need to know about natural systems, a forgot area by modern mindset. Brains are the new evolutionary shape that came from atoms systems, astronomical systems, cells systems, early organisms systems, etc. Don’t do that and you never will know what a brain is about.
What? I don’t understand your first comment. I can, however, say that cognitive rehabilitation is a very specific therapy that has not been around for centuries and is a valid form of therapy. We are looking at a specific implementation of cognitive rehabilitation. Cognitive rehabilitation works based on the idea that the brain is plastic, which wasn’t known centuries ago.
I appreciate your wikipedia search for my sake, but I am well aware that of what cognitive rehabilitation is and in what ways it has been shown effective. We will be the first to test the effectiveness of cognitive therapy in epileptics. I am aware that the Dept. of Defense will not cover cognitive rehabilitation, but I’m unaware of what relevance any of this has. Our lab’s work is our lab’s work and you are welcome to read the paper when it is published. I’m not exactly sure what your point is.
What is my point? Cognitive therapy is actually fairly difficult and challenging due wrong approach due wrong interpretation of the brain due wrong interpretation of origins and meanings of brains. If we don’t know this Nature here and now we don’t know if the unusual behavior is illness of the individual or of the society.
I am grateful for you keeping this conversation because it is constructive for my job.But I understand why you never have thought outside the box.
“What you are citing is a program that only checks for the version of that particular os to make sure that it has not corrupted during the transfer process.”
Nature does not permit to systems that she creates to be eternally perfect closed operating system. It is because the very foundation of this material Universe: he is assented upon the expansionist light-wave triggered by the Big Bang.This light-wave produces fragments, photons, which go out from direction of the wave. Same way, the unique perfect closed system reached by matter had fragments of mass/energy going out of the systemic circuity. With time = there is whole corruption/mutation
try to stay consistent. You said their is no evidence for spontaneous life. In fact there is evidence and some of that is that 1 – RNA and lipids arise naturally and 2 – RNA and lipids together perform all the functions of life. Also you should be concerned about Prion’s. They arise naturally and can replicate themselves. That is more evidence that life can arise naturally.
No. The fact that RNA and lipids arise naturally is not proof for spontaneous life. They arise by the same process a new human baby arise inside the womb. Should we say our bodies arose spontaneously, by chance? What is missing for you is to see and understand the larger big picture, the state and shape of the world where the first RNA arose. If you try do it you could be more helpful for Humanity. Just now you remembered me that I need go back to study prions-diseases and Matrix/DNA models
You fail to understand both the conversation and the point you are trying to make. 1st, RNA and lipids arising naturally is not “proof” – only an idiot would say that. It is however evidence. RNA and lipids do not arise in nature through the same process as they arise in our body. For example, if you freeze a solution of amino acids, they will form RNA. Hint: your body does not freeze amino acid solutions to form RNA. There are other ways they form in nature as well.
I think I can understand your point because I know your world view, but, you can’t understand my point because you don’t know mine.The emergence of RNA at abiogenesis could be an evidence for spontaneous generation only if one does not know the informations inside atoms, molecules and aminoacids. Same way, the emergence of an embryo inside a womb being watched by a microbe living in that womb should be for him evidence of spontaneous generation. He does not know DNA. You don’t know Matrix
You do not understand my point because you do not know what you are talking about. You are using the terms completely wrong and nothing you are saying makes any sense. Its like you are saying the “rabbit ran fast unicorn eats soup” (WTF?). Additionally, your idea of a world view is nonsense, we live in the same world that follows the same rules of logic and evidence, this “world view” idea is simply a dishonest way to avoid your own ignorance.
You don’t know what you are talking about. Why a long post totally off the topic that initiated our debate? It is about yours beliefs in spontaneous generation of RNA and lipids. Let’s check yours evidences? First: why carbon atom was chosen for to be the basic atom for organic matter? Second: Why carbon choose to link to N and O for building aminoacids?
Ok, you are talking something that I don’t know and I need know it. I will search the paper/articles about freeze aminoacids making RNA, but if you could advance the best paper, I will be grateful.The Matrix/DNA models are suggesting that it is impossible inside a lab to built naturally those 20 aminoacidos and naturally they will compose as RNA. If it is possible, I must throw Matrix models into the garbage. But I want to see it
I am not worried with semantics, but about facts. So, *why is carbon so well suited as the basis for life?*. What is your explanation? It is not enough to say that carbon is able for several connections, etc. It does not works at other different planets. Why Earth is the right catalyst for carbon making the right compositions for life? Of course there is no self awareness involved, but why linking to N and O results into aminoacids fitted for biological systems?
“At the moment, since we have no idea how probable life is, it’s virtually impossible to assign any meaningful probabilities to any of the steps to life except the first two (monomers to polymers p=1.0, formation of catalytic polymers p=1.0). For the replicating polymers to hypercycle transition, the probability may well be 1.0 if Kauffman is right about catalytic closure and his phase transition models, but this requires real chemistry and more detailed modelling to confirm…”
The modern academic worldview have no idea how probable life is because this worldview is denying that every son must have a father with same genetic code. This worldview is suggesting that the first cell came with a genetic code built spontaneously at abiogenesis, but they do not show where and how this genetic code was in the state of the world during abiogenesis. Do you need to apply probability calculus for to know how a female womb is suitable for creating a new life?
Impossible question?! Are you talking about the question: “Which were the natural forces and elements that contributed for building the first biological system? Where were them? How and why those forces and elements converged to this planet surface at same time?”
These is the unique most rational questions we can do. And the method for finding the answers is: “Go looking them at the ancestral existing natural systems: atoms, galaxies, etc.” Yes I did it because I am not denying our ancestors.
Hummm…Yours argument is irrefutable. Really, it is impossible to avoid the basic materials for life – they are pervasive in the universe! Yours problem will begins when you take a little bit of those ingredients, mixing them for getting the right 20 aminoacidos, only the left handed molecules, and leaving them by themselves continuing the process towards the first cell system. Since they will not do that, you will go back, to the Universe – as the designer – for asking the same question.
Yes, but why the carbon structure easily forms long chain polymers for organic life? Why the oxygen or Nitrogen structures are not such suitable? I think academic establishment never did these questions, so, they have no explanations. I will advance the explanation from matrix/DNA models: carbon has number atomic 6, which is the exactly copy of Matrix natural formula for composing natural systems. Each particle is a tool performing a specific universal systemic function. And goes on…
The sun is going to dye because he is eating himself, Goo. The lesson of his existence, the big mistake of being supreme selfish, composing his own body as his own Paradise as a closed system, is spread to the external world in shape of light, a lesson for his offspring don’t do the same mistake.Creationists did not learned the lesson. They don’t love Humanity and Nature, they makes an alliance with a powerful god and lives their selfish life. Your light is our darkness. We’ll do different
Every time you have a question about Nature (the Universe is Nature) search the answer in nature.nature does not play dice with us. So, you will see that all elements and substances inside a cell system came from outside, through holes at the membrane.Now, try to make yours theoretical model about “where the Universe came from” based upon what you see. It is better than appeal to imaginations going far out away from Nature. That’s was the method used by Matrix/DNA models
I never said that. But…natural fractal patterns are in need of analyse from a different approach, other than Math. The universal pattern that Matrix/DNA models are suggesting seems a living thing that evolves, creates different appendices, changes time from micro to macro, etc. It is the universal formula that nature uses as template for organizing matter into systems. It is better seeing as a bi-lateral pair of nucleotide, the unit of information of DNA.
Technically, science is a product of your brain. and then if there were no organisms on the planet during the Big Bang, how did they come from nothing? Macro evolution also doesn’t make sense, in the terms that everyone came from a single cell that multiplied and already had the function to multiply if it was the first one
DarkHoundNero, our known data were rationally connected and the result is the Big Bang Theory. It requires that something came “through” “nothing” and not that something came from nothing. It means that the Universe is surrounded by a kind of membrane remembering nothing, with holes. And the first cell was not the first natural system able to self-replicate: our ancestors, galaxies and stars already does that.These theories are very pretty rationals under the light of what we see here and now.
You’re the first person to actually make some sense and answer me.
So science says that an organism was not present on the earth when the Big Bang happened and it was formed? So where exactly did an organism come from?
Organism is the name that we call any natural biological organized system. Then you have the same question I had 40 years ago and since nobody had the answer, I went to Amazon jungle - the still living world that witnessed the origins of life – searching the answer. There the jungle sent me to ask to the sky, because at the sky was the answer. Then, I saw the Matrix/DNA in shape of astronomical system, working exactly as an ancestral organism. Maybe my answer is wrong, but it is interesting…
The Matrix/DNA does not have seen supernatural interference upon the long chain of causes and effects that began with the Big Bang and is coming to our days.But absence of evidence is not proof for non existence. I will not destroy yours faith and hope in the existence of a lovely God, but only I will debate the events and real facts of this world that my little brain can grasp
I am not well informed about LQG, which means I need to dedicate more time studying. But…theoretical Physics seems that are going away off the beam. I don’t appreciate the idea of existing ghosts black holes as theorized by Hawking, I think that it is result of deviation of Maths from the natural world due the excess of Maths and computer simulations. Matrix/DNA is suggesting that at galactic nucleus there are merely vortexes formed by dust of died stars
It’s reasonable that any natural system 75% bad mutations goes worse and the 1% good, by logics, never should get fixed. But the macro-evidences of this world, the analyses of whole Natural History, shows that the long natural chain of causation is not linear as wish our logics. The carriage makes a curve and so, there is an evolutionary movement from simple to complex that is curve also.Have you heard about white light and dark light? It does that a system must became worst for becoming better
“I don’t know that humans are apes, but I do ‘know’ that life is a kind of energy. Despite my science illiteracy, I KNOW that all the actual scientists are liars or idiots.” –TheOneTheOwnLak
My definition of “life” is: “The shape of the universal natural system that began simplest as a vortex at the Big Bang, but containing all seven brutes natural forces that became the seven life’s properties. This shape correspond to our shape as “fetus” when our body is changing shapes due the action of vital cycle process. So, this Universe is a genetic reproduction process of something ex-machine, performed by steps known as Evolution, but, which, really, is the Universe under a vital cycle
If my definition will be proved the right one, life is not merely “energy”. Energy is merely a natural state got by accelerated mass and mass is the state of low energy. Both, mass and energy are not essence DE per SE, but derivations of a deepest essence: information. Informations are those quantum vortexes that appeared at Big Bang working like genes and composing quarks, leptons, etc.Reproduction of Universes…or Gods? I don’t know.
Really? Thanks by this information, I will go back for repeating my research about AI, maybe is there something new that I don’t know.Any suggestions for correcting my mistakes are welcome.
Every material body that still belongs to any natural system is light sensitive. All matter is supported by an ocean of light that produces wavelengths with different intensities of vibrations.All seven vibrations are shapes of a single vital cycle process. So, the shape of “green”color always are sensitive to “yellow” and “blue” colors due the same cause that a baby is the shape that links to embryo and child. There is symbiosis among material bodies
When a kid lose his parents and becomes homeless, his inner tendency forgets parents and turn on as hate against the hell in the streets and the world, becoming a criminal. But, if the kid is kept by relatives and grows on the same land, he keeps the memory of parents, like Uudam did, and the missing parents’ love becomes great potential tendency in some kind of arts. Usually he does nothing in relation to the whole Humanity, this species abandoned here without spiritual protectors parents. But.
Dawkins, like Darwin, had reduced the Universe into terrestrial events for analyzing biological history. They conclude by evolution and tried to identify its mechanisms. But… a microbe living inside a womb watching the embryogenese of a human fetus should conclude by evolution. We, outside the womb knows that evolution is not the ultimate event, it is “reproduction”. Amplifying our vision to the time/space of universal history leads us to see reproduction of Universes with another mechanisms.
Universe is not magic,he can’t create new information from nothing. So, he only can make a new thing, system, by the same process he was made. He can’t invent from nothing new information for other kind of process. We are a new system, so, if we want to know how the Universe was made, we have the process by which we were made. Our body started with a Big Bang, explosion of spermatozoon from initial singularity. What’s was before our fecundation? Another thing like us, conscious, natural. So?
Living in the jungle I woke up for the salvage chaotic state of this biosphere. All creatures, from any plant to any animal are tortured in this existence. But, then, suddenly we see a beautiful small flower. It seems not belonging to that world. We see a bird nurturing its offspring. We see the tall tree offering flavor fruits. And we see the salvage natives. A mother holding her baby and a male bringing on food to them. This is order lifting up from chaos. This is divine evolution.
Creation plus Evolution is a process much more complex than all guys are thinking here. The deeper template where natural history is established is the history of light light and dark light, ( vibrations popping out of a membrane of nothing that separates different worlds). Matter only is adjusted over this template. Driven by this universal force, biological systems (aka life) evolves in relation to Earth and degenerates in relation to this galactic system. The source of light is creation.
Thanks America! This debate is signal that a collective mind of a whole Nation has the courage to face its inner conflicts, thinking about then, suffering the pain of self-correction,but just it keeps the strong creative power of this great nation. What’s about the European and the Asian religious countries, South America, etc., which already discovered the ultimate “Truth” and has no capacity for fix what is sure wrong? There is no such debate. Yours voluntary suffering here is an heroic act!
What’s beyond the Membrane of Nothing?! The astonished idea coming from Theoretical Science, is Lawrence’s “something from nothing”. Since that Matrix/DNA calculations arrived to the astonishing idea that the seven frequencies of electric-magnetic spectrum of lightwaves are the source that imprints the vital cycle, life, into matter, we are searching the source of this natural light. The unique situation where things emerges is through membranes, then, I think there is a Membrane of Nothing.
NoGoodScienceForYou is here suggesting a video ( /watch?v=HRyXauc0h04) which uses real scientific reality as propaganda for his theory. I think the best education for children is showing the images of reality but, being careful self-watching for not using any kind of concepts related to adult’s interpretations, no imposition of theories. I could make a video with same images having in parallel images of spermatozoons as comets, oocyte as nuclear black holes, etc. This is for philosophy class.
Creationists frequently are using the probability calculus for refuting the odds of evolution and evolutionists are using the same calculus for reinforce the odds produced by chance. Both are wrong. The “individual” evolution of a new being inside a womb is driven by the external environment (human species as the non-intelligent designer) which acts internally (through DNA) and externally. Biological evolution is being driven by an yet unknown external environment, probabilities does not applies.
Creationist woman – “My grandfather was not a monkey!”
Lawrence Krauss – ” Well… yours case is not so clear… ” (maybe a pork?)
Evolutionists could be more intelligent if they explain the real state of Science today. All known facts suggests strongly the physical body of human beings came from primates. But Neurology – the field really expert in this matter – says that it still does not found how neurons produces thoughts and how they are related to human mind. This is hope for dignity
No. Biological Evolution is a point of time/space located at the long chain of causes and effects started with the Big Bang beginning with particles evolution, atomic and Cosmological Evolution. All forces of Biology were there at the last non-biological ancestor, the top pf cosmological evolution and I can show you where. But… we don’t know if the very seen steps of evolution is universal evolution or merely reproduction of universes.
GoodScienceForYou: “Mitochondria in most species has lost over 1200 complete genes”
And you says it is due degeneration from Adam’s DNA. You have a point, you are right. Adam was a closed selfish astronomical system, also called LUCA, his DNA was the formula of Universal Matrix. The decay or Fall of Adam into the microscope shape of biological system due entropy was a change from closed to opened system. Mitochondria tried to close it doing photosynthesis, and got it as cell plants.
About the graphic made at “evolution-is-degeneration dot ComSindex dot asp?PaginaID =1102″
Matrix/DNA:The graphic doesn”t shows a complete period of micro-evolution, nothing about universal evolution. Biological systems are result of the decay of astronomicals systems described by Newtonian mechanics plus Relativity plus Quantum Mechanics theories composing a quasi-perfect closed system, half-alive. This “evolution” has been reproduction of that ancestor
As introduction, they says: evolution theory says all life has started as single cell organisms”
TheMatrixDNA: It is wrong. There is no separation of life and no-life when talking about natural systems. Then, “life” has not started as single cell organisms. Biological systems (aka, “life”) had all principles of its forces, elements and properties inside atomic, astronomical systems, expressed or not. See them at Matrix/DNA models.
Peer reviewed scientific paper shows there hasn’t been enough time in the history of the universe for evolution to take place.
Journal BIO-Complexity, “Time and Information in Evolution,” Winston Ewert, Ann Gauger, William Dembski, and Robert J. Marks, II once again show that a mathematical simulation of evolution doesn’t model biologically realistic processes of Darwinian evolution at all.
This debate between Dembski team and Ewens team will not be solved while Humanity doesn’t know the entire context that affects our biosphere and living things. The existence of biological systems is not due a simultaneous act of magical creation neither a long process obeying natural selection as agent of immediate environmental changes. For instance, the process of Earth nuclear reactions and Sun’s reactions are stronger forces composing NS, any change there means changes here. See Matrix/DNA
Evolution has been destroyed and is now in the level of archaic mythological science. These priests of the past faith based pseudo science will be known for how they retarded biology and any progress towards cures for diseases. They’ll be mocked as they should be.
NOT ONE cure has ever come from the medical industry! We have rampant NEW genetic diseases eating away at us and killing our babies.
The rise in genetic diseases under their watch is horrendous. thanks to this Evodelusionism. LOOK!
The souls of the creators of the Selfish Paradise, Adam and Eve, that remains at Earth in shape of humans, are joined around the creationist world view, has been corrected. These people wants to reproduce at Earth the falling paradise, but they reserves to them the residence at the palace, while all other humans beings should be the slaves. You can see the design of that Paradise at Matrix/DNA Theory: You see Adam and Eve, the serpent, the tree, the apple, the Fall, and you will know the truth
I’m very glad to hear that you got saved. I certainly agree that the effects of Evolutionist propaganda are tragic. We need to fight for what’s true, but I don’t think comments on a YouTube video are exactly the frontlines I’m looking for.
(For Evolutionists reading this comment: yes, spreading Evolutionism is only tragic from my Creationist viewpoint.)
The effects of Judaism and its Bible and its production as Christianism approving human slavery, sharing Humanity into predators and preys, and as Islam, the violence that never ends, are most tragic. You are a bad human when propagating that anti-Humanity book. It is rational to suppose that there is some thing as God, but one needs never forgetting the size of this Universe, then, giving to a “possible God” his real dimensions above the Universe. The bible stupidly reduces Reason and God
The earliest writings on that subject come from the satanist Helena Blavatsky. She was busted several times scamming people and making up history. I take it you believe in her channeled demonic writings or one of the copycat offshoots like Zeitgeist the movie. The history lesion in Zeitgeist comes from Blavatsky’s imagination.
Yeahh… Blavatsky, a woman that challenged the Russian status quo established by imperators supported by arm and religion, a woman that abandoned a powerful Russian military husband, for travelling alone to Tibet searching other kind of knowledge. Was she a satanist? You, as supporter of an established power ruling at Vatican, unable to challenge the status quo, that had enslaved populations inside industries, is a saint? I prefer Blavatsky.
I have thought that the Earth is an amusement park. Where beings come, inhabit us and share our life experiences, feelings, etc. I’m not sure if the science fiction story has been written or not..
Your thought maybe is right, but, it includes the supposition that should have a parallel spiritual Universe, is it right? If so, I remember that there is no evidence/comparative parameters here for parallels universes and spiritual existences. Why not thinking that those beings that come, inhabit us, are really bubbles of consciousnesses that pops out of this planetary matter? Think about computers: software (as bubbles of intelligence) and hardware (material living bodies) in feed-back.
I think it is not “my philosophy” because it is a normal natural effect given some circumstances. Any one, included you, should get the same world vision if – known the modern scientific data and with single scientific tools – go to live in some virgin jungle by 4 or 7 years. It is the jungle that produces this philosophy over modern hard-wired brain by scholar education. But Darwin took 30 years for written a book, the jungle is big, there are lots of data, I need doing lots of work yet.
There is no evolution. There is no evidence for it. Not one species had evolved more complexity. You are a liar and are part of the denial of humans and their compulsions that destroy not only human lives but all life on earth. Putting your faith in humans has never worked. Why are you so stupid you want to thing now is different. They have killed so many people in the name of some idea.
Maybe you are right. Maybe there is no evolution inside this Universe. Millions of generations of hypothetical intelligent particles living 17 seconds each one and inside a fecundated ovum should watch the steps of evolution from single zygote to a human embryo believing that was watching evolution. We, outside their “universe” knows that it is “reproduction”. Maybe we are watching and working the reproduction of the son of some god. But… for while, we are watching evolution, that’s reality.
Changing the faith in humans for faith in supernatural ghosts produces the preys (95% of world population?) and hating humans by loving the salvage past animalism inheritance produces predators (the 1%?). Why human beings has followed these stupid millennial social models, shared into salvage capitalism, salvage communism, etc? It is the work of the “serpent” that convinced “Eve” in the “Paradise”. It is the stupid universal material tendency to be extreme selfish closed system. Not humanism…
“There are millions of single celled species that never evolved into multicellular organisms.” Exactly and that means there is no evidence of any form of advancement from a single cell to 2 cells with the new cells performing new functions. Thanks.
Don’t you know embryogenesis?! Fecundation, zygote, meiosis, morula…etc? You need learn something new, but for doing it, you need change your magic supernatural ghost creator in the sky by the real, natural, creator in the sky. Functions comes in two types: the systemic function (which is the effect over the external world from the projection of the shape of the whole system) and internal systemic function, which is related to each part of a system. There are different expressions of (cont.)
of internal functions and each system has its tendency expressed by the most strong expressed part. Any bit of external change makes changes at internal expressions. The interactions between internal parts creates infinite numbers of internal functions, called “fuzzy logic”. The initial process of eukaryotes merely replicating its cells is the first phase of biological evolution mimicking the process by which stars, galaxies are replicated, by self-recycling (see Matrix/DNA models)
“I want you to find one positive mutation ever found in the human genome.”
The Matrix/DNA models explains how and why the genome is continually mutated. The fundamental unit of information which is the building block of RNA/DNA is a bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, which is the biological microscopic counterpart of the building block that came evolving from quantum vortexes after Big Bang, to atoms to galaxies. This universal “matrix” diversifies into infinite different kinds of nucleotides
Medical science is going away off the beam due Biology being seen as separated from Physics. It’s the same that one try to understand the existence of human body composed by flesh organs and substance without the skeleton and nervous systems which are related to the entity of natural systems. They had separated Universal Evolution into two blocks, with no evolutionary links between them. The abysmal hole created between two blocks are being fulfilled with the myth of absolute randomness.
I use evidence and the DNA is fantastic evidence for only DE-EVOLUTION.. All creatures are losing gene functions and we can easily see this in the DNA. Fossilization is not rare. We have samples of over 200 million fossils from most creatures that have ever lived. WE have 88% of the non bird, NOW LIVING, vertebrates as fossils and the original looks FAR more fit than what we see now. Go look! You cannot use faith and belief!!
This has to be the dumbest argument for evolution of all of them.
The famous laryngeal nerve “evidence”. If the path of this nerve is not optimal then God is a screw up.
The fact that “evolution” only leads to screw ups from the original far more fit condition means that the laryngeal nerve is evidence for genetic dysfunctions of original “engineering” when the nerve was in a much shorter path at one time and “Evotards” still don’t fully know the purpose of this nerve.
We know. The purpose of this nerve is transforming chemical operations for connections between organism’s organs into sounds waves (voice) for connecting separated brains into a whole Humanist system. When you need transformations of signal waves you need apply quantum superposition and following separation. Then, the left and right nerves superposed makes the complete circuit of an established system, and when are separated they can be turned into a new different system. But…this is complex
In the first paragraph they clearly define “anti-evolution” or loss of good genetic engineering as the creatures “degrade” from the more “optimal” to the “suboptimal”.
This is the MOST compelling evidence for anti-evolution or gradual degrading of the best genetic engineering to the more defective genetic engineering we see today that I have ever seen and that we can see today.
The problem is that yours “more optimal” is good for stupid monkeys, but unsupportable for who has some intelligence. Yours optimal is called “Adam’s DNA”, a creature that was living like a stupid monkey eternally at a garden full of animals and plants. Any intelligent being would prefer the suicide, if they think that would be condemned to that life by all eternity. Thankfully had the Fall, the “Adam” genetic degradation, even that we were condemned to beginning as microscope cell here
The famous The Left Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve is totally evidence for genetic degradation. These people are “nuts” by the way in not being able to see the obvious, because they are brainwashed into seeing things BACKWARDS.
You are still blind to the deeper secrets of Nature Why the left RLN os different from the right RLN? This question makes no sense, there is no right and left nerves, there is a complete circuit of a system, separated into two slices. Make the superposition of those two nerves… you gets a complete circle. Why they makes a circle and why the left has several branches? Well… see the Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems, you will understand everything. No degradation
There are only a very few amino acids available to make living tissue from, so OF COURSE it will be used in different creatures to make similar body parts.
Look at the amino acids chart and tell me how many do you see? (20)
We live on a tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.
We do not have infinite resources to build body tissue from.
Drive your eyes down to look to those 20 aminoacids and now drive yours eyes up to see the galaxy, the Universe, that produced them. Ask “why”, “how”, “for what”? Do you see the evolution of aminoacids? First step: Carbon is called by Nature to be the central atom. Why? Because Nature has several different faces, states, and our astronomical system was standing at the specific state as closed perfect natural system. Which is composed by six universal functions. Just carbon atomic number. So on..
“protein functional redundancy… our tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.”
This doesn’t means that life was tunelled due intelligent design. Proteins are slices of a kind of complete systemic circuit – the system around us – so the slices are limited in number. Planets has limited variations, resources, because limited is the specific state of Nature that produced them. But biological systems (aka, “life”) are just a rebellion against the creator system, so, open for mutations
It is ridiculous crap “pseudo science” and a stretch of the imagination.
It goes along with the idea that fools think that any similarity of use, appearance can only mean a direct genetic linage link.
This is utterly ridiculous and in fact all that we have seen of this idea in fossils of the “ancient version” of the creature are shown to have far more usable features and the “homology” becomes more complex as you go back in time.
I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.
While Naturalists are struggling trying to understand this world, trying to discover mechanisms and processes that can be transformed into technology for increasing Humanity power, spiritualists are criticizing them, being obstacles to their job?! No spirits and supernatural beings has made anything good for human kind till now and still 95% of our brothers in species are being tortured in this stupid conditions of life. Evolution is the idea that arose from a man that sacrificed his life for us
I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.
That’s the cause we agnostics prefers the naturalist/rationalist community than the religious community. Our life experience as humans at Earth have been too much bad, our dream is to change everything. The naturalists woks in rhythm of changes, while creationists are conservationist of this stupid “status quo”, so, they are obstacles and unuseful.
Even the “father” of evolution mentioned sripulations under which evolution could not be true. Those stipulations were met. Darwin discredited evolution in his own words. But you all havent actually taken any time to study it, you just assume blindly.
Why aren’t you honesty and respectful enough? If you want to destroy the worldvision of a man due you think it has bad effects, what you should do? Repeat his experiments, contest his evidences. Take a ship and go by 4 years facing the hell in a salvage world, do observations by yourself, applying the modern knowledge, show what was wrong with Darwin idea. Or do you want to refute such sacrificial heroic job standing under air conditioned? Taking Reason off Nature by magical thinking is easier
Christianity is a theory by the real definition of “theory” by the Greeks that coined the word. It is not a theory by scientific definition, but here is not a scientific community congress, it is a public debate. Theory is “a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking”- Wikipedia. Christianism is product of earlier human consciousnesses recently formed as any modern baby impregnates its surroundings with magics and ghosts friends.
Both can not equating at the same plane as the operations of a baby brain (Bible authors) is not the operations of a teenager brain (Darwin). All big religious theories were built from an unique source: the real little world seen by an infant intelligence plus flashes of memories popping up in the baby brain about a not seen but lived womb’s world. Ancient founders of all religions were visionaries (embryos) that had real visions about the womb were our ancestors shapes lived: the Cosmos.
You will not believe in my narrative as I don’t believe in it, I am still searching a better explanation as skeptical that I am. The narrative is: a native xaman living in Amazon jungle 30 years ago, with altered state of mind due their beverages, described visions of black holes and cosmogony identical to descriptions of black holes and cosmogony seen at Blavatsky books about “The Secret Doctrine”, or “theosophy” made by ancient eastern 5.000 years ago. I have a theory about: same baby brains
Yes, Christianity is not rational in the sense that Reason must be a natural product of nature. But… the non-rational productions of Bible’s authors can be rationally understood, using an analogy: the excessive installations of an industry is used to produce different sub-products. My theory is that the fusion of Chrom-2 suddenly produced an abrupt augment of cerebral mass beyond the normal installation that should be produced by the normal evolutionary chain. Earlier hominids had imaginations
I an sorry that I am not finding now a recently published paper showing that human fetus suddenly produces neurons twice more fast than apes/monkeys fetus. I think it is a good evidence for this theory about the development of consciousness at the level of the human species, when I separated the stages of its evolution between babies/teenagers/adults shapes. But… why still there are people that believes in the Bible, which was a baby’s minded production? Missing education, denial to be adult?
I honestly don’t know what to think. The idea that there’s a guy upstairs pulling all the strings sounds silly, and completely illogical, yet for macro-evolution contradicts itself in more ways than one.
While it makes absolutely no sense how or why we’d choose to go back to primal technology after conquering the galaxy, the only thing I’m truly comfortable with is that we developed on another distant planet and migrated to earth.
Yes, makes no sense the idea of some intelligent powerful being responsible by this chaotic biosphere and the struggle for species to become powerful. And makes no sense that an intelligence in shape of quasi-apes after conquering galaxies with high technology arrived here forgetting all that technology. The unique explanation that makes sense to me is Matrix/DNA Theory. Intelligence was merely potential at ancestors that were, themselves, the building block of any shape of natural systems.
Biological evolution is merely a micro-evolutionary cycle which must be added to lots of others micro-cycles and finally composing the Universal Evolution, from the extreme singularity resumed to a central point towards complexity expanded to astronomical size. How should you call the period of evolution that goes from yours body shape as teenager until the final shape of adult? As biological systems we are one transitional shape of a universal system that evolves by vital cycle process.
Things does not change by themselves from simple to complicated, this should be creating new information from nothing, by magics. But there are things like atomic, astronomic, biological systems that changes from simple to complex, at individual and populations levels. Individual occurs at embryogenesis, a body transforming from extreme singularity to complex. The mystery is that this world has a hierarchy of systems and you are not seeing the system the informations are coming from.
Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body. The natural elements and informations for transforming non-organic into organic and electric-magnetic-mechanical systems into biological systems does not arises by magics or absolutely randomness. Those necessary and enough for building biologicals must come from a stellar system described by Newtonian mechanics turned into half-biological galaxy, as described by Matrix/DNA Theory.
@”Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body”
And there you have it, folks.
You see this, soullessdeity?
Even matrixdna, world-class expert at butchering logic, reason and lucidity, not only completely understands the inherent conflict contained in your ridiculous statement, but can even state it on a level that approaches eloquence.
That alone should have you burying your head in utter shame.
I don’t understand why posts like yours are being flagged as spam. You, as everybody, has the right to express opinions, we are debating theories, one can read or ignore what he/she doesn’t like. This is not honesty. About logic I do my best advocating the logics that I learned from nude. virgin, salvage Nature living 7 years at Amazon jungle were was elaborated Matrix/DNA worldvision. Conflicts with modern scholar logic is an issue to be solved by time, not by us. Who is away off the beam?
Look! There are trees. Someone must have designed them. See? Tree elves are real and great designers engineering trees for everyone. How else did trees get here, if not by the mysterious powers of the chief tree elf?
Yes, trees were designed. Genetically, by transmission of “Matrix/DNA” from their creators…living in the sky. Trees are the same image of galaxies.The trunk represents the central nuclear axis. The branches are the galaxy’s arms. The leaves are the planets. The yellow fruits pending on the arms are the stars. The plant cell is the biological tendency to reproduce the closed astronomical system with chloroplasts making photosynthesis linking the cell to the star, which is an evolution-stopper.
Question: why can’t humans create a self replicating machine? We can’t even create a machine that can eat breakfast. Intelligent designing humans can’t come close to the technology, complexity, efficiency, eloquence, etc of any type of life. Why would random chance processes be better able to produce life (even when the laws of physics, entropy, are against their natural creation?). I’m interested in an intelligent response! Do you have one?
“Machine” and “life” are cultural symbols used for describing real states and details of Nature. We learn mechanisms, processes existing at Nature and we see matter organized as working systems. Our technology is mimicking natural phenomena, sometimes applying fuzzy logics, mixing mechanisms and materials from different phenomena and producing new arrangements. We produces “machines” because our limited sensors and brain capability see only mechanical and biological aspects of natural systems.
If you want to debate your theory about this yet unknown world first of all you need be honest and a method. You post this exactly post here yesterday, got several answers, now answers that answers.
Could you elaborate this information? Are you referring to synthetic molecules, like those from Craig Venter? Matrix/DNA is researching the extensive already published papers related to NASA research of self-replicating robots, but any additional information about other sectors will be welcome.
NASA has a sector dedicated to study self-replicating machines. The goal is sending robots like Curiosity to other astronomical bodies, self-replicating robots that could use the matter of those bodies for populating the astro, maybe extracting some valorous mineral, etc. I am preparing a descriptive suggestion because the Matrix/DNA models arrive to a theoretical formula, a software’s diagram about a natural self-replicating machine. It is about the Newtonian mechanics aspect of systems
The same question would have been asked as to why humans can’t get to the moon a hundred years ago. Not only have we done that, but we’re getting closer to building a self replicating machine.
Also, technically, we absolutely can create a self replicating creature that eats. We can create some that are even capable of learning on a fundamental level. Programmers have done that for quite some time. It’s limited to another, simulated universe. Technically, those programmers could be gods.
This issue is good food for thought. Nature makes self-replicating machines: a stellar system (working with the principles of Newtonian mechanics) degenerates, decomposes, its dust composes again as a new stellar system. But this process is self-recycling, when the original machine needs “dying” and its matter be used for a new one. Suppose that we could insert a software inside each atom of Curiosity and when the robot become oldest, we keep it at same place, the atoms would joining again…
Then why doesn’t 1 human have at least 1 wing growing out of their back. The fly did it, w/ less of a need to fly, than we have. They can walk around all day and find poop. That is their life “poop”, poop is on the ground, they do not need wings.
Joe, the causes are deeper than we think. Wings can be a result of personal effort (anfibians jumps) or can be imposed into a specie by informations flowing in this environment. Wings are specific shapes of accessories developed from cellular cilia which was produced by a universal systemic function number 5. This same function produced the tails of comets for realizing an operation. Here, the system that built biosphere was in need of something being the transporter of pollen. It was imposed
@tsub0dai “humans are far more diverse as a species than any individual person”
The population of human species is comprised of individuals. Theoretically, one individual from today’s human population could be compared to one individual, Adam, in the creation model for genetic diversity. The quagga is an example of selective breeding (artificial selection) used to restore lost genetic information to a few individuals. Natural selection works oppositely toward genetic entropy, i.e. loss.
Yes, Adam/Eve were/is the most perfect genome possible to be made by Nature. Their genome was the formula for building their bodies, which was a closed non-minded system, merely extension of their genome. You can see their “photo” published by Matrix/DNA theory. Natural Selection worked oppositely to their tendencies, entropy causing the big Fall. As microscopic biological systems, the offspring of Adam/Eve lifted up at planets, as opened systems. The sinner father in the sky is driven NS now.
The land of militant Evotards who constantly give me death threats:
Austrailia: “The incidence rate for all cancers combined increased by 27% from 383 cases per 100,000 people in 1982 to 485 cases per 100,000 people in 2007.”
This is the highest rise in cancer of all the social liberal states I have found 127% rise in cancer in 25 years.
Cancer is only caused by genetic defects according to 449087 peer medical papers on PubMed, the international library of genetic diseases.
Yes, cancer is an issue that needs urgent attentions. If you see the picture at my website tipping “The Cycle Of Cholesterol And The Matrix” you will know a new approach for understanding diseases. We have the formula for perfect systems, any disease is dysfunction of that formula. My problem is that I am alone doing this, have no time and resources. I did only fast research about bad cholesterol, Alzheimer. For analyzing cancer under Matrix models is necessary reading lots of informations.
Germany, with militant socialists liberalism has 7.5 million functionally illiterate adults out of a population of 81.7 million.
That is a great sign of how well that works. Germany used to be the country where science and engineering prevailed and German engineering was well known. Now 9% of the population can’t read or write. They are setting up programs to educate people who have already been through the school system
I think this is normal result from WW2: generations of people went to hard work instead schools. But this is also a suggestion that Matrix/DNA models are right. They are suggesting a different kind of targets for the Science enterprise, producing a different kind of technology, medicine, human habitat, different design for urban life. Different from that produced by Germany, whose unconscious target was driven to be a kind of Brave New World ruled by the Big Brother, mimicking insects societies
OUR DNA closely maps out our history of self destruction. Its clear that we have been destroying our genome for a long time and it shows in the huge numbers of deaths directly due to genetic diseases, 30.4 million is less than half of the real number each year. Considering that we created all the viral fungal and bacterial infections by our stupid actions that kill us from infections.
We seem to have become animals with sexual compulsions owning us completely, never aware of what that is doing
The building blocks of DNA, bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, are diversified copies of a unique system. each copy expresses a particular particle, a specific function, different of all others. These copies self-assembly themselves, free in biosphere and cell environment. Some kind of biological behavior selects among these copies which will be increased in their genomes. But the constructors of these copies does not want us as biological minded creatures, they want pieces for a natural machine.
We now have the all time record of childhood congenital disease rates and at astonishing accelleration. 120% rise in Autism in 2 years! 1 in 88 diagnosed by 8 year old. 1 in 125 babies born with congenital heart disease. A rise of 135% in childhood invasive cancer in 34 years. 200% rise in 10 years of STD’s affecting 1 in 4 and young fertile girls have the highest rates. Evolution is a denial mechanism that supports this genetic suicide. “evolutionforum.info”
I should leave these statistics for atheists answering them. But, my personal technique is searching causes based on Matrix/DNA models. They suggests that degradation of humans genetics and bodies is the predicted results from this biosphere evolution. This biosphere was produced by chaos through fragments coming from the decay of a ordered half-mechanical/half-biological system. The action of these fragments is to reproduce the machine, humans must be pieces, so, it is fixing our genome.
History’s shown from the dark ages; the advent of many diseases that nearly wiped out humans, like the plague , wiping out 1/2 the population of Europe; resulted in extreme political measures, using the state religion, Gods authority, to stop diseases. Prison time public whipping, death to homos & anyone who had sex outside of a virgin marriage was a criminal period. It took a lot of suffering to learn to stop killing families children mothers fathers. Used to use a sharp pole for punishment.
I had no time yet for analyzing those plagues based upon Matrix models, but these models suggestions about the origins of viruses also suggests that diseases caused by them are produced by specific psychological states – individual or collective. Viruses are organic constructs from Matrix/DNA genetic code – which exists inside living beings and flowing in the environment – produced by universal function number 5. So, those plagues were produced by specific state of mind, which were religious.
33% of people ages 15 to 64 will die from cancer in the USA. Source CDC. Childhood invasive cancer in the US has risen by 135%;34 years. STD’s in the US up 200% in 10 years with the highest rates: young women ages 14 to 24.
It seems that also the fastest growing religion is atheism.
It turns out that Evodelusionism is the religion of atheists, homos, sex addicts, socialist liberals, communists, politicians, prostitutes (no kidding) and scientists. What a group of people to model after. Eh?
It is just the opposite. This degradation of human bodies is the corolary of millenniums of religious thought ruling societies with wrong social systems, wrong technology and wrong science. Religion is a minded-stopper, it separates men from its Nature for alliance with supernatural. Then, the whole body is driven not by the intellect, but by the laws of atoms composing the body. These atoms are matter which supreme tendency is closed inertial equilibrium. We got it, but Nature is responding.
A good sample is the biggest religions of the planet, the Asian religions, which supreme goal is the search for personal equilibrium and nirvana. We have a model of a natural system just in this exactly state: the building block of astronomical systems, our ancestor since 10 billion years ago. It is a closed system into itself, cutting relations with the whole natural world, a self-constructed paradise, where the two aspects of matter, mass and energy got its targets. Extreme selfishness.
These building blocks grew and built galaxies. Its shape is like a perfect machine, a perpetuum motor, self-recycling. The Universe was populated by them. But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation, measured by entropy and the pretense eternity falls down. Today the Universe is composed by their fossils, ours ancestors. Meanwhile, consciousness was sleeping at galaxies, woke up in shape of animals and lifted up as humans. Religious aret repeating the sin
@”But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation…”
First off, it doesn’t produce degradation. It simply states that isolated systems will always achieve maximum entropy, manifested as thermal equilibrium. This is the ultimate destiny of our universe.
Secondly, galaxies aren’t isolated systems within the context of “the universe”.
Are you based on Thermodynamic Theory for systems? First of all, those theorists never knew how and what is a perfect closed system. It is built by any lightwaves invading inertial mass and modeling matter accordingly to its seven different frequencies of vibrations, from gamma-ray to radio. Entropy is the name of unit of measurement, not the sate itself. Degradation is not loosing quantities of energy/mass, is fragments escaping from the circuit flow and diminishing the quality of closed system
EVOLUTION is a fairytale for grown-ups, complete with its abiogenetic virgin birth, apes that talk and tell lies, “survival of the fittest “moral code, The prophet called Charlie, a magical process that’s never been observed while its happening, cows that tried to walk on water but became whales, a story about how a primordial soup made a chef.
Almost equal to the collection of fairytale in the Bible, eh? The big difference is that Charlie really sacrificed his best years abandoning a good life in London for facing the hell of the salvage world, observing facts for building conclusions, while the prophets of Bible forgot the real facts of nature and jumped to imaginary conclusions. Any other man that go back to the salvage world with the modern scientific knowledge will find models that solves all problems pointed by you, rationally
No, DNA proves that he has all informations for doing all species at Earth. DNA proves to aliens that there are diversification of species at Earth. It does not prove Evolution, it merely suggests that evolution is possible.
I’m sorry, but last time I checked, not matter what you believe, there’s only so much evidence, and at some point you have to go on faith. Tell me again how evolution is a fact?
DNA proves for a microbe as observer located inside the womb and watching the progress of a fetus that he is seeing evolution. As observers outside the womb, we know that it is reproduction. This Universe is a cosmic egg – or is an agglomerated of bodies still alive or of died fossils (galaxies) – where is occurring a normal natural process of reproduction. And we – like all conscious living beings at millions of other planets – are the minded “genes” making the embryo for the final Big Birth
@van der Meer “[Creationists] provide an answer, just not the correct one”
Considering that scientific theories are only temporal and never absolute (e.g. Newton’s gravitation theory was replaced by Einstein’s general theory of relativity), how do you know what the “correct” answer is concerning man’s origin? Modern-day scientists admit that they don’t know how life began nor has anyone ever created an artificial environment that facilitates the spontaneous generation of life from non-life.
Newton’s theory was not replaced by Einstein’s theory because they were dealing with different dimensions of time/space. Newton’s theory is for Einstein’s the same that atoms are for cells, it means, the new arrangement of atoms inside a cell changes their behaviors and functions. Newton was dealing with mechanics at stellar system level which is an mechanic arrangement like a watch – but Einstein was dealing with galaxies which is half-mechanical/half-biological acting over stellar systems
We don’t know man’s origins in relation to human mind/brain, which could have aggregated new informations coming from a superior natural system located at a superior level of complexity in relation to the total systemic environment (Milk Way) that supplied informations for man’s body, about which we have the most strong evidences that came from primates. For creating biological systems from the evolutionary top of non-biological systems we need more knowledge about natural light, it is the code
I would hardly think the lack of 100% confirmed theory in the branches of science would drive children into the wrong path, most depending on age wouldn’t grasp the Matrix /DNA theory anyway ,and most likely be taught at the college level.. Where as religion prefers to brainwash children at a young age before their logical abilities are fully developed and are still easy prey to mythical fairy tale stories and fear of invisible boogie men and good fairies …
You are right, religion has not worked for improving human existence, so, they are not the solution, our futures generations needs search other alternatives, while the empirical scientifically proved facts must be known. The observation of fossil record and another known facts strongly suggests that there is a natural process from simplest to complexity, which is called “evolution” But this process happens at universal macro scale, unknown, so biological evolution is a non-complete theory.
@NuggetKazooie “negative factors you described wouldn’t apply to the other populations”
Then you get a net positive. Even very small positives soon leads to huge numbers & small negatives quickly lead to extinction.
“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass, with a narrowing population of Homo erectus leading to possibly one single mutant, whose improved genes emerged into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from failure to success is startling.” Alan F. Alford
Not true. Alan F. Alford is not an reliable witness–His first book Gods of the New Millennium (1996) drew on the ancient astronaut theory of Zecharia Sitchin
@Martin Koch “Alan F Alford is not an reliable witness”
“however, he admitted to serious faults in his use of Sitchin’s theory and proposed an alternative, cataclysm theory of ancient myth: “I am now firmly of the opinion… the descent of the gods was a poetic rendition of the cataclysm myth…” wiki
Alan Alford is thus a “hostile witness” for creationism. Too bad he was forced to consider what he thought was a better mechanism than TOE.
Do “reliable witnesses” only have your same viewpoint?
“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass,…”
But his observation above is known, being the human genes emerged by evolution or by other unknown source. Alford almost touched the deeper secret of Nature and the deeper source for religious myths. In fact happened a cataclysmic event and the descent of gods as source for human genes. But this cataclysm was not the Noah’s flood neither the explosion of Nibiru, Matrix/DNA suggests other kind of “cataclysm” and descent “gods”
Yes, that is what Matrix models are suggesting: no aliens, ancient or otherwise. We need to remember the initial state of this biosphere and the jungle is the best witness still existing about the life’s origins. It indicates that this biosphere is product of chaos. Chaos is product of cataclysm that happens on ordered environments. The environment existing before biosphere’s origins was made of atomic and astronomical systems. So, there was the Newtonian machine and ours ancestors, the “gods”
The Matrix model still is a theory explaining this worlds’ existence, under tests facing real proved facts. It is a natural formula used by Nature for assembling matter into systems, like atoms, galaxies, trees, humans, cells, etc. This formula is under evolution since the Big Bang ( initially the Matrix was shared by billions of vortexes as bits-information or ex-machine quantum genes) and here the formula is resumed into a base-pair of nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. Theories…
Only when Science as real knowledge of real facts is used by someone that did the mental exercise for connecting the facts, got a big picture, and teach to children that his picture is Science. Since we for sure don’t have all facts ( maybe neither 30% of all facts of this Universe) any big picture will be product of imagination, then, should be taught as theory. Any big picture (as Matrix/DNA Theory) now will be a driven into wrong pathway for children or a closer mind
I agree and I will talk to kids about ToE, ID, panspermia, Matrix/DNA, etc., mentioning that I don’t know which theory is more appropriated and my personal thought has indicated that there is a natural process of transformation that have increased complexity. But, all these theories must be taught in a Philosophy class, not Science class. Science only inform about real known facts, has no conclusions. The most important thing is to be certified that kids will be opened minds, free for choices
That’s funny. You make me remembering when Morelli was in Amazon jungle and elaborated the Matrix/DNA Theory. He saw lots of snakes in his pathway, they were static waiting any attack for expelling their venom. Louis usually touched them with a long piece of wood, and the snake bites the wood, before going away. Here in Internet, we find snakes in needs of expelling poison of their souls and any comments contrary to their beliefs works as the wood branch. Funny is that Interned is enough long
@khoraski ok fine, give me a proven testable hypothesis, just like every single real scientific thory must do, and we will start calling creationism scientific.
You have a testable hypothesis. The Last Universal Common Ancestor – LUCA – of all living systems, is pictured in a intelligible astronomical model that’s testable. Taking out LUCA from Earth and out of abiogenesis, putting LUCA in the sky, all tools of a cells system can be reduced to the astonishing singularity of LUCA. Broken LUCA into small pieces, you have as result all living species seen at earth. But, LUCA was found coming from before the Big Bang, its origins is unknown.
Ok, they you think you have the right for taking the word “theory” from the ancient Greeks that coined the word and give a new definition. No, my friend, the modern schools are not the owner of this world, they applied the wrong word to jobs resulting from a specific method of connecting real data, which method can be wrong. The Matrix?DNA Theory is a theory in the strictly sense obeying the right of its creators.
The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear.
All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this assumption can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.
Sentient animals put a face to phenomena – the evolution of the ‘god’ concept. All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it Assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this Assumption, this Instinct can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.
That’s your big mistake! yes, primates and all animals worships real things which symbolizes divinity. Primates, dogs, worship caves. black caves, they do holes in the soil, because in their brains are flashing images of black holes, which is encrypted into DNA. Flies worship any lighting lamp, because their atoms is a scene of electrons worshiping the luminous proton. Bees and ants worships the model of astronomical closed system and indeed, they built social system as the real copy.
Raízes Como Consciência Cósmica e Arvores como Consciências Humanas
Muito bom exercicio para desenvolver o intelecto é ler, ao menos, o resumido texto na Wikipedia ( http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aposta_de_Pascal ) ( a versão em Inglês está mais substancial). Mas qual foi a interpretação da Matrix/DNA sôbre êste tópico? Os nossos modêlos sugerem que o Universo é composto por hardware (comprovado) e software ( não comprovado, ainda confuso, mas racionalmente viável e quase inevitável). Viver segundo a sugestão dêstes modêlos é viver apostando na exist6encia de uma superior consciência, na qual, a nossa mente enquanto existindo como humanos, existe como uma espécie de bôlha densa num oceano de consciência cósmica. Se isto estiver errado, talvez percamos um pouco das oportunidades de prazer e poder que a vida curta, real, oferece a alguns ( para muitos, como eu, que nasceu e foi criado como menor abandonado e nunca foi agraciado com alguma dádiva material, não existe livre-arbitrio e portanto não existem tais oportunidades, mas quem nasceu suportado por familias pode ter tais oportunidades). Ainda não avaliei profundamente quais seriam estas perdas. Mas tambem pode ter vantagens, como a de evitar depressões e acessos de furia incontida. Em todo caso, pelo menos imaginando-se existir uma consciência cósmica, deve ser um estado de inteligencia que ajude a ampliar os horizontes da nossa consciência individual, ao sempre nos lembrar que estamos num Universo e não apenas na nossa cidade. E se existe a consciência cósmica, temos que nos lembrar da hierarquia dos sistemas naturais, onde sistemas muito grandes e menos evoluidos como as galaxias, ou possiveis sistemas muito evoluidos em relação ao sistema corpo-humano, podem estarem influenciando através de suas informações flutuando no ar. Se supomos a existência de uma consciência cósmica como um sistema invisivel superior, estaremos sendo acessiveis à penetração de informações livres que dela porventura possam estar vindo. Se não aceitar-mos sus existência, estaríamos criando em volta de nós uma armaduara bloqueante para tais ‘hipotéticas informações.
Quem sou eu?
Porem, penso que devemos fazer algum esforço para não cair no estado de Pascal, um estado religioso produzido pela aceitação da existencia de um Deus e humanamente descrito, pois assim estariamos reduzindo ou afugentando de nós a possível verdadeira consci6encia cósmica. Acho ser melhor não fechar a mente em torno de crenças sôbre propriedades, intenções, comportamentos, etc., dessa consciência cósmica. Nosso pequenino cérebro e recem-nascida consciência ainda não poderia entender nada dessa consci6encia superior. Não vejo em que essa aposta nesta possivel consciência cósmica possa prejudicar nossa qualidade de vida, a não ser, que a falta de escrupulos no gozo total dos prazeres seja uma vantagem e a vida seja apenas esta curta vida. Como disse, êste tópico é mentalmente saudavel, deve-se gastar alguns minutos pensando nêle, não devemos seguir a conclusão e crença de ninguem mais alem de nós mesmos, pois ninguem sabe nada a respeito. Se você não sabe, existem pessoas que creem fielmente nessa consci6encia cósmica e numa versão moderna, mais ou menos bem informada cientificamente, como é o caso de Deepak Choprah. Êle tem website e colunas em conceituados jornais, como o Huffington Post. Ás vêzes estou trombando com seus artigos, alguns, fornecendo alimento para pensamentos. Mas nunca se esquecendo que êle é um ser na busca, tão cego quanto eu. A diferença entre nós é que 6ele acredita na sua cosmovisão e afirma ela tentando impô-la na mente de outras pessoas, enquanto eu tenho mêdo de ser um cego dirigindo outros cegos, pois poderiamos todos cair nos buracos da estrada, e eu seria o responsável, insuportável pêso de consciência. É um tópico muito importante, Pascal foi um grande pensador, e se você tiver informações que possa me ajudar a desenvolver meu lado tambem, agradeço.
“Primordial soup” is a term introduced by the Soviet biologist Alexander Oparin. In 1924, he proposed the theory of the origin of life on Earth through the transformation, during the gradual chemical evolution of molecules that contain carbon in the primordial soup.”…
But your alternative is not rational: a magic man making man from lame. There are mistakes in Oparin theory due the lack of knowledge of Astronomy at 1924, so, his calculations about reduced atmosphere were missing hidden elements. Today we are able to calculated working systems composed by the seven kinds of known astronomical bodies, the process by which this system can be microscopically miniaturized and becoming a complete cell living system. See Matrix/DNA Theory cosmological models.
(Vai lá e clique no botão com o polegar prá cima – claro, se você concordar com meu comentário) Esta é a sexta parte dêste artigo, vide as cinco anteriores, numeros 5,4,3, 2 e 1 tôdas aqui nêste blog com o mesmo titulo) . Foram perdidos muitos posts da Matrix devido uma revisão que desapareceu do blog ( principalmente posts do dia 08). Meus posts estão em três nomes devido problemas na conta do Youtube: Louis Charles Morelli, TheMatrixDNA e Austriak1)
( Deletar PC Cleaner Urgente! Perdí Todos os posts entre 11 e 13)
XXX
Posts modêlos para entrada todos os dias:
All posts here by Matrix/DNA seems “away off the beam”, it makes no sense, the words are out of order, phrases are not connected in comprehensible way. It “seems” because Matrix/DNA is a narrative of this world by a never knew before way for connecting all real natural facts and events observed here and now. Is not the words out of order, it is your way of connecting real facts that is out of order. We need give to our children more power than we had, which is the right naturalistic knowledge
The fundamental problem with the observable universal history of evolution is that evolution is product of matter, and matter, we know, has the supreme tendency to get eternal thermodynamic equilibrium. So, must have a force among matter that is odd to matter. How to find it ? Nature must answer this question. And I see the matter inside a fecundated ovule not going to inertia, but moving under evolution. DNA contains this force here. And now we discovered the DNA of Universe: the Matrix/DNA.
Question: If the supreme tendency of matter is to accommodate at eternal thermodynamic equilibrium state, which non-material force could exist against this tendency, forcing matter towards complexity and evolution? If there was a God creating this world, why he made matter with this tendency for being the structural substance of this world and the substance of bodies of living beings with the opposite tendency- the tendency for eternal dynamic movement? Atheism and creationism makes no sense?
I know the answers. Atheism will say that the Big Bang produced chaos, after that matter is searching its ordered state, and that’s why we see evolution just now. And creationist will say that God created the world in perfect state ( this was not the tendency of matter or living beings) but the sin of Adam/Eve broken the perfection. But, I think that an infinitelly perfect and not mutable world, at ordered state, is the same of “nothing”. It should be a closed system, the supreme selfishness.
Why not asking these supremes questions to Nature? Who else could be more faithful professor? That’s what we did. We spent 7 years at the heart of Amazon jungle asking nature, because there is the last untouchable land that still has the witness of life’s origins. And we got a third alternative, not atheist, neither creationist, but 50% of each one. This Universe is a kind of cosmic egg, the galaxies are the fossils of our ancestors, and the History is “from the Big Bang towards a Big Birth”.
Inside this Universe is occurring a kind of genetic/computational reproduction of that unknown system existing before and beyond this Universe. It is all about the embryogenesis/evolution of a unique natural system, which has a Matrix/DNA. We, human beings ( and maybe a lots of another extra-terrestrial lifeforms), are the genes being expressed just now for building the brain and consciousness of this universal system. We need loving and helping each other, because we will be one.
Saying that God creates Universes and man that seems like him inside it is not problem because humans also creates eggs and men inside it. Saying that Universes becomes a hot and concentrated small dot and explodes becoming again Universe is not problem because a big adult human becomes small egg and after the sperm “explosion” becomes adult again. But saying God lives inside Universes and Universes evolves without purpose are problems because I can’t see these things in Nature. What’s up?
As an agnostic and defending a new and unknown evolutionary theory different than ToE, I want for my kids ToE in science classrooms and ID obligatory in social/philosophical class. Evolution is not understood if only based on biological history, so, ToE is non complete “theory” and is necessary that it be criticized and checked by ID. ToE has no intellectual support for a meaning of our existence as religions does for avoiding kids falling on drugs, and ToE alone will not keep free thought.
I think Bill Nye is the expression of a second wave of Enlightenment, as happened at 18th century, due human Reason reaching a new shape in its vital cycle. Philosophers joining to scientists and atheists against those fantasies of Reason’s baby times, promoting science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition, intolerance and some abuses by church and state. If the first wave was based in Newton ( after Copernicus and Galileo), now it is largely based in Darwin and Astronomy.
Creationist “faith” can not be explained rationally based on current scientific view of the world. But, at same time this faith is an aberration produced by Nature, this aberration can not be explained because the scientific current world view does not translate the real world. This faith is product of expression of data storaged in the wrong called junk/DNA, real data about real world of times beyond 4 billion years. People with this faith has hard-wired brain confused by these memories.
TrueVerdicts: You haven’t criticized my post: “Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities “per se”, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universe as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time in between? Zero…
Here are creationists and immediate naturalists debating. They want to model the formation of children’s minds of the world. But, there are a minority – the cosmic naturalists agnostics – that also has its own model. We want our voice be heard here also. As said “illegalconspiracy”, a child with mind structured upon lots of evidences of a natural process of biological evolution interpreted by modern Darwinism will be a believer in an almost magical blind God acting without any guidance (cont.).
For us, biological evolution, the change into news species over long time, is obvious. In another hand, although we consider the indoctrination of children by a doctrine expressed in Bible is a prejudices to their healthy, we try to see the world from a cosmological point of view, and our suspection is that this process is not blind, what leaves opened to possibilities, included a non-biblical kind of “god”. So, although evolution must be a fact, the Darwinian interpretation must be a theory.
The monstrous, sanguinary, enemy number one of human specie, terrorist, god of the Bible, was merely projection of human ancient almost salvage personality to the common humans’ dream of ideal supermen. But, every human is different from all others, then, the ancient debate about the ideal god was worked by writers. It was a projection of this earlier fetal evolution in shape of blastula, where billions of diversified cells should converge and be resumed into the first initial cell. Irony!
From Matrix/DNA Evolutionary Theory: “Natural Selection is the immediate environmental selection acting by stress guided by natural designers which are non-immediate natural systems, occupying the systems’ hierarchy at sequential inferior and superior levels.” This process goes back and before the Big Bang, triggered by an ex-machine natural system that contains consciousness. If you are a theist and want to call this natural system “God” know that it creates as do humans’ father and mother.
It is not rational that people does not accept the visible process of embryogenesis and the whole life cycle of a human being as the exactly mirror of universal evolution. One motive of this deviation of Reason is the missing knowledge that universal evolution is all about the evolution of a unique system that began as merely vortex/matrix, evolved to atom, star system, galaxy, cell system, human, mind, and next… These are different shapes of any natural system under the process of lifecycle.
Alan Clarke: “What’s more amazing is that if Genesis was derived by a dream, it was a dream like no other”
The same “dream” occurred to the creators of I Ching, as to the visionaries of chakras, as to those black holes like vortex related in Secret Doctrine, and they can occur today to natives of Amazon jungle. All of them are flashes of a single pair of nucleotides, which are DNA’s bits, because these units are bits of information for galaxies and atoms also. Kekule’s ring was the same dream
I was thinking about it just now: teaching kids that a supernatural assassin of human beings, causing wars and killing whole tribes, causing floods and killing even the lovely squirrels and butterflies; approving slavery, etc, as a humans’ hero, is just the kind of doctrine that produced the Inquisition, the killings of september 11. If this being exists, he is enemy Number One of human kind and all life, he should be bring on to Justice as terrorist. That’s a bad moral education. Or not?
If anyone here wishes to debate me, learn from Louis Charles Morelli or Kenith Adam and see how we debate. The rest of you, four-letter-word lightweights (deemed below my pay grade) whom I’ve asked to GO WAY, please can continue to do so.
If you wish to re-insert yourself in my debate, say something constructive with no profanity!
Ok, Parsival. Please, see this: “I found the number 1,618 when searching for a number for the point in time/space occupied by the piece of the perfect closed system circuitry – the Matrix – that has the function of systems’ reproduction. But, then, this number remembered that is very known and famous as “the number Phi”. Sacred geometry, bi-lateral symmetry are some of its names. Why? Then I discovered that the left face of Matrix is reproduced by Phi making the right face. That’s bi-lateral
symmetry! Since that Matrix is a kind of universal fractal, repeated everywhere, was explained why people see beautiful and wonder about this number.” This piece with this number is spermatozoon at sexual level, RNAm at cellular level, the base Uracil at DNA level, comets at astronomical level, and particle pion at atomic level. But Phi must be also the force that trigger DNA replication and now I am searching what is this force” I know you will see no meaning here. Due an unknown worldvision
I have to agree with parsivals horse. Your use of the language appears to be no more than a collection of words without any meaning. Certain sentences do make sense by themselves but they appear to be floating without a context.
No, that’s happen also with people that talks my native language but does not know the Universe I am describing. But I am sure that all words and all sentences are perfect connected and located and at the right sequence for any kind of apresentation. And I know how to express ideas, since that at my childhood I got the first place at scholar concourses for writing. I think this strange odd effect that everybody feels would happen when listening the author of I Ching explaining the symbols.
“[Natural selection] may have a stabilizing effect, but it does not promote speciation. It is not a creative force as many people have suggested.” Daniel Brooks, as quoted by Roger Lewin, “A Downward Slope to Greater Diversity,” Science, Vol. 217, 24 September 1982, p. 1240.
Brooks was right. There is no creative force, in the meaning that this Universe could have forces able to creating new information from nothing. But, still, speciation is merely reproduction of natural mechanisms, systemic functions, geometric shapes, existents since the beginnings of this world, that were expressed by natural systems unknown to us, and since these systems are hidden from our understanding, the mechanisms were unknown also. We’re discovering them by Matrix/DNA methods
It is not an assertion fallacy, you just failed to reflect on it deeply enough. If we break down everything we know to exist into the smallest form of matter possible, physicists still cannot explain its origin. This is a very basic principle, or the law of conservation of mass. Assuming that our scientific understanding applies universally, it is evident that we cannot find an explanation for our existence in its entirety. The same concept applies also for time, space, etc.
But we can elaborate falsiable theories that makes sense. it is enough that you has the right knowledge of universal evolution and projects its logics upon the existence before the origins. Because these origins must be a natural and logic effect of that chain of causes and effects that must happened before the origins. That’s what Matrix/DNA Theory did for finding a natural system existing before Big Bang and finding a half-biological/half-mechanical system before life origins.
What you are saying is reasonable, and I agree with you. I am just addressing the basic premise that something cannot not originate from absolutely nothing.
The curious thing here is that the law of conservation of mass seems be applied also as “the law of conservation of knowledge”. Remembering Godel’s theorem ( nobody can know the thru of a system – which in this issue is the universe – standing inside this system). That’s why I suspect that the human shape will be transformed into new shape/substances for to be able to extrapolate the universe and able to know the thru about it.
“Because our brain can not process the information of this world as having a beginning, neither the information of this world as having no beginning.”
That is just reasserting your assertion fallacy, all you are doing is doubling down on the same flawed premise. The human brain processes information that much we know, you have yet to show information it can not process. Your premise is an illogical paradox since you are limited to a human brain yourself.
My brain knew the information coming from some theorists (as Hawking, etc.) that the universe could self-assembling from itself. There are several theorists talking about vibrations arisen from absolute vacuum. All these things suggests a beginning from nothing and my brain could not process it. By other hand theism has spreaded the information that has gods and worlds with no beginning, infinite. My brain could not process this information also. An I can’t see a third alternative. Not fallacies
Billions of women give birth yes, but they don’t have virgin births…lol
There is no evidence that a rib can make a person, nor that a snake could talk. I don’t make the claim the bible does.. Whether that’s through speech or mind control..
Yes, there are evidences, metaphorically. But explanations requires a deeper understanding of universe’s pastimes and cosmological evolution. The metaphor of “woman made off man rib” comes from the ancestor mechanism of this process we see here today called “DNA replication”. Imagine the right strand of DNA alone and it appears a vertebrate column with two ribs. That’s the man. For making the left side (woman) need reproduce the first rib. This happened with LUCA billion years ago. Snake also..
was there, inside the body of LUCA. If you look to the photo of LUCA it seems a snake swallowing its own tail. So, the snake is the systemic circuit, which means that it has the identity, the personality of the system. LUCA was a perfect closed system in itself, the extreme expression of selfishness, from who we inherited the selfish gene. And the Fall was due Eve built the system/snake and occupied the place of queen, which is mimicked by any insect society today. Unconscious remembering…
@Terncote “[Darwin] let the cat out of the bad and it’s never going back in”
1) That’s a little overstated since natural selection was described by creationist Edward Blythe in two papers (1835 & 1837), years before Darwin published Origin of Species in 1859.
2) Portions of creation theory overlap with Darwin, namely information loss by mutations & natural selection, genetic variation, and changes within species, but not common descent were bacteria can turn into people given 3-4 billion years.
“not common descent were bacteria can turn into people given 3-4 billion years.”
You are saying that a blastula can’t turn into a human baby given 9 months because his parents are blastulas! Bacterias were merely a reproductive shape intermediary step between the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA), which was not biological and not living at earth surface. If you see the picture of LUCA model from Matrix/DNA Theory you will see the human face previously designed in the sky.
FROM THE LATEST EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED FUSION SITE IT’S CLEAR THAT THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT A HEAD TO HEAT TELOMERE FUSION OCCURRED WITH EVOLUTION GRADUALLY ELIMINATING THE RECORD OF THE FUSION BY N.S. SINCE TELOMERES WHICH ARE DESIGNED AS TERMINATION POINTS WOULD MITIGATE THE EVENT. THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT 2 CENTROMERE CO-EXISTED WITH N.S. NULLIFYING THE NEGATIVE INFLUENCE OF A SECOND CENTROMERE THAT WOULD MAKE THE CHROMOSOME UNSTABLE.
Don’t worry with this rationally acceptable theoretical event because it does not denies your theoretical ID. The final result we see at chrom 2 is just the way Nature records mechanisms and process into matter for this material structure works. A sample of this process is the case when nature discarded the top of reptile evolution – dinosaurs- and went back in time catching the smaller cynodont for continuing evolution to mammals. The ape was discarded as the dinosaur. Previous design.
LMAO. You just told a fairy tale story. The scientific method of the evil lying atheists/evolutionists is to tell “Lamarckistic” stories. Sorry evil lying deluded atheist, the Real Scientific Method doesn’t use just-so Lamarckistic stories it uses empirical methods. The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation. Loosing DNA you say, that would be devolution. Information can only come from a mind i.e. of God; Mindless and lifeless elements can’t.
“The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation.”
Ok, I am going back to Amazon jungle next month for developing my researches, you are invited. I will introduce you to Marilyn, a female orangutan that’s my friend, you can leave with her for two weeks because, for sure, you will die (if not by a snake, at least by malaria) and she will continue alive. Than, from the hell, you will phone to me saying: “Yes, you were right…”
LMAO. You just told a fairy tale story. The scientific method of the evil lying atheists/evolutionists is to tell “Lamarckistic” stories. Sorry evil lying deluded atheist, the Real Scientific Method doesn’t use just-so Lamarckistic stories it uses empirical methods. The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation. Loosing DNA you say, that would be devolution. Information can only come from a mind i.e. of God; Mindless and lifeless elements can’t.
Ok, now we can change our ideas. Maybe you are right saying that information can only come from a mind. The Matrix/DNA Theory has calculated Universal History in the reverse way, from here and now towards the Big Bang. At the Big Bang I stopped because I know my little brain can not go ahead, rationally. But wasting time, projecting the natural logistic saw here for calculating what’s was going on before the Big Bang, the results suggests a natural system with consciousness. Is it yours God?!
The Maxwell Demon is a discovery that it is easier to get new good information than lose the bad ones. DNA is full of repetitive not useful information inserted by retrovirus and inserted by wrong pathways of ancestors that were discarded by evolution. Cleaning these bad informations is not devolution, is the way for the best use of its energy.
“The chimp is not healthier than the human body; this is just your unsubstantiated allegation.”
Ok, I am going back to Amazon jungle next month for developing my researches, you are invited. I will introduce you to Marilyn, a female orangutan that’s my friend, you can leave with her for two weeks because, for sure, you will die (if not by a snake, at least by malaria) and she will continue alive. Than, from the hell, you will phone to me saying: “Yes, you were right…”
You mention research in the Amazon but have you ever been published in a peer reviewed journal? Has your research ever been able to withstand scrutiny?
How is an animal being better adapted to it’s habitat than a human evidence for overall health? Health is not a measure of ones ability to survive a foreign and hostile environment. Contrasting the Orangutang with local tribes of humans that have also adapted to those surroundings is a much fairer comparison but still doesn’t address health.
“You mention research in the Amazon but have you ever been published in a peer reviewed journal?”
My website says at the first page an advice: this job does not pretend to be scientific. Because, the method of comparative anatomy was practiced by Greeks before the emergency of scientific reductionist method and modern Science has rejected my systemic method initialized by Bertalanffy “General Theory of Systems” and the works of Capra, Margullis, etc. It is my right to tell about any theory.
My friend, the most healthier does not need medicine and evidence for overall health. It is a product of the environment, well synchronized, that’s it. But my saying that the ape’s bodies is most perfect machine than human body is based also on my models of LUCA, which is the creator of this biosphere and apes. I am seeing in the models that evolution was driven till apes for reproducing LUCA which is the most perfect machine. Humans are out.
IT SURE IS LAMARCKISM. IF YOU LISTEN TO THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY EVIL EVOLUTIONIST IT IS LAMARCKISM I.E. THE IDEA THE TRAITS WILL PASS ON TO THE OFFSPRING DUE TO USE OR EXPOSURE I.E. THE GIRAFFE HAS A LONG NECK FROM PAST ANCESTOR STRETCHING TO REACH THE LEAVES HIGHER IN THE TREE AND THE LONGER NECK WAS A SURVIVAL ADVANTAGE THAT ALLOWED MORE OFFSPRING THAT THOSE WITH SHORTER NECKS. THIS WAS NICELY FALSIFIED BUT IT IS STILL USED TO DECEIVE THE PUBLIC.
My friend, giraffes has long necks because Nature ( created by your God or other way) permits it.There is a mechanism at light waves electromagnetic spectrum level, which we can see also at systemic astronomical formation level, that is a circuit through which flows information. Any natural system can use this mechanism, can cut it for becoming shorter, or expand it for to be longer. I am telling you: while we can’t go outside this Universe, don’t worry with evolution, ID is safe, Bible not.
I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.” Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859; 1984 edition ), p. 184.
I can see no difficult either. One problem of yours is about not thinking in relativistic way. Why the emphasis in the word “montruous”? It is due its size. But it is considered big in relation to what parameter? In relation to a galaxy, whales are microscopic. Perfect suitable for existing as not “monstrous”. So, wales are not montruous bears. And this “Natural Selection” working here is the agent of an environment that was produced by a monster system produced by Eve before the Fall. Right?
You are indoctrinated with all the atheistic pseudoscience of evolution.
Evolutionist falsely claim a chromosome fusion to make it appear that a human chromosome fusion lead to and is evidence of evolution. “[There're] Millions of differences between human and chimpanzee DNA”. In the Y chromosome, chimps have only two-thirds as many distinct genes or gene families as humans. Also, more than 30% of the chimp Y chromosome lacks an alignable counterpart on the human Y chromosome and vice versa”.
That’s the way evolution works. The chimp’s body is healthier than human body, it is almost a perfect biological machine for facing the real virgin Nature that’s the jungle. So, from the phenotypic aspect it is going “degeneration” which means “losing DNA material”. But we know that from apes to humans DNA has increased its material. Why the paradox? Because since first humans evolution is working at brains and its sensory levels. So, it lacks alignable counterpart and vice versa
@parsivalshorse “There simply is no competing theory”
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck
This is food for tought and remembers the same great Teilhard that you mentioned in other post. I noticed that suddenly, at the generation of 1970/2000, lots of people were talking the word “matrix”. That’s never had before. Why? There was anything new discovered about matrixes. I required copyrights of my book “Matrix/DNA” at 1980 and 20 years later they did the movie with almost similar idea. It seems that a collective consciousness (Teilhard) wake up for a new fact. People around the world.
It seems that this unconscious collective mind of Chardin meets the “meme”of Dawkins with the punctuated equilibrium of Gould at same time. Very curious, don’t you think so?
Secondly, (this is crucial) we must assume that everything has an origin, including our reality as a whole. Once we accept the premise that our existence cannot explain itself or account for its own origin, it follows rationally that something outside our scientific realm of understanding must account for its creation. Hopefully I explained this well enough, I apologize if its not clear.
No. Let’s see a sample of self-organization: Chinatown. People arriving from all different places of China to a same point in spacetime trends to meet, to stands next, to organizes and transforming the environment into a new shape remembering China. So, Chinatown was not self-organization of Chinatown, it was re-organization of informations coming from a past organized system. That’s the way that informations coming from an astronomical organized system has organized the first cell system
That is an assertion fallacy with no basis in reality. Why can’t we understand the existence of our reality?
Because our brain can not process the information of this world as having a beginning, neither the information of this world as having no beginning. And our brain can not grasp a third alternative. So, we need wait the evolution of our brain.
It is not an assertion fallacy, you just failed to reflect on it deeply enough. If we break down everything we know to exist into the smallest form of matter possible, physicists still cannot explain its origin. This is a very basic principle, or the law of conservation of mass. Assuming that our scientific understanding applies universally, it is evident that we cannot find an explanation for our existence in its entirety. The same concept applies also for time, space, etc.
But we can elaborate falsiable theories that makes sense. it is enough that you has the right knowledge of universal evolution and projects its logics upon the existence before the origins. Because these origins must be a natural and logic effect of that chain of causes and effects that must happened before the origins. That’s what Matrix/DNA Theory did for finding a natural system existing before Big Bang and finding a half-biological/half-mechanical system before life origins.
I am stating that ENCODE is jumping the gun on thier claims and that, based on what we already do know, thier claims of that much DNA being functional vs simply interactive is premature and I highly doubt it will pan out being correct.
Why are there long chains of repetitive “letters”? Considering that DNA is the chemical counterface of biological architectures, every letter must be a chemical record corresponding to a real architeture. So, why the long repetitions? Answer: it means extended evolutionary periods of stasis, without significant evolution. So, billions of years can run without any significant change but time does not stop because at any place something is moving and added to time. That’s cosmological evolution.
Never I said that. DNA is not a building block. It is the biological counterpart of a universal Matrix that we can see using our intelligence at every natural system, from atoms to galaxies. You misunderstood it, idiot.
I ammmmm sssssayiiiiiing thhhhhhe sammmmmmmmmmme thiiiiiiing. Excuse-me, these repetitions of letters is because I am written relativistically in cosmological evolutionary time which is ways more longer than your time. Do you understand, idiot?
And I mean the something. These molecules at nucleotides are material tools made by natural forces called “universal functions” because these forces are the motions that organizes inertial matter into systems. What he is suggesting is that the building of 3.200.000.000 letters represents things, substances, that were out of the long universal chain of causes and effects ( aka “evolution”) He is saying that this building is made of iron and cheese.because probability does not forbidden it.
Very good, I agree. It makes something that your computer do when you are writing a text in Word. But chemical chain alone as the computer’s hardware alone couldn’t do it. Both needs a software. See the diagram of this natural software at Matrix/DNA Theory.
That’s not DNA as building block, stupid! Horizontals laterals pairs of nucleotides are biological building blocks as unit of informations because they are the same configuration of those seven astronomical bodies organized as systems by the vital cycles process which is triggered by any electromagnetic spectrum of light wave…, my brother so stupid like I am because we, both, don’t know the Truth. Piles, like DNA, are mass of systems, not systems itself. And biological information are packets
1) You draw a bad annalogy that DNA is like a Building
2) You draw a bad anaology to language… 2a) Because the 4 letters in DNA are not the same as using the 26 letters in the english alphabet 2b) Because it isn’t actualy a language, it is chemical reactions that some idiot compared to a language in the same type of bad analogy you just did
1) Not if you see the human body as a building; 2a) it is not the same when you are talking metaphysical ideas. Those chemical basis are real tools performing real actions; 2b) It is not a language as the misunderstanding that DNA should be a code expressing a message. Each nucleotide-pair derives from a universal perfect closed system formula as fractals that are diversified for composing new larger fractal.
Birney was right about the scepticism. Gregory says, “80 percent is the figure only if your definition is so loose as to be all but meaningless.” Larry Moran from the University of Toronto adds, “Functional” simply means a little bit of DNA that’s been identified in an assay of some sort or another. That’s a remarkably silly definition of function and if you’re using it to discount junk DNA it’s downright disingenuous.”
That 80 percent covers many classes of sequence that were thought to be essentially functionless. These include introns – the parts of a gene that are cut out at the RNA stage, and don’t contribute to a protein’s manufacture. “The idea that introns are definitely deadweight isn’t true,” says Birney.
We know that 1.5 percent of the genome codes for proteins. That much is clearly functional and we’ve known that for a while. ENCODE also looked for places in the genome where proteins stick to DNA – sites where, most likely, the proteins are switching a gene on or off. They found 4 million such switches, which together account for 8.5 percent of the genome.* (
(Birney: “You can’t move for switches.”) That’s already higher than anyone was expecting, and it sets a pretty conservative lower bound for the part of the genome that definitively does something.
In fact, because ENCODE hasn’t looked at every possible type of cell or every possible protein that sticks to DNA, this figure is almost certainly too low. Birney’s estimate is that it’s out by half. This means that the total proportion of the genome that either creates a protein or sticks to one, is around 20 percent.
To get from 20 to 80 percent, we include all the other elements that ENCODE looked for – not just the sequences that have proteins latched onto them, but those that affects how DNA is packaged and those that are transcribed at all. Birney says, “[That figure] best coveys the difference between a genome made mostly of dead wood and one that is alive with activity.” [Update 5/9/12 23:00: For Birney's own, very measured, take on this, check out his post. ]
I think that scientists of ENCODE and elsewhere are not thinking rationally about DNA and Nature as a whole. That’s the reason that is keeping very slow those researches and experiments. Matrix/DNA Theory is a new and novel naturalistic thinking that suggests a different picture. What’s DNA? Merely a pile of a simple system (nucleotide-horizontal-pair) diversified into millions of different shapes connected into separated groups (genes) that resembles the same system-formula, that are
aligned as two helix because they are assembled over a template: a simple wave of light. This “pile” is the record of events that were the experiences of this systemic formula through time and space. But this history did not began here and biologically, it began at the Big Bang. So, the atomic and cosmological evolution are recorded in that region we call “junk-DNA” in a time that DNA was not biological but a kind of physical Matrix. Here we see why proteins stick to genes also.
Evolution is both a fact and a theoryThe fact is that it has happened. See the fossil record and also see Stephen J Gould’s paper, Evolution as a Fact and a Theory.The fact is that it has happened as per the fossil record.The theory is the mechanism for how it has happened. That is natural selection, sexual selection, etc.Creationists like to mix these two points up..The scientific community considers evolution a fact.The only people who reject evolution do so for reasons that are not scientific
Great post! The difference between the real and observed natural process of evolution and the theory called “Darwinian”, or even the Modern Synthesis. Congratulations you have written in good English what I was trying to say. The real mechanisms seen today here and now that constitutes the interpretation of Evolution are not the whole mechanisms that acts over evolution. So, there is a distance between evolution and modern interpretation of it ( called “theory’). Astronomy will solve it.
You are right in relation to shorter times. But Astronomy has alterations that are altering our astronomical systems that are altering our environmental biosphere that are causing mutations at genomes by a kind of punctuated jumps See the mechanisms of alterations at matrix/DNA cosmological models) . So, you are wrong at longer times, that’s why modern evolution theory is not complete and can not shut up the arguments from creationists that are bringing on gaps seen in this theory.
GOD INSTRUCTED HIS PROPHETS TO WRITE WHAT HE SAID IN A BOOK, OR MEN WROTE WHAT THEY SAW, HEAR, AND EXPERIENCED IN A BOOK WITH THE INSPIRATION FROM GOD.
So, is God inspiring salvage natives of the jungle till today? Because the scenes and symbols that were the sources for genesis narrative are talked by those natives as were talked by orientals thousands years ago when they elaborated the narratives of I Ching, chakras, etc. These sources are images end events about the software aspect of matter/energy that pops up as fast flashes into primordial minds remembering their ancestry when we were non biological system. See sources Matrix/DNA models
Everyone believes in God, but not everyone believes in the His Free Gift. Everything is clearly seen… “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse…” (Romans 1:20) People that claim to not believe in God actually do believe, but they try to persuade themselves that He doesn’t exist. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” Rom 1:22
Maybe you are right, all of us should appreciate that should be a God, souls, we should be eternal, etc. “Yours “Romans” citation is very smart and appropriated here. It is an advice against the creationism expressed by texts in the Bible. Why? For the invisible things of him are clearly seen… but…where are they seen? In the reign of imaginations of those Bible’s writers? No. It is clearly seen in Nature. Genesis is a not honesty try to jump the observation of Nature as Science do it.
” Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” (Romans 1:25) Nature is not God. God is a Spirit.
If God wanted that you – human creature – know him as spirit, he should not create you as fresh meat and this material world for you to discover him. He did you and nature in this way for you studying here, learning here. Trying to escape from here and going straight to the spiritual realm is escaping from the classroom. Scientists are more god sons of God than creationists.
And Jesus Christ, like John, learned that it is not good deviating humans minds towards spirituals imaginations through the hard and painful way. This is phrase at the crux: “Yahveh, Yahweh, why had you abandoned me?” Answer from Yahveh should be: “Humans’ brains are not made and not able to grasp the infinite dimensions. You were lying and prejudicing their evolution. As are you doing now when teaching creationism to children that will face evolution at school. Just my humble opinion.
““We talk about the ‘march from monad to man’ (old-style language again) as though evolution followed continuous pathways to progress along unbroken lineages. Nothing could be further from reality…..Moreover life shows no trend to complexity in the usual sense — only an asymmetrical expansion of diversity around a starting point constrained to be simple.”
Gould was very smarter discoverying puntuacted equillibrium, but he had no knowledge of data for understanding how and why evolution makes biological system to progress towards complexity. In fact there is a parameter for approving Gould: division of DNA. When the left side builts the right side. The new right molecule seems an asymmetrical expansion of diversity around a starting point, simple, as is the chemical soup. But, as science can change pigments and making pink babies, Nature does it.
Gould was right referring to biological systems if they were the drivers of their evolution. The complexity is in the environment, the informations for complexity are in the air, coming from the Newtonian cosmological mechanics. Everything here are forced to mimicks the sky, the larger system that Earths belongs to. That’s why organisms works as machines, insects societies works as machines, and we are building the mechanical social system of “The Brave New World”. But “mind” is a mutation.
““There is no progress in evolution. The fact of evolutionary change through time doesn’t represent progress as we know it. Progress is not inevitable. Much of evolution is downward in terms of morphological complexity, rather than upward. We’re not marching toward some greater thing. The actual history of life is awfully damn curious in the light of our usual expectation that there’s some predictable drive toward a generally increasing complexity in time.”
Gould was analyzing biological evolution as a biological observer located at this biological biosphere. No such observer will grasp the final results of evolutionary process, because, as established by Godel’s theorem, nobody can understand a system or process standing inside it. And this is just the biggest mistake of all evolutionists, when separating biological from cosmological evolution. You see progress in evolution if you go out from here as observer, as did Matrix/DNA Theory
“Your world gets complicated when you don’t believe in evolution” Ok, “science” is observation. We never observed dinosaurs, so we have to take REAL science and use it to support our faith, whether it be in a big bang or a big flood. But mr Nye, you would accept math as a nearly immovable science. It is a constant; equasions don’t lie. Look at the probability of a big bang jumpstarting life, and then you shall have your answer. Your belief is just as much a faith-based relief as us “ignorants”
Mr. Shunk, you are right saying that Math is linear, constant. But Evolution is not, it is curve. The line of Evolution of matter organizing systems since the starting point of a Big Bang in a Cartesian Graphic having times and space as coordinates draw a final design. just the image of DNA. At short spaces it seems straight (phosphorus strands), but at larger spaces you see the whole being curved, till reversing, as the strands of DNA do it with its sugars. Math does not interpret evolution.
“Look at the probability of a big bang jumpstarting life”
Mr. Shunk, please, look at the probability of that microscopic lump at the middle of a “giant”ovule, which lump explodes like a big bang, genes are free and begins the works for producing a new life. The probability should be zero, but you know it happens. If Nature is showing here that it happens ( and if you believes that this Nature was created by a God, it means that God is showing it) why don’t you believe in Nature?!
Ok, my conrade emfederin, brother in the faith of the lovely, tiny, lord PinkUnicorn. Try this:
Draw a single cartesian graphic where a vertical line is transversed by a horizontal line. At the vertical put the name “time” and other will be space. At the exact point of the axis, writes “Big Bang”. Now, begins a third line starting at the point of the axis and applies everything you know about quantum, relativistic, genetic, etc, aspects of matter. You will discover big secrets.Pink bless you
The movements of animals are interpreted as random by those that does not know the movements and forces of particles of atoms that composes the body of animals. Different from random Brownian motions. Brownian motions is part of particles theory which will be, also, known not be random when Science will know better the quantum dimension. But it is not enough to know atomic theory for understanding animals at Amazon jungle: You need know the shower of new laws that these atoms take from Milk Way
The truth fostered by the Holly Scriptures has produced the monstrous Christians crusades and Inquisition, the maintaining of social systems based on slavery because those scriptures, for five times, says that slavery is God approved, etc. No, my friend, I love my brothers of my species and I want the best for all without any racist discrimination, so, I need another source of truth that fits humans conditions. This source is Nature, but not the chaotic and salvage face of Nature here.
Are you suggesting the ‘everything’ follows the same patterns? Patterns revolving around Phi? Like flowers on a plant that can be reduced to an intricate repeating pattern? Like the face of the Matrix!
That’s why the method of comparative anatomy among living and non-living systems are suggesting to me. As merely a theory, I could be on the wrong way. If the Matrix formula I had showed at my website is right and really existent ( I am testing against facts) DNA is merely the biological shape of a more deeper universal system (Matrix) that has organized matter into systems applying electromagnetic spectrum of light waves. The problem of these patterns – this formula is under evolution, mutating
@”There is another approach for trying to understand the connections, interactions and variations between magnetic fields of planets and stars – projecting what we know about interactions between nucleus and electrons of atoms, but calculating the interferences from Milk Way”
WTF does that even MEAN??? It’s nothing but gibberish. Are you an author who has a book to sell by any chance?
You can’t understand a talk about Orion’s lifeform and civilization without seeing pictures and graphics for clarifying the concepts. It is so different, never imagined before. So, why I am here talking about Matrix/DNA worldvision if I can’t bring the pictures and graphics? Because, like one day you will be obligated to survive with the Orion’s lifeform, and it is better staying prepared for, also at the next corner of paradigms shift, you will be obligated to survive in this Matrix/DNA world
That’s funny! Creationists says that atheists must bring on evidences. Atheists shows millions of evidences and creationists repeats that atheists must bring on evidences. But atheists does the same thing about others theories. They repeats at nauseum asking for evidences, Matrix/DNA Theory brings on thousands of evidences, and they says it is as-hoc arguments without rationally debunking these evidences. War of worldvisions! Beautiful!
“NASA has renamed twin satellites, originally known as the Radiation Storm Belt Probes, to the Van Allen Probes in honor of James Van Allen, the scientist who helped launch the field of magnetospheric science. The Van Allen Probes have turned on and tested all instruments and are beginning their prime science mission: observing the giant belts of radiation around Earth in order to understand what causes them to swell and shrink in response to incoming radiation from the sun.”
There is another approach for trying to understand the connections, interactions and variations between magnetic fields of planets and stars – projecting what we know about interactions between nucleus and electrons of atoms, but calculating the interferences from Milk Way. The problem for Science now is that they does not know the Matrix/DNA theoretical model of this galaxy for grasping those influences.
“evolution as a whole doubtless had a general direction, from simple to complex” – T. Dobzhansky
500 MILLION YEAR OLD BUG BRAIN FOSSIL — “the 3in long fossil shows that insects evolved to have complex brains much earlier than previously thought… The discovery, which is reported in the October edition of the journal Nature, suggests insect brains evolved from a previously complex structure to a more simple one, rather than the other way round, researchers said.”
This is more one evidence for Matrix/DNA Theory. In fact, insects had evolved brains due grasping more bits-informations from environmental photons coming from LUCA, the whole astronomical system here. Why the reversed evolution? Because insects went the wrong way, repeating the sin of Adam/Eve at the Garden Paradise. They became a closed system, the extreme expression of selfishness, and we can see it at the automated social systems of bees and ants, which are exactly copies of LUCA.
Wiki; In western Classical Antiquity, theism was the fundamental belief that supported the divine right of the state (Polis, later the Roman Empire). Historically, any person who did not believe in any deity supported by the state was fair game to accusations of atheism, a capital crime. For political reasons, Socrates in Athens (399 BCE) was accused of being ‘atheos’ (“refusing to acknowledge the gods recognized by the state”).
Yeah, probably not a good idea to write anything down lol.
Yes, but then, creationists uses this history for argument that religion from Gods words and rules expressed in the commandments were the source for that morality applied by kings that socialized salvage people into social systems. But how the salvage kings and illiterates bible’s authors had the intelligence for elaborating systems’ rules? Matrix/DNA found an explanation when discovering that salvages natives in jungle ” see” flows of natural systems organizations and applies them socially.
That’s a valid point, Nugget, against the creationist theory. But this broad array of not enough conditions for starting and maintaining/catalysing the primordial processes required for starting life needs a lot of calculations for “how Earth’s primordial soup got all of them”.
But, the rational way is observing how Nature works. Every time she produces a new life she produces an egg inside a womb and inserts seeds. For abiogenesis is missing the knowledge about the seed… the Matrix/DNA
What really is the Matrix/DNA theory? Far as I’ve heard it doesn’t sound coherent at all.
My point is valid, since it helps disprove creation because, if the Nebula Theory is true, then it would make sense that there are other worlds that can be hospitable. If the seven days theory is true, then we should see signs we were created, like: We’re the only hospitable place here, Saturn’s rings should be be the same age, etc etc.
I am suggesting that the egg could be Earth, the womb could be the solar system. If so, what’s and where is the system, the species, the father/mother, that furnished the seed, where the solar system ( the womb) is located? These questions makes us lifting our eyes and see beyond: the galactic system. But how and why this astronomical system, this hypothetical last non-living ancestor could be similar to the first living being ( a cell system) and how it was transmitted to here? That’s Matrix.
The first living being was a complete system with certain properties, as genetic code, reproduction, metabolism, homeostasis, etc. What has produced this system? Since that this system makes news systems using himself as template, he must be produced by the same process. Then, which was the template that produced this first living system? The template needs to show all those properties, everything less evolved. Then I designed the template: it is a new cosmological theoretical model.
Because the teachers of Biology and Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution didn’t have answers for my questions. One does not need be a creationist for not agree or not see sense in those explanations. So, I went searching better answers for myself. And I found then at the level where Biology was created: the astronomical level. You never will understand Biology, DNA, life and evolution if you ignores their creator. And with this fault, you never will be able to convince creationists.
This is not a honesty tactic. You know what I am talking about. Names does not matter, facts, yes. If you are supposing that I am not actually informed about every aspect of this scientific theory today you are wrong. Included I have noticed that the interpretations of this natural process called evolution was broken into two parts: cosmological and biological evolution. That’s very wrong because you can’t explains biological evolution without the mechanisms and effects coming from the whole.
( êste debate foi o mais interessante e perdí todas as cópias quando caiu a luz. voltar a copiar)
XXX
DO YOU EVEN TRACK WHAT HE HAS DONE? DO YOU SUPPORT PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION, ABORTION FOR ANY REASON, OR HOMO UNIONS? ONLY THE SPERM OF THE BIOLOGICAL FATHER AND THE EGG OF THE BIOLOGICAL MOTHER CAN BE MARRIED AS GOD DESIGNED. ONLY THIS MARRIAGE IF NOT KILLED IN THE WOMB PRODUCES/MAINTAINS THE HUMANKIND/SPECIES.
TWO OR MORE MALES SHARING BODY CAVITIES, GENTLES AND FLUIDS WILL NOT PRODUCE A HUMAN AND THE SAME IS TRUE FOR WOMEN.
NO CHILD SHOULD BE SUBJECTED TO THIS IN THE WORLD OR SUCH AS PARENTS.
Nope. Yours “God” has designed hermaphrodites too, where there are no biological fathers/mothers and still can produces/maintain the species. But this is an interesting issue. The creators of biological systems at Earth had a hermaphroditic configuration and working mechanism that self-recycles them, which mechanism is the ancestor of sexual reproduction. See Matrix/DNA “photo” of that creators.
@”My guess is you didn’t read any of the 61 arguments”
Answering for myself, you’d be right.
Creationist sites offering evidences against various scientific establishments is about as believable a source as “free energy” websites offering evidences against thermodynamics.
When these articles hit the pages of Nature or Scientific American, then they would be worthy of investigation.
Until then, if there’s any real evidences revealed, they’re buried under timewasting crap.
That’s very bad! What is happening today with the dictatorship of scholar worldvision. This modern mindset that took the controls of human scientific enterprise will leads Humanity to the repugnant “Brave New World under the rules of Big Mother”, like the ants and bees societies, because the scholar staff does not know the natural system that is still driven evolution here, which is like the Newtonian cosmological machine. Creationism makes no sense today but our brain can’t grasp the Truth yet
@TheMatrixDNA “core of Genesis has the same source of Kekulé inspiration”
What’s more amazing is that if Genesis was derived by a dream, it was a dream like no other:
GENESIS BASED ON A DREAM? (1 of 3) — These are the names of Esau’s sons; Eliphaz the son of Adah the wife of Esau, Reuel the son of Bashemath the wife of Esau.And the sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, and Kenaz. And Timna was concubine to Eliphaz Esau’s son; and she bare to Eliphaz Amalek: these were the sons
Alan, that’s non sequitur. The humans interpretations based in that “dream” were the source for the imaginative effort trying to understand the mysteries of past times, like the creation of the world and men.Since that the flashes flowing in their minds were about ancestry registered in DNA memories, and relative to past dimensions (astronomical, atomic, etc) this stranger worlds leads to magical thinking. You are sharing genesis into two: talking about real people at Earth, not initial Genesis
Adam/Eve were the illiterate interpretations of ancient men still with fresh brains that can bring to memories the ancient times of ours non-living ancestors ( astronomical systems, atoms systems, etc.) Natives in Amazon jungle has the same visions today, as had the hindus/chineses with the same images used for to elaborate the symbols of I Ching. Go read the Secret Doctrine, about Schion ben Jochai, thousands years before the Bible, and see the models of Matrix/DNA, who were Adam/Eve.
I understand that you are not arguing for creationism or ID, but why is it that your posts always seem to confuse and conflate cosmological notions with biology?
Because the teachers of Biology and Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution didn’t have answers for my questions. One does not need be a creationist for not agree or not see sense in those explanations. So, I went searching better answers for myself. And I found then at the level where Biology was created: the astronomical level. You never will understand Biology, DNA, life and evolution if you ignores their creator. And with this fault, you never will be able to convince creationists.
Well you could argue that there should be millions of transitional species in the fossil record but we see none. Of course evo/bios claim there are and put up a few dozen examples but they don’t hold up as proof because of the lack of genetic lineage. The greats facts evo’s use to support their views is the one you’re using and that is “it is fact” and there is no disputing it which is laughable at best.
Is that true? Are you saying that the transitional fossils are enough for believing in evolution, but at genetic level it is proved that there is no genetic sequence? If so, the explanation is clear: there is no genetic lineage in relation to biological systems because they are related to LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor, as described in Matrix/DNA models. Mutations are caused by insertion of new shapes of nucleotides which are LUCA’s related and punctuated.
how can diseases evolve if they are not on there host
patuer disprove the theory of spontaneous generation because darwin thought putting a piece of raw meat into a container and he thought that was proof for spontanius generation.darwin thought insects evolve from bits of food.
Comets are not created as the Modern Astronomic model suggest, by the oort cloud. They are produced by any old planet becoming a pulsar that has giant volcanoes and no gravity for hold on the magma expelled. Diseases by viruses: virus are a bit of Matrix/DNA genome, corresponding to Function 5, the function of reproduction, they emerge due sun’s energy and if pulled from their environment they attacks cells. Pasteur killed the photons of life in his experiment. ( Answers from Matrix/DNA models
An article in Nature talks about the possibility of the speed of light changing over the history of the universe. Where this stems from is observational evidence that the “fine structure constant” has changed. The fine structure constant determines the exact wavelength of fine structure lines in the spectra of atoms, and measurements of the spectra of quasars suggest that it many have decreased by 0.00072 +/- 0.00018 % over the past 6-10 billion years (ref the Nature article)
That was suggested by Matrix/DNA Theory 30 years ago and the explanation is very clear. Any wave of light has seven different frequencies. When a wave is absorbed by a inertial portion of matter (like this universe), each part of that matter moves and dance accordingly to its local frequency. But, the whole wave spectrum is just a life’s cycle, so, light brings movement and life to matter. Universe is evolving under the rules of a life’s cycle. The velocity of frequencies decreases over time.
Pigliucci, Gould, Long and Eldredge are on a list compiled for ICR by Henry Morris PhD (in hydraulic engineering and he pumps the BS out!). A quick search into talkorigins gives refutations of all these tired creationists talking points.
Gould said the equilibrium was more punctuated than Darwin supposed, so creationist scream “Evolutionists at war!” and “Gould discounted the fossil record” and so on and so forth, ad nauseum. Gould was justifiably pissed off at all the laughable quotemining.
For understanding why evolution shows long times of equilibrium and sometimes sharp changes is necessary to know that:1) There is the hierarchy of systems; 2) This hierarchy makes that invisibles systems are interfering upon biological evolution ; 3) The terrestrial biosphere evolves designed by a template, which is an astronomical system ancestor of biological systems; 4) This invisible system is a closed, perfect machine. If does not happen beneficial mutations by chance, the template do it.
Couple of questions… 1. Do you seriously think that teaching Kids that they are simply a trillion year old lab experiment and have no purpose in being alive is somehow going to keep them paying attention in school and give they a desire to learn more??? 2. If evolution is true… Shouldn’t there be thousands of transitional fossils all over the world?? Not just one or two apes with human teeth here and there?! I’m just saying you might want to look at this a little more fairly
You are right, we can not agree our kids being exposed to such “science class”. But the hypothesis of we being 13,7 billions years old and the purpose of life is not the purpose suggested in the Bible are well substantiated by factual evidences. Then, what we should chose to our kids? The right teaching: “we don’t know how this Universe began ( it it began one day), and we don’t know what kind of forces leads aminoacids to develop the first living being. I will talk about several theories…”
question … they say God just is, and some laugh, and I’ve listened about the Big Bang, and wonder where did the hot and dense state which expanded come from? or was it just there? Much like some feel God is? What if, there is a whole other level of being and our God is just one of many in his realm,and we are just his ant farm and this universe is just his school project? I’m going to go with following Christ just to be safe, because forbid it that man made an error in their thinking
“I’ve listened about the Big Bang, and wonder where did the hot and dense state which expanded come from? or was it just there?”
The unique faithful and best teacher we have is Nature. Ask this question to Her. I did it and She showed a hot and dense state of a genome coming from my parents and initializing the construction of my body. What it would mean? That’s this universe is like an ova, the Big Bang is like the explosion of envelope spermatozoon at the center of this ovule… No need gods.
Just my opinion on the religious dying to express themselves without being asked:
There’s a little guy at the gym I go to every morning that’s the official greeter. He professes to be a devout Catholic and must know everything about everyone – all the time – every time. Inane questions for everyone. If you get new socks – nobody else will notice, but Pepe’ is right on the story. He tells you about the socks he’s purchased in his life, prices, stores he’s shopped for socks in, and every single one of the people that he’s encountered going there, while there, and everyone he saw and talked to on the way home.
Really? Is that living?
It’s just a question, but Pepe’s routine is alien to my species (coherent – productive – time conscious human being) and I view him as an emotional vampire.over-emphasizes little things that happen to them all the time, but some folks, like my little gym buddy, make a science out of it.
Now when he approaches – I send him immediately on his way to his next victim. He never works out – he just talks, and talks and talks. That’s what his belief system has given him.
(This old bastard says “Fuck That.”)
Is that what true Communism is all about? Being totally obsessive about saying hi to everybody like a Wal-Mart greeter, asking them how their doing, how their dog’s toenail problem is coming along and sharing every thought (like I’m doing now?) that comes into tour scull? WTF?
My sorry, you are in bad situation at your gym with such guy. I can’t support them, either. So, since I am reduced to live outside academic environment, I went losing all friends. And I arrive to a point that I can’t support friendship with women also, because they never talks an issue that I am interested. That’s bad, I went to a wrong way. The human intellect has two first ways: extreme expansion or extreme introspection. The right one for surviving better should be a middle term. Right?
My bitch is that some religious folks have zero boundaries.
Even common wolves have boundaries. They’re conscious of borders they don’t cross – territory that’s forbidden. Step across a certain line – get bit. I was raised to respect others space.
I’m not promoting being anti-social, but walking up on me with your gigantic bullshit line is just fucking rude.
So, it seems we have a new theory: Every person has the tendency to expands towards two extremes. If one does not control the expansion of an imaginary supernatural worldview ( like creationism, bible) it can not control the belief that he knows the truth about each factual detail, which means no control of introspective tendency. If one ( my wrong experience) can not control the expansion towards macro and micro dimensions of Nature, he can’t control the escape from factual immediate details(?)
DNA is not a code, in the sense that genes should be operating symbols of a living message. DNA is merely a pile of building blocks (horizontal par of nucleotides) which is merely the material configuration of a universal formula for natural systems. Each nucleotide-pair has something different, derived from the first, like happened in cell’s diversification starting with a single cell. The first came from Earth and the system it belongs to. And there is lots more wrong concepts about DNA.
@whiteowl “[Genesis should not be taught] in a science class”
I don’t disagree with that. However, if a person gets a scientific idea from the Bible, or a dream (Friedrich Kekulé, principal founder of the theory of chemical structure, discovered the ring shape of the benzene molecule after having a dream of a snake seizing its own tail), he should be allowed to present & test his hypothesis in a science forum without having his source of inspiration ridiculed.
You got a point. The fundamental ideas-core of Genesis has the same source of Kekulé inspiration and I discovered it after watching natives in Amazon. Kekulé had not a dream: the formula came as flash of images to his consciousness produced by DNA at his brain after extreme effort searching it. Benzene is a ring with 6 carbons that is just the configuration of a nucleotide which is the configuration of the world before life’s origins. Jochai, the Bible’s inspirator, had the same experience.
SECULAR RELIGION — “ideas, theories or philosophies which involve no spiritual component yet possess qualities similar to those of a religion. Such qualities include DOGMA, a system of indoctrination…designated enemies… The secular religion [fills] a role which would be satisfied by a church or another religious authority.” – Wikipedia (emphasis mine)
DOGMA EXAMPLES:
@XGralgrathor “There is only one scientific theory”
@jjukil “there is only the one theory, and no competing explanations”
Stating facts saw here and now by human beings as observers as foundations for general theories, natural laws, creates dogmas. For instance, we know here the chaotic state of Nature, its production is this salvage, bad-designed biosphere. But, Reason suggests that this is only 33% of the final Truth, because must have the state of order and the third state, which is the result of interactions between the two extremes. And we can see only from the perspective of two frequencies of light.
how nice you cut out the middle portion. but like we keep saying by all means. jjukil say there is the one theory and no competing explanations. but there COULD be. please provide evidence for one!
Any new theory that will revolutionize the worldview suggested by Modern Darwinism will be rejected by you and all scholar staff. It will take one hundred years accumulating evidences and will wait a big discovery that will make to notice the theory. There is now the Matrix/DNA Theory: “The configuration model of the building block of primordial galaxies, considering astronomic bodies under life’s cycles, is just the ancestor of the configuration of nucleotides, so, DNA is a universal Matrix.”
Since there is no such thing as a Matrix/DNA theory but a mere hypothesis that no one takes seriously and has no evidence to back it up, why are you making a false claim?
That’s just what I am saying: a new theory, without accurate analysis, will be rejected by the academic staff. Example? There is a website for this theory with hundreds of deeper insights as evidences and hundreds more for being added, every day a new scientific paper or a Hubble’s photo is revealed as new evidence. The indoctrination by the reductionist method is such that you forgot that the word “theory” outside this method has other definition: keep the original Greek definition.
Your whole comment is nothing but a giant assertion fallacy with no foundation in reality. None of your claims are backed by evidence ergo reason does not suggest any of it.
This is just a “creationist religious response”. It is not different the way Tom Adams are here criticizing the worldview created by Darwinism. Our “reality”is merely a fraction of the whole and if you can not see it, that’s indicative some fantasy is working your mind. This chaos around “human reality”is just what is being projected by people like Hawking upon Nature in the ordered cosmological state and theorizing ghosts black holes, cannibal galaxies, explosive Big Bangs, etc. Wrong way…
Look, your hypothesis has no relevance to reality, it’s alright.
A website do not constitute a peer review basis. Hypothesis are shred all the time in science when they cannot stand the scientific method. It’s alright, it was an idea, but it failed, that is all.
The “peer review system” is based upon the reductionist method, which reaches only 33% of real Nature. For instance, the “systemic method” was killed after Bertalanffy “General Theory of Systems” by theoretical Mathematics. The staff of medieval Church was applying the same peer review biased system over Science. But the Matrix/DNA idea is also theoretical, so it could fail. Not while it is becoming stronger every day based upon peer reviewed papers, despite they are limited to reductionism
Nope. It is several examples of approved peer-review that later was proved to be false, and lots of rejected peer review of studies that later was proved to be correct…Don’t you know that?!
So? It’s still the best way to test the different hypothesis. Sorry, but no one takes seriously your idea due to it’s lack of evidence and explanatory power of observable phenomenon, get over it.
So that the peer review scholar system is not the parameter for analyzing new theories and those occurrences prove it. I am waiting in the last 30 years any observable natural phenomenon that could not be explained by Matrix/DNA models. Bring on one, please… and then, no problem, I will trow them to the garbage.
So ID failed before it established a single example of irreducible complexity, or even got as far as formulating a testable hypothesis. There is no ID theory, there never was an ID theory.
Science Daily – Avalanche of Reactions at the Origin of Life
The scientists says:
“Life arises when, subsequently, a whole cascade of further couplings takes place.
As opposed to the notion of a cool prebiotic broth, the first metabolism was not dependent on accidental events or an accumulation of essential components over thousands of years.”
Ins’t it irreducible complexity? Vulcanic flow + minerals + organic elements. Reduced to Earth?
No that isn’t irreducible complexity. Nor did scientists ever argue that organic chemicals form by accident in the first place. Neither chemistry nor evolution are random processes. Most of those reactions in the cascade you refer to have been observed to occur naturally.
At earth, for life begins was need: vulcanic flow, water for producing minerals from rocks, the exactly mineral catalyst, carbon… A star at the right age, a planet at the right distance and orbit… Several details coming convergent to the same point at time/space. And maybe the right location of solar system in relation to the galaxy. So, it is reducible to what? The Universe?
For getting the final result ( aminoacids and ability to replicate and diversifying) you need a cosmological configuration. That’s why Oparin elaborated the theory of reduced environment and Miller tried to compose it. But the pieces that composes this configuration comes from different parts, so far away as terrestrial vulcanic flows and stable/old solar system, which is determined by galaxies. If there is no ID you need to show the element beyond the galaxy that can produce this configuration
That’s not irreducible complexity – that’s the ‘fine tuning’ argument. And given the size of the universe the probability of all of those conditions being met at some point over the last 13 billion years is very, very high indeed.
I have not understood the difference between ID and fine tuning argument (FTA) . FTA is the supposition that all those conditions are derived from elements that were present one minute after the Big Bang. The Big Bang was an event that separated everything condensed in a dense point. If those conditions developed separated and converged here for production of life, and you try to reduce those aminoacids to ancestors, everything is irreducible. Or not?
Parsival, this is not a creationist argument, neither I belief in ID. I am only trying to justify that my theory, which suggests a LUCA as being the building block of astronomical systems, makes sense. Thanks by this kind of testing the rationalization of this theory.
Jesus was Jewish, all of the apostles were Jewish. The bible is a Jewish book. People have always had false notions that are not in the bible. Christianity can not take responsibility for false assumptions. No man could take Jesus life he laid it down willingly. That is why he came, to die for mans sins. That being said, evolution is still just a false religion, and not a science.
If you have power, could you permit the drug dealers around the school of yours children? God permitted the serpent around his sons, so, he has no power. Would you have the courage for sending your son to be tortured and killed by salvage tribes? God did it, so he is a monstrous. That’s why a book written by hewish and from salvage times does not can be accepted by western mindset: its different moral, ethics, culture.
God allows free will, just like he allows you to believe the farce of evolution… He will not force you to believe anything. It is your choice, and mans choices that we will be judged for. That is what scares evolutionist they don’t want any kind of accountability.
It is the same saying that you permit the drug dealers around the school of yours children because you allows free will… I don’t. That’s why you believe in the bible and I will never be able to accept it.
You accept that NOTHING CREATED everything you should be able to accept just about anything, but the truth. That is your right. God will not force you to believe anything. That is your choice. Notice how you choose to believe what you will.
No, I am agnostic, I don’t believe, I have no believes. My brain can not process a world that had a begin or a world that had no begin. Same for gods. And there is no third alternative. So, I am convinced that I will die without know the thru, if there is one. Now, that someone comes to me saying that talked and saw gods… that’s absurd!
My Dog! Tom has enunciated a deeper secret of Nature, which neither Science knows yet! How Tom got it?! That’s revelation? God is talking here through Tom Adams? Really, in the Universe there is an astronomical system with a network that is the ancestor of the first cell system. And that network is irradiated towards planets’ surface from stars. At least is what are suggesting the models of Matrix/DNA Theory.
As the world started to oxygenate plant life took hold on land. Since there were no predators life started to branch out to exploit the plants on land. Dew to stronger effects of gravity animals evolved vertebrate and lungs.
People are made of mostly water, and water is the most vital source of life, not to mention all the diversity in the oceans.
Animals are’t made from stone, they are made of soft tissues that can acclimate to the forces at work on
That’s a theory. Since there were no vertebrates neither fossil of those primordial plants in the ocean, there are no scientific statement, yet. Matrix/DNA Theory suggests that life began somewhere at the beach, just upon the frontiers of rocks/water. Some kinds went to land, others to water, others. like amphibians stood at the same point. For life begins is necessary the convergence of all physics/chemistries forces of the Universe to a unique spatial/temporal neutral point.
1. Mutations happen (as well as natural variation) but this is not evolution. Mutations cannot cause a creature to gain new genetic information that wasn’t already in the overall genome to begin with.
2. You can prove scientific theories by experiment and observation. ideas alone are not science.
3. Donkeys and horses are different species but they’re still the same kind. no experiment has ever shown one creature turning into a new kind.
4. Evolution is a very intrinsic yet impossible idea.
1. Mutations happen (as well as natural variation) but this is not evolution. Mutations cannot cause a creature to gain new genetic information that wasn’t already in the overall genome to begin with.”
You are right, this Universe can not create information from nothing. But the biological genome is not the complete universal genome, then, still there are informations disponible in the air, for new beneficial mutations. See the univ. genome at Matrix/DNA Theory.
@XGralgrathor “Gould was wrong about that. His understanding of the evolutionary model was less complete than that of an evolutionary biologist today.”
Then let’s look at a more up-to-date understanding:
‘The Movies in Our Eyes’, Scientific American, Mar 2007
“For decades, scientists have likened our visual-processing machinery to a television camera: the eye’s lens focuses incoming light onto an array of photoreceptors in the retina.
These light detectors magically convert those photons into electrical signals that are sent along the optic nerve to the brain for processing. But recent experiments by the two of us and others indicate that this analogy is inadequate. The retina actually performs a significant amount of preprocessing right inside the eye and then sends a series of partial representations to the brain for interpretation…
Preprocessing! That’s just the prevision suggested by Matrix/DNA formula 30 years ago, before this paper. But, the preprocessing process does not sends different interpretations of wholes, only partials (like 44 chromos?). So why reprocessing if there is no variations? Because the whole process uses the same mechanism of recycling and embryogenesis used in that formula. ( See the systemic circuit between F7 and F2). The image may have the same distortion between parents and a new baby
The image “dies”at the retina, due entropy attacking the light wave carrying the image. These are the processes at the retina. Then its “cadaver fragments” are transported as electrical signals to the brain. At the brain occurs the process of recycling, when the image borns again. It is the same process by which stars and babies are born from previous similar templates.
@whiteowl1415 “We have an evolutionary path for the eyes”
I noticed you used “path” in the singular. Wikipedia says, “complex image-forming eyes evolved some 50 to 100 times.” Nature can build crystals but the idea of non-directed, non-intelligent processes (following physical laws) building an eye from scratch out of earth’s elements seems unlikely. To say it happened 50 – 100 times strains the limits of credulity.
CREDULITY – a tendency to be too ready to believe that something is real or true
Alan, the evolution of biological eyes becomes clear and acceptable if you know the evolution of a universal natural system since the Big Bang. Aren’t you a builder of electronic sensory systems? If you know the universal formula for natural systems (see it at Matrix/DNA Theory) you can have good ideas for innovation. 10 billions years ago there were astronomical “bodies”performing the function of primitive eyes or vision: all information and images of a system pass inside the big eye at F1.
here’s why evolution is false. its simple. ready?
at the heart of evolution is this basic, irrational claim.
“randomness produces increasing order and complexity.” in order to prove this statement true, intelligent people set up very structured, (non-random), experiments to show that it required no intelligence in the first place. I’d say that at the best that is circular reasoning and at worst its pretty close to the definition of insanity.
“randomness produces increasing order and complexity.”
If someone said that based in neo-Darwinian theory I agree with you: it seems highly improbable when facing evidences here and now. But it does not mean that the natural process of evolution does not occurs, it suggests flaws in those theoretical mechanisms. The Matrix/DNA evolutionary theory is suggesting others mechanisms that shows, when a random mutation occurs it is selected or discarded accordingly to cosmological reproductive purpose
Ok. Is this answer a proof that had no previous design for different shapes? Still not because there is a most real evidence suggesting previous design. Embryogenesis is an accepted natural real parameter happening in short time that could be the copy of a process happening at longer time. At blastula we see different elements ( proteins, chemicals reactions, etc.) emerging from particular environments (cells diversifications). It is due a previous design hidden in the genome. Why not?
Go to Wikipedia and type “Miller–Urey experiment”. But don’t worry if you prefer the idea of previous and non visible design driven the experiment, still it is possible. And the real scientific facts leaves open the possibility that this design is coming from before the Big Bang from an unknown source. The problem is for biblical creationists and for Intelligent Designer, because evidences suggests it has been a natural process of cosmological evolution, no evidences of intelligence and magics.
All right. In that case, what is your refutation of *all* the evidence that has been adduced to demonstrate evolution and common descent? In order to demonstrate that evolution is a “fallacy”, it seems like this is a necessary prerequisite.
I’ll give you a head start: how do you explain the 100,000 base translocation from chromosome 1 to chromosome Y that is shared between chimps and humans, but not gorillas, macaques, monkeys, orangs, etc. (who only have the sequence on chromosome 1)?
Great, Mr. Nullifidian! Yours question produced another question and I did again a quick view in those chromosomes and elaborated more one hypothesis inside Matrix/DNA Theory, about the emergence of human consciousness: this fusion means that, first time in all universal evolution, the aspects of software and hardware presents at any natural system were most fused, most closely mixed, and this event made that the software became almost material like the hardware, being strong expressed. Great!
Nooohhh… if this hypothesis is real fact, it means that the aspect of software was “sleeping” all past time in those primates with 24 chromosomes. Just at the 24th. Comparison with our computers, the 24th chromosome should be the piece of hardware where the diagram of softwares are projected. And suddenly, this computer’s software piece splits among all pieces, It does not needs any more the mind of Bill Gates for evolving. If this event is possible, will be here the starting of AI? Hells…
Evolution understands life in a whole different way; and in an effort to legitimize the original mistake, scientists continue to make claims that are extremely nonsensical. There is not ONE WAY of understanding the Universe, and science’s original evolutionistic approach to it is not THE uncontested truth of The Universe told us by s/he/that/those who made The Universe (if any) — Evolution is quite flawed.
You said. Evolution understands life in a whole different way? Different than what?
Science is a roll up your sleeves endeavour. That’s why religion and philosophy have been so inadequate at explaining the true nature of reality. You can’t understand reality just by sitting in your comfy chair and imagine it all into existence.
Eventually your going to have to get up of your arse and go and search for the answers.
Arguments from ignorance are for the lazy and the weak minded.
You said: “Evolution understands life in a whole different way?” And a user asked – ” Different than what?”
My answer would be: Different from the real life, which is not different from the Cosmos that produced it. ToE has shared Universal History in two separated blocks without any evolutionary links between two blocks. The abyss between Cosmological Evolution and Biological Evolution that ToE created has been fulfilled with mystic, like absolute randomness and blind evolution.
That’s funny! Are you suggesting that this Nature we see here is not the job of God? And that the job of God was the perfect garden of Eden? And you conclude that I will never understand god ( if he exist) studying Nature here? You are almost right because Nature here is half-Nature, his face’s side of chaos> There is another half face – the state of order – we can’t see here. Maybe this hidden face is the garden, why not? If you read Matrix/DNA models you will see the garden and what it means.
You and I have been able to genuinely debate, and agree to disagree. Which is great. My premise is that Humans are beyond just biological; and evolution does not begin to explain the intangible capabilities of Humans. Thus, one is within his/her right to entertain different possibilities. And, I reject the notion that one who does not subscribe to Evolution is an imbecile; because it’s quite imbecilic to say that ‘atom’ causes one to ‘envy’? <=That’s just one example.
Yes, and thanks because I have learned with you. When you say “I do not subscribe to evolution” we disagree. I subscribe to the process of natural evolution, but does not in relation to neo-Darwinian theory about this process because I think that my personal investigation studying natural systems in Amazon jungle for 7 years with the modern scientific knowledge about genetics, cosmology,etc. that Darwin did not have when in Galapagos, suggested a more complex theory and deserves be tested.
You said: “My premise is that Humans are beyond just biological”
It is just what are suggesting my theoretical models and results. But when a new human being is developing inside a womb, the shape of embryo shows properties and elements( as brain and wishes) that its own shape as blastula did not showed. From where the fetus got the ability of intelligence? From a superior ex-machine system that is not visible inside the womb, but is encrypted into fetus’ DNA, which has evolved from a matrix.
I unequivocally disagree. It is simple reasoning… and any study which attempts to prove that they are, is bias and in error. ‘Atom’ has no bear on ‘morals’ or ‘greed’ or ‘hatred’ or ‘laughter’. Absolutely none!
It’s a simple equation: If all things are physics/biological, then why do all things NOT display these attributes but Humans? Do you see the discourse? There is an intervention which took place allowing for these abilities in Humans.
“If all things are physics/biological, then why do all things NOT display these attributes but Humans?”
When I have a question like that, my best and faithful professor is Nature. Ask it to Nature. I did it and saw new attributes being displayed facing my eyes, inside the womb of a pregnant woman. Who else I could believe if not on Nature? In the fetus emerges consciousness, but the parents are not inside the womb doing interventions, neither used intelligence for making babies. Wombs=Universes
Once time I read a phrase, I think that it is in the Bible: “If you want know Me, study my job because the personality of an artist is projected over his creation”. I am seeing Science studying Nature and my creationists friends neglecting Nature because they have all answers. If is there a God and if this Nature is his product, scientists are obeying God and going straight to real understanding about how he thinks than those that think are smart and can jump to conclusions with no homework.
First, what you are witnessing in your examples are the results of certain Universal Laws.For example, the ‘killing of other pieces/substances for the good of that system’ you talk about is a result of either Self-Protect or Self-Nourishment which all living entities follow. These are Universal Laws.They don’t do it because they know that it’s “bad vs good”.Lions don’t kill for the good of life; they kill under the law of Self-Nourishment. & black hole cleaning galaxies is an unproven hypothesis
I think you are projecting your specific position as observer which is bio-intelligent centrism over the Universe for the sake of seeing beyond the Universe a metaphysical intelligence creating those universal laws and hence humans life and intelligence. If I am right, you need know that I am not against your worldview, I have no knowledge of real scientific proved facts denying yours world view. But my worldview suggests an ex-machine system acting naturally.
2) If you’re looking for something PROFOUND about what I’ve been saying, it is that: if you were just biological/evolved, you would not have instinctively known this law. It would’ve been foreign to you as it is to a tree or a lion or any other entity you can think of.
Nope. Non-intelligent and even non-living systems shows their pieces, elements, parts, killing other pieces/substances for the good of that system. Samples? The liver cleaning the organism, the lysosomes cleaning the cell system, a black hole cleaning the galaxy. Lions are the biosphere’s system function ( cleaning the system) that produced livers, lysosomes, black holes at another naturals systems. In the Matrix/DNA universal formula for systems this is the Function number 7.
Wow, so you just completely ignore one of humanities greatest evolutionary advantages, that is the ability to work in cohesive groups. I mentioned the very biological source of empathy, we have a name for people who are born without it, they’re called psychopaths.
Oh, and humans aren’t the only social animals of this type. Even piranha’s know not to kill each other.
Exactly. Cohesive groups. These groups are the merely natural graduated steps for formation of a new system, in this case, human social system, family system, etc. TrueVerdicts is advocating the idea that only humans have intelligence because intelligence has a metaphysical source, then, we are not apes. I am not against this hypothesis, I have no proof against it, but he does not know that biological instincts are merely evolution from physical forces responsible for matter into systems.
2) Lastly, the fact that piranhas don’t kill each other is an instance of another universal law. There are many universals laws decreed by Time-Space. The 3 main ones being: Self-nourishment, Self-protection, Procreation — which all living beings do instinctively.
Universal laws are natural physical forces. And you can see the origins of the seven natural forces popping up from any natural vortex, included those appearing at yours yard. I already said why time and space are not “entities” per se, they are units of measurement created by human beings. Time and Space does not decreed anything. Brute natural forces are the counterpart of tribal primitive agreements and universal complex laws are the counterpart of modern social complex legislations.
You are right and you must do not change what had learned in school. Here we are talking about theories. My theoretical models are suggesting at least seven forces, not proved yet. For example, the process that fragments a closed system, creating internal chaos, re-arrangements of its bits-information, mutation, and lifting up order from chaos with a new system employs other forces than the strong, electromagnetic, weak, and gravitational. Theories…
2) What tree do you know of that knows that those things are bad, or what rock, or what dolphin, or what star? Yet, they, and everything, are all physics/biological, right? To conclude: These laws that you NOW take for granted are not an act of physics. Someone will be thinking in bed tonight, when this will hit him!
They are an act of Physics. Morals, altruism, selfishness, what’s right or what’s wrong, all of these things are visible in natural systems existents prior of life, practiced by atoms or stars. For understanding why and how they are physics forces you need know the universal template upon which all shapes of natural systems are naturally built ( the matrix diagram/software showed in Matrix/DNA website). If is there something metaphysical, ex-machine, it is beyond this Universe.
I am not against evolution but every argument leads back to intelligence. For example if environmental stress is forcing a change on a species how does natural selection know what direction to change or what to change? It could be that a species needs fins or doesn’t legs then we have to assume NS is going to make the correct change which only leads to intelligence driving NS. If it was totally random then NS could devolve any species it wanted causing continues mass extinctions.
From Matrix/DNA Evolutionary Theory: “Natural Selection is the immediate environmental selection acting by stress guided by natural designers which are non-immediate natural systems, occupying the systems’ hierarchy at sequential inferior and superior levels.” This process goes back and before the Big Bang, triggered by an ex-machine natural system that contains consciousness. If you are a theist and want to call this natural system “God” know that it creates as do humans’ father and mother.
A user here named whiteowl1415 whom I’ve deemed below me, to whom I will not respond, suggested that he has come to know of other animals that innovate — meaning they’ve engineered something, and have subsequently made it better over time for their societies — such as the way humans have turned chariots into sophisticated automobiles. I’d like to know if others here support that and can give examples. Please don’t say monkeys use tools, as this is invalid
What do you think about bees and ants social systems? They are not social systems? And were there any kind of social systems before living beings, even before bees? If not, do you agree that they engineered the first social system, or, at least, they made better a system that is subsequent advancement from symbioses of cells’ organelles?
Yes but any other species less complex (I will not say “less evolved”, if you are a creationist) than ants were not applying less complex agriculture. If you are creationist you will say that God created ants with knowledge of agriculture, and then, I am out from debate. I see ants as the first to discover this “technology” ( of course, we can see something in bacterias, corals, but let’s us keeping here)
And maybe humans will stop at robotic machinery with artificial intelligence for agriculture. But it is possible that other most evolved specie can making arrangements of atoms from a chair into arrangements of lettuce, only using mind’s forces and light waves. Why not? This most evolved specie can be a transcendent shape of an evolutionary lineage that had human specie as ancestor. So, humans sensors have technological limits, which explains the technological limits of ants also. Or not?
Wrong. Mind is the natural counterpart of biological system correspondent to what’s software in artificial computational system. And softwares are evolving. Just my opinion. By the way, if mind was abstract, immaterialish thing, how could you making affirmations about its properties, as “it can’t evolve”?
I won’t worry. I know our lord is just and wise. Praised be his Neighs. They ring through the heavens, and are the actual cause of background red shift.
Since you mentioned CMB ( I was thinking that this background sound was due our Lord falling in love with Tom and saying “ooooooommmm…”) what if we change thoughts about meanings of human existence? Is it in topic here? My theory: Our scientific tools (optical telescope) are grasping the microwave region of the radio spectrum and not all regions because this tools are projections of our natural limited sensors. Universal evolution will go from BIg Bang (red) towards Big Birth (Y ray). No?
All such chemical elements are already found IN biological evolution, we’re composed of molecules. Everything in this planet came from star formation. Common knowledge in physics.To deny that is simple idiocy. There is no reason to think chemicals have to be “mindful” and “think” in order for biochemistry to take effect. Biochemistry is simple chemical reactions. There is no law of biogeneisis that says life can’t come from increasing complex molecules. Enough with your ignorance.
Question: Since everything in this planet came from star formation, why would be not possible that the observed chemical processes in abiogenesis were just the same process that Nature had applied before for getting formation of stars? Why would not be possible that those chemical reactions contained hidden variables driven the process towards cell’s formation? Chemical reactions are based atoms, which purpose is getting eternal thermodynamic equilibrium, so aren’t they a chemistry-stopper?
You are right, I should be clear that I am talking about physical processes, which can be chemical and nuclear. The evolution from pure physical nuclear reactions to the novelty of physical organic chemical reactions was based merely over the fact that astronomical bodies were made with only two states of matter (solid and gaseous) and organic molecules/systems were made with a new state, the liquid. At least it is what is suggesting the models of Matrix/DNA Theory.
Hey everyone! Bill needs brainwashed children who can’t think for themselves. He needs children to conform and “accept” that there is no God and they are part of an everlasting “evolution” which has never been proven. The evolution Bill is talking about is in fact a fantasy theory, no one has ever observed a plant turning into an animal, no one has ever observed a star being born, there are no fossils that have ever been found of a species turning into another species. Bill needs a slap!
I don’t think Bill said “there is no God”. He is against biblical creationism, but it does not means that is not possible a great intelligence creating universes with computer/genetic programs included for these universes developing forms of life and intelligence. You are right: somewhere in evolution theory suggests that first came plants and from them came animals but did not explain how. Matrix/DNA Theory explains it very well. It is about the origins of animal and vegetal cells.
You are right, and never Humanity will see it, since that these cosmological processes takes millions years. Then, the maximum that we can do is elaborating theories with gaps, holes, but under a unique logics that suggests what shapes must be the missing links. Modern Nebulae Theory suggests the processes of stars formation from nebulae of dust under rotation, but this is spontaneous generation. Matrix/DNA Theory suggestion is more rational.
“there are no fossils that have ever been found of a species turning into another species”
Ok, let’s suppose that the millions of similar fossils are not enough for proving a jump from one shape into other. We will abandon the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution? There is no known rational acceptable alternative. There is Matrix/DNA Theory that brings “punctuation jumps”+ mechanisms of cosmological evolution that produces mutations/muscles/cartilages and a new fossil. This is an alternative.
Nice attempt to divert from the presented fact that Life becomes tuned to its enviroment through natural selection not the enviroment is tuned to life.
Earth’s early atmosphere was nihospitable to most life we see today.
Plant life developed ad did just fine for a LONG time bfore animals were even possible.
Photosynthesis alterd the atmosphere and animal emerged in the NEW enviroment
Enviroment isn’t fine tuned it is in constant flux
That’s funny! What’s truth? Life becomes tuned to its environment or the environment us tuned to life? My wise grandfather always said: “You must suspect of any two extremes alternatives. The right one is a third, hidden, equilibrium alternative”.That’s just the case here. Plants’ life becomes tuned to earlier reduced environment, plants changed this environment in the way for this environment to be tuned to animals life. Plants were copies of astronomical closed system, animals are opened ones
You said: “If I say the sky is blue and another says it is yellow that doesn’t not equate to it being green.”
But…but… the sky is not blue neither yellow, the color is in the eyes of the observer. This Universe obeys evolution by the same process your body changes shapes ruled by the process of life’s cycle. This process comes from the life’s cycle of a light wave, having seven colors, but as observer you see only from the perspective of one wave’s frequency. The sky is white, my friend.
You said: ” 1) Life tunes to environment: FACT”. 2)Enviroment is altered by many factors including the impact of Life: FACT; 3) Life adapts to the new enviroment: FACT.
That’s just what I said. The problem is with yours first proposition. What kind of pre-existent life tuned to environment? At abiogenesis? If the theory says that life came from non-life? But, still you are right. There was no life coming from non-life, but biological systems coming from Newtonian system machine. No miracles.
RogerS4JC: “Information quantity & density? in a single cell is TOO MUCH DATA, beyond the possibility for abiogenesis apart from a source of intelligence.”
So, while atheists are seeing evidence for blind evolution you are seeing evidence for supernatural intelligence? I can understand these reasoned deviations far away of Nature due human consciousness is still a baby that was born minutes ago in relation to universal nature’s time, like any baby transforms every object in tolls/phantasies.
Do not tell me that my beliefs are wrong and I’ll do the same…whether you think the Bible is a big book of stories put not…its your opinion and that’s great but don’t tell me what I believe is wrong:)
Tiffani, these people here inquiring you does not understand yours healthy mind, I am sorry. I will tell a history about the writers of the Bible. A long time ago, humans were more naturals than we are today, their minds was like an empty book ( I know this because I lived 7 years in Amazon jungle among apes and natives studying their instints and psychology). They had a special sensitivity for grasping things we have lost. Then, monges from China, India, Hebrews, were having flashes of (cont.)
… memory from our past, long, long time ago, when our ancestor was a kind of spirit and his body was a whole galaxy. These flashes comes to mind due a strong event that happened with that ancestors, called “The Fall”. But, the shapes of our ancestors and their world were totally different ( I have the pictures at my website), and the non continuous flashes were like symbols, they made those writers thinking a lot, trying to identificate what their dreams were about. They told the dreams to students, disciples, and they tried also to solve the dreams.
Now I was designing those revelations from natives and I got the real picture showed by those flashes. About 4 billions ago, there was the Garden Paradise. It was a selfish astronomical closed system, the original galaxy. There were two beings in shape of flows of information (softwares? spirits?), one male, other female – Adam and Eve. They built the selfish Paradise suggested by a “Serpent”. Now, look to the pictures. The Serpent swalling its own tail is a shape of that system’s circuitry, but if you see the Paradise from other angle (cont)
it seems a Tree, like any spiral vortex galaxy. But if you see from above it seems an Apple, despite it is just the world in shape of that Serpent and also a tree. The center of that system was a quasar containing a black hole, which is the astronomical symbol for hardware as female and her anatomy. Like the beam queen, the female ruled that system while Adam had as anatomical hardware in shape of a Pulsar containing giants volcanos (male sexual organ) emitting magma (his genome) that flyies in space like comets (spermatozoons) towards the female quasar.
The garden paradise was built by Eve who convinced Adam it was the best world. But it was the extreme selfsness, a closed system, that broaken comunication with everything else, and closed the doors to their evolution. Then, entropy attacked the system, the Garden Paradise. It began to be fragmented in its surfaces bits of information, running towards the center. The system was collapsing into itself. These bits fail over planets surfaces and worked like genes, re-organizing themselves luke the shape of the old paradise, but the new enviroment was hard, made mutations, they lift up as opened systems. The time wasted from the Fall of that ancestor till the time of life’s origins was known as “abiogenesis”
And the thing that lifted up was the first living cell system. Now, why the scenes saw by sparsest non continuous flashes of memory were transformed in the genesis account? wrong interpretations of what we see but can not understand, they are things from other worlds and times. The disciples of Schimeon Ben Jochai, the hebrew that told his visions were the founders of judaism, esoterism, cabalism, etc.
FIM
XXX
In a scientific study just released by the University of Copenhagen, and funded by the Templeton Foundation. A 150 year sampling of devoutly creationist brains has yielded some surprising results. Observations and analysis have concluded that creationist’s brains are diminishing both in interconnections and cognitive function. The findings have been attributed to a loss of mass, and predictions indicate that within 300 years creationist’s brains will become vestigial.
Be evolution totally blind or obeying some ex-biological purpose, what we see here and now is that all Nature’s efforts are being applied to the development of human brains. And through human brains is developing consciousness. The models of Matrix/DNA Theory suggests an explanation. Biological systems are product from the entropic decay of something called “Newtonian machine”, a closed system, spreaded in bits-informations and delivered to new environment (planets’ surfaces). These (cont.)
bits are diversified, each one having a unit of the ancestor’s selfishness. 7 billions of bits of a big selfishness = human beings today. Facing one another, conflicting, will cure this sin and all of us will be one, an opened system. Then, my first purpose in this life is helping Nature’s efforts to develop brain and its product, consciousness. Yours news is the worst. We need doing all efforts for the freedom and welfare of humans, because all of them are indispensable for our own success.
Not at all – there are millions of other organisms evolving along with us. We are by no means the focus of Nature’s efforts – if anything micro-organisms dominate the biosphere.
Good point. We need making comparisons between micro-organisms development and apes/humans DNA development. My last informations is that human species DNA is evolving faster. Maybe the DNA’s micro-organisms are merely arriving to a final limit permitted by this modern environment/atmosphere. Or maybe at any planets where life emerged, all micro-organism will evolve into humans and when they gets consciousness, all leaves the planet… finding better places in the Universe. What do you think?
Yes they do and that is why we ask where do we see any of them “evolving” UP??? we do not. they all continue to remain basically the same.
we can witness this with amber we find that contains mosquitos and many other forms of life. They look no different from todays, although, some were larger but nonetheless the same.
the fact you think that evolution has anything to do with up is beyond me.There’s no such thing as up in evolutionary terms you think insects have remained the same? by all means find me dragonflies with a 2ft wingspan. just because a mosquito looks the same?…really? are you gonna tell me we’re gonna find t-rexes and smilidon’s roaming around? and giant sloths?
Well we do see other organisms evolving, scientists have observed speciation events (macro-evolution) many many times. Organisms evolve according to selective pressures, some slowly and some quickly – but there is no end point to evolution, and no reason to think that it is a process that has stopped.
The domination is not measured by quantities, and yes, by increased complexity. Matrix/DNA explains it. The diversification of stars are like the diversification of cells in a blastula. Each star has a bit differential, which is responsible by its unique function in this Universe’s system. When a star radiates its bits-information for evolution of biological systems, which accounts is their small differential bits, the resting are merely mass. The Sun is like anion, each time radiates a layer
Well where did you get that ‘latest information’ from? It sounds like it came from a layperson who thinks that there is some kind of imaginary limit to how much DNA can evolve?
I said “human DNA is evolving faster than micro-organisms DNA”, and thinking about the increased size of DNA since the apes DNA. Not said that microorganisms stopped evolving, I don’t have information about that. You don’t need an imaginary limit to how much DNA can evolve, only think about this: micro-organisms evolved at early atmosphere and environment, these things has changed, so, it is probable that their speed of evolution has changed also. Human increases in DNA is about brains. Or not?
Things don’t HAVE to evolve. And just because a mosquito today looks exactly like a mosquito eons ago doesn’t mean that some mosquitoes in a different environment didn’t evolve into something completely different.
The fact remains: Today we have mosquitoes, humans and rabbits, when eons ago there is no record of ANYTHING but single-celled creatures.
How do you explain THAT? The implications are undeniable.
What do you mean by ‘the diversification of stars’ – do you mean fusion shifting elements further up the periodic table? Stars don’t ‘radiate information’, information is something that you learn from something – not a physical property. For example – you can get information by examining tree rings, but tree rings are not information.
You need remember that this is not a debate among scientists, it is between Bill Nye and us, common fathers/mothers. So, the definition of words like “theory”, “information” that you were trained in scientific fields need be forgot and looking for the definition that the common person are using. Good see Wikipedia here. To me, information still is the old Latin definition in its turn derived from the verb “informare” (to inform) in the sense of “to give form to the mind” which is physical (cont
Information appeared in this Universe in shape of half-material vortexes containing 7 brutes forces that evolved to natural forces known today and after that to the seven life’s properties. Each vortex has a specific number resulting from the mixing of expression, intensity of those forces. So, information are bits, real and concrete physical bits that gives forms to particles, matter, systems. Stars transmits its own body and history through radiation, so their emitted bits are informations.
@”Sure it is information on the age of the tree and what environments it has gone through in the past”
He’s referring to the technical definition of the word “information”, you illiterate dickwad. All you just did was prove parsi’s point that you can extract information from informationless elements.
To me makes no sense saying that star is “information less elements”. By the way, the problem maybe is about different definitions of “information”as I suggested in the post above. For instance, how we know a star’s age and is lights- years away? Who is sending that information? And what is the substance of this information? Symbols? Code? No, it is physical bit belonging to the star’s body. Or not? By the way, Matrix/DNA Theory is suggesting that stars are more alive than we think.
Maybe the words “Nature’s efforts” are wrong here. I should say “the last Nature’s evolutionary bias” has been observed lately. My readings have saying that human DNA has increased its size faster than apes, lately. If it is right, what is being registered in this DNA? I think that apes as working functional bodies are better developed than humans bodies. What’s being evolved is sensors systems and psychology, all about brain and consciousness. Wrong?
What a crock. If this was true creationist would have diminished their brain capacity a long time ago by these standards. Creationism has been around much longer than modern science and yet we still move forward in all areas of development.
What on earth has the size of DNA got to do with anything? DNA is a polymer – there are sponges with longer DNA strands than us. Please tell me why DNA size is in any way relevant?
Let me think myself. DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system. If any specie keeps the size of its DNA, in any way it is evolving, because it means no new information are being added. It this specie is changing, it is not evolving, only mixing existent informations by fuzzy logics. If any species has increased the size of DNA it could mean that the added information is not new information but only more bits of same junk mass. But, there is no evolution if not increased non-junk DNA
“in shape of half-material vortexes containing 7 brutes forces that evolved to natural forces known today”
Incorrect. To the best of our knowledge, all of the fundamental forces of nature derive from one single force. This has been demonstrated experimentally for all three forces except gravity.
“the seven life’s properties”
Define please.
“Stars transmits its own body and history through radiation”
Stars don’t “transmit” anything through radiation except energy. False analogy.
You said: “Stars don’t transmit anything through radiation except energy.” Ok, let’s see that. We have different theoretical cosmological models, and my models suggests that initial astronomical bodies had life’s cycles and a star contains all information of those different seven shapes of astronomical bodies. The whole galactic system is encrypted inside a star and radiation due entropy makes those informations being emitted as photons. That’s what creates life at planetaries surfaces.Theories
You said: “the seven life’s properties, define please.” The initial quantum vortex at the Big Bang were divided in two big groups: those spin right and those left. This is about phenotype. besides that division there were the diversification of all them, due each one having a final number resulting from the mixing of that properties. One was curved motion, the other was rectilinear motion: one was fast, the other slow, and so on. This is genotype. Digestion, sex, metabolism all life’s properties
You said: “all of the fundamental forces of nature derive from one single force”. That’s what I said. But the unique force can be a quantum vortex. Only when you try to analyse deeper what’s a quantum vortex you find, theoretically but rationally, that all natural forces are encrypted into that unique force. Matrix/DNA models suggests that the production of these vortexes are waves/rays of light. Any spectrum shows seven different frequencies – which are the projection of vortex’s forces.
No, not at all – I completely and utterly reject your claim that scientific terms and their meanings should be dispensed with – this thread is about science education.
Bill Nye is saying: “fathers/mothers don’t tell creationism to yours kids”. It is about general education, at home and at school. And most fathers/mothers does not speak scientific definitions. It is not the case for dispensing scientific definitions, it is the opposite: this is an opportunity for scientific education included scientific meanings. But does not try to dispense the common traditional definitions because science had appropriated these terms. Science is not the owner of these words.
Then… what? Are you saying that human shape are/will not change?! Are you suggesting that human is the last shape possible for evolution? You don’t know the E.T. I have hidden at home. He is almost pure energy, he is like a ball, almost only “head”. And he said that thousands years ago their ancestors, in their planet, were humans like we are today. Of course, we are a provisional shape… and so, our DNA. DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal no-biological Matrix, my friend…
you are wrong. Human generations span decades whereas micro-organisms reproduce every 20 minutes. Greater populations means much more diversity which ultimately means bacteria have faster evolution.
The environment causing mutations, natural selection and finally evolution of human beings is different from the environment of micro-organisms. And thanks God…(ooops, my fault, sorry) – thanks Nature that it is in this way. Have you thought what would happens with our bodies if those millions of microorganisms inside our bodies evolved fast? Spaceships crossing the space among our cells, species acquiring the size of dinosaurs? My God…(ops…excuse-me again). We don’t know this issue yet.
“Let me think myself. DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system.” – No Louis, it is not.
“If any specie keeps the size of its DNA, in any way it is evolving, because it means no new information are being added.” – No Louis, DNA is not information, information is not a property of matter.
No offence Louis, but a few basic biology lessons and then you will at least know what DNA is and understand the basic principles behind evolution.
You said: “DNA is a pile of different copies of a unique system.” – No Louis, it is not.”
Parsi, we are debating theories, not real knowledge. You are based in abiogenesis theory, where nucleotides should be product of long evolution of chemicals reactions and DNA the result of nucleotides replications. Am I right? I am based in Matrix/DNA Theory which suggests a model of building blocks of non-living systems (atoms, galaxies) driving those chemicals, exactly like nucleotides. Who knows?
You said: “No Louis, DNA is not information, information is not a property of matter.”
Again. difference between theories and definitions of words. My theory is suggesting that the process by which the half-mechanical/half-biological system productor of biological systems at planetaries surfaces is a genetic process where a kind of systems’ software is transmitted to models the new biological hardware. DNA as hardware is not information but the genetics instructions are physical information
You said: “No offence Louis, but a few basic biology lessons and then you will at least know what DNA is and understand the basic principles behind evolution.”
Thanks by no offense, I know it is hard to heard these weirds things. I had studied Biology, Evolution, Physics, Geology, Astronomy, all scientific fields and reading thousands of papers for 30 years, every day. I know I am not debating real scientific proved facts, only different interpretations of those facts. Maybe my theory is wrong.
Please define “quantum vortex”, because what you’re describing is definitely not a quantum vortex as understood in contemporary physics. Without that, I cannot address the rest of your post.
What’s “quantum vortex”? Two things: 1) all matter is reduced to particles, all particles are reduced to ghost vortexes; 2) The processes of atomic’s nuclei between protons and neutrons, as interpreted by the Nobel Hideki Yukawa, if such processes are projected over those ghost vortex, watching the results of vortexes interactions and development towards quarks, leptons, light, etc, we got all life’s principles, all natural forces and the universal formula of natural systems. They are “genes”
1. Quantum spin is a solely quantum mechanical property and is not “left” or “right”. It has no analogous counterpart in classical physics.
2. You again bring up quantum vortices, and demonstrate that you don’t understand what a quantum vortex is.
3. Your use of the terms “genotype”, “phenotype”, “digestion”, “sex”, and “metabolism” in this context all belie your purported understanding of cosmology and quantum physics.
You: 1. Quantum spin is a solely quantum mechanical property and is not “left” or “right”.
In physics, a quantum is the minimum amount of any physical entity involved in an interaction. Behind this, one finds the fundamental notion that a physical property may be “quantized,”. Maybe in QM it has other meaning, but QM is not the owner of the word “quantum”. The last non-matter unit are vortex, they have physical forces, they rotates and produces waves of light in two reversal directions…
You: “2. You again bring up quantum vortices, and demonstrate that you don’t understand what a quantum vortex is.”
Please, separates the words “quantum” and “vortex” because I think you are very literate in quantum mechanics and forgot the origins and common usage of those words. Now you can go Wikipedia and read the chapters of those two words. I know I am wrong, but there is no way when connecting data with new method if not using existent words. Think about vortices forming in dark matter…
You: “3. Your use of the terms “genotype”, “phenotype”, “digestion”, “sex”, and “metabolism” in this context all belie your purported understanding of cosmology and quantum physics.”
Exactly and thanks by wasting yours time with me. It is a hard testing for my models also. Those words are biological centered. I have projected “biocentrism” over cosmology and Physics’ phenomena instead modern scientific method of projecting Physics, Mathematics, Cosmology, over biological phenomena. Two theories
Ok, Joshua, the topic here is what we think is the best for teaching to our kids. I think first of all we need teaching the real scientific proved facts and i know you agree with that. But then the kids makes deeper questions about the whole existence, we have no facts known yet, we have theories. I make sure they know the scientific theories but I also talk about my own theory which has one citation: The Universal Matrix of Natural Systems and Vital Cycles (if you Google it )
There is no life force within a star, let alone a conscious one. And no Stars do not fucking create life on planet surface. There is no theory as we know it does not happen.
Yes, no conscious one, of course, the future forces used for formation of consciousness were not expressed in stars, yet. “Life force” is a wrong name, the right should be “natural forces”. “Life” is a wrong word, the right is “biological systems” for separating the systems’ shapes we have here from the systems’ shapes that are our ancestors (atoms, galaxies, etc.) Stars does not create life because there is no origins of life. Everything is a continuous chain of events coming since Big Bang.
Maybe you are only thinking about packages of bits of information… Information, from the viewpoint of my theory, starts with those bits that triggered the Big Bang. They are the unique thing ex-machine existent inside this Universe, since they came as bits from a fragmented system that was existing before the Universe, maybe another universe. Working like genes today (which are package of zillions of bits information) they works building this Universe towards I don’t know…
Exactly Louis – most fathers and mothers do not understand science, and so should NOT interfere with the science curriculum. Bill Nye is right BECAUSE most parents do not understand enough about science.
I think should be a good idea watching this vídeo: Kent Hovind – Debate 13 – Dr. Hovind vs. Professor of Anthropology Dr. Robert Trivers (Round 1). I think yours strategy is the same of Dr. Robert Triviers, and it was a bad strategy. Dr. Triviers knows he is right about evolution but tried to impose a new and weird information quick and fast, without previous appropriate preparation, to fathers/mothers modeled by wrong information. In the eyes of those fathers/mothers, Hovind earned.
I have skimmed the website you indicated. All I can say is, if you have evidence to back up your assertions, submit your papers for peer review. That’s where the real test of your idea’s mettle will be.
Thanks for doing that. If everything is wrong, at least it shows that one can explains every natural phenomena and event saw here if applies the reverse logics in relation to the logics applied by Physics when searching a theory of everything.Physic-centrism or biocentrism? The Universe is merely the result of moving physical forces or is tunelled for life and so, like a biological egg? Or like an ancestor’s body and we are the bacterias living inside its body? I will test it till my death.
Exactly who conflates cosmology with biology? The two disciplines have nothing to do with each other. I think you’re confused if you really believe that biologists have anything to do with cosmology. As for physics and mathematics, well, mathematics is a tool used in *every* scientific discipline, and biology and biochemistry follows the physical laws, so that argument is kind of moot.
Joshua, cosmology and biology are words invented by humans. The separation between the natural phenomena related to Earth and the system it belongs to and natural phenomena related to those things created by Earth and its system is only a human behavior not a Nature behavior. I think that it is rational thinking that this astronomical system created the first cell system by the same process of evolution that reptiles created mammals. Biologists want understand mammals without knowing reptiles?
You said: “And isn’t it kind of amazing how our Earth is JUST the right distance from the Sun to support life and have water?”
Sorry but there is other website than reason.org suggesting that the reverse is the right one: a pre-life put the Earth at the right distance from the Sun for walking free here, like humans beings makes roads for better walking. The problem of reason.org is that they does not know the real pre-biological system that the Sun and Earth belongs to.
No Louis – as I have repeated;ly explained to you, information is not a property of matter at all. We get information from examining things, but the things we examine are not information. I realise that you are not using english as your first language, so please let me assure you that you are just using the word ‘information’ innappropriately.
No Louis – as I have repeated;ly explained to you, information is not a property of matter at all. We get information from examining things, but the things we examine are not information. I realise that you are not using english as your first language, so please let me assure you that you are just using the word ‘information’ innappropriately.
You are based in string theory or any modern theory, then, you could be right. But… all these theories are projection of Physics-centrism, where the Universe is forced to be modeled and explained by Physics alone. My theory was elaborated doing the reverse way over the same evidences/facts: biocentrism forcing the model of this Universe. Here the final results suggests that “information is not a property of matter” as you said, but matter is a property of ex-machine “natural” information
Such transitional forms are beneficial. Without them there is too huge of a gap to leap in a single bound.
I started as a Young Earth Creationist, moved a bit to become an Old Earth Creationist, moved a bit more to become an Intelligent Design Proponent, moved a bit more to become a “quasi-directed Panspermia” proponent, moved a bit more to become an evolutionist, and finally moved a bit more to become an atheist.
In a scientific study just released by the University of Copenhagen, and funded by the Templeton Foundation. A 150 year sampling of devoutly creationist brains has yielded some surprising results. Observations and analysis have concluded that creationist’s brains are diminishing both in interconnections and cognitive function. The findings have been attributed to a loss of mass, and predictions indicate that within 300 years creationist’s brains will become vestigial.
According to wikipedia
A 2009 poll showed that almost a quarter of Australians believe “the biblical account of human origins” over the Darwinian account. 42 percent of Australians believe in a “wholly scientific” explanation for the origins of life, while 32 percent believe in an evolutionary process “guided by God”. A 2010 survey conducted by Auspoll and the Australian Academy of Science found that 79% of Australians believe in evolution (71% believe it is currently occurring, 8% believe in evolution but do not think it is currently occurring), 11% were not sure and 10% stated they do not believe in evolution
Besides the fact that women are not brood mares for other women, her’s some statistics about adoption not working NOW.
There are at least 400,000 children in foster care in the US at all times. childtrends(dot)org UNICEF estimates the number of orphans at 210 million in the world today. 86 million orphans in India 44 million orphans in Africa by 2010 10 million orphans in Mexico 35,000 children die everyday from hunger and malnutrition.
It is inevitable that the current worldview of delusional Christians will evolve until it finally ceases to exist, just as Christianity will cease to exist. Humans now have unrestricted access to knowledge and scientific facts that previous generations did not. The Christian Church became all powerful and all consuming through keeping knowledge and facts away from humans. It swelled its ranks by forcing millions to convert or be murdered. The Church can no longer control humanity in these ways.
@parsivalshorse “There simply is no competing theory”
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” – Max Planck
E nós estamos participando dos comentários no debate do vídeo:
XXX
Posts de Entrada para Debates:
I think that among all species there is a big gap in relation to the idea of transformations from one into other. Seeing that chimpanzee and humans side by side, and although making the mental calculations of an evolution in million years, I ask: “Why this happy monkey should made the sacrifice of his freedom on the jungle for to be the slaved human urban zombie working 50 hours a week today?” Why a free reptile that throws eggs out should making the sacrifice of supporting pregnancy? Answers?
1) We, human beings, arise inside this galaxy. There are virus that arises inside our body. Why not the same process? 2)Billions of galaxies are merely diversification of an initial galaxy, like billions of different cells of a blastula are diversification of an initial zygote cell. There are thousands of different biological species: why not as merely diversification of an unique initial ancestor? Why not the same process? 3)Our bodies were produced by designs in parents; why not universes?
Although I watched this as an atheist/anti-theist and enjoyed it… I think there were many missed opportunities during the trip to better explain how science works.
Also I think that regardless of what the host said… it WAS a very biased “trip”. Attempting to move someone from their position to yours is an agenda in and of itself.
I like this idea but in my mind it could’ve been better implemented and more carefully thought through.
The best video should be monitored by an agnostic and the participants should be atheists, creationists, occultists, natives American and agnostics. Facing the skulls over the table, each one explains his/her theory about its origins, and after that, over the table are trowed the real evidences everybody knows about natural processes: nature transforms things from one into another, never nobody watched miracles, etc. The goal is: are there some invisible forces producing these transformations?
Nope. I think ( my humble opinion that arose from my private experiences with natives Americans) that the modern scientific reductionist method is driven by unconscious bias. This method is selecting only those data that this limited human senses and its technological extensions can see and discriminating those data that it can’t grasp. It is product of “biocentrism” – projecting the biological over the whole, it is product of chaos not order and ignores the effects of natural systems.
Male/female is the biological counterpart evolved from the universal dichotomy that came before life’s origins, even before matter’s origins, in shape of quantum vortexes spin right/left. If you want to see were female/male come from see first the hermaphroditic micro-organisms. Then go to see this picture ( Google – Images – and paste ” origem-astronomica-dos-cromossomas-sexuais-289×300.jpg) .It is the first image.
I agree, not all scientists are in this conspiracy. Right now there are students who have degrees in science looking for work in their fields but can’t find it. I believe some are honest in their pursuit of doing science. Not all. Some are taught evolutionary science and are told it’s true, whatever is presented before them is accurate and correct and they just accept it without questioning. With this in mind they look for more information to support it. It becomes their bread and butter. more
You are right, there are bias driven the scientific method. When observing any object, this method selects some data it can see and discriminates data it can’t see. If there are forces from invisible systems acting over the object, they are ignored. But is is not conscious, it is due the limited human senses and the tools are extension off these senses. We can’t know the Truth of any real object, that’s why we elaborate theories. Bring on facts over the table, let’s go debate our theories?
(Vai lá e clique no botão com o polegar prá cima – claro, se você concordar com meu comentário) Esta é a quarta parte dêste artigo, vide as três anteriores, numeros 3, 2 e 1) . Foram perdidos muitos posts da Matrix devido uma revisão que desapareceu do blog ( principalmente posts do dia 08). Neus posts estão em dois nomes: TheMatrixDNA e Austriak1)
( Deletar PC Cleaner Urgente! Perdí Todos os posts entre 11 e 13)
Ultimos posts da Matrix/DNA: (perdidos posts de 04, thuesday, devido PC cleaner)
XXX
Posts modêlos para entrada todos os dias:
My question:
Saying that God creates Universes and man that seems like him inside it is not problem because humans also creates eggs and men inside it. Saying that Universes becomes a hot and concentrated small dot and explodes becoming again Universe is not problem because a big adult human becomes small egg and after the sperm “explosion” becomes adult again. But saying God lives inside Universes and Universes evolves without purpose are problems because I can’t see these things in Nature. What’s up?
As an agnostic and defending a new and unknown evolutionary theory different than ToE, I want for my kids ToE in science classrooms and ID obligatory in social/philosophical class. Evolution is not understood if only based on biological history, so, ToE is non complete “theory” and is necessary that it be criticized and checked by ID. ToE has no intellectual support for a meaning of our existence as religions does for avoiding kids falling on drugs, and ToE alone will not keep free thought.
I think Bill Nye is the expression of a second wave of Enlightenment, as happened at 18th century, due human Reason reaching a new shape in its vital cycle. Philosophers joining to scientists and atheists against those fantasies of Reason’s baby times, promoting science and intellectual interchange and opposed superstition, intolerance and some abuses by church and state. If the first wave was based in Newton ( after Copernicus and Galileo), now it is largely based in Darwin and Astronomy.
Creationist “faith” can not be explained rationally based on current scientific view of the world. But, at same time this faith is an aberration produced by Nature, this aberration can not be explained because the scientific current world view does not translate the real world. This faith is product of expression of data storaged in the wrong called junk/DNA, real data about real world of times beyond 4 billion years. People with this faith has hard-wired brain confused by these memories.
TrueVerdicts: You haven’t criticized my post: “Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities “per se”, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universe as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time in between? Zero…
Here are creationists and immediate naturalists debating. They want to model the formation of children’s minds of the world. But, there are a minority – the cosmic naturalists agnostics – that also has its own model. We want our voice be heard here also. As said “illegalconspiracy”, a child with mind structured upon lots of evidences of a natural process of biological evolution interpreted by modern Darwinism will be a believer in an almost magical blind God acting without any guidance (cont.).
For us, biological evolution, the change into news species over long time, is obvious. In another hand, although we consider the indoctrination of children by a doctrine expressed in Bible is a prejudices to their healthy, we try to see the world from a cosmological point of view, and our suspection is that this process is not blind, what leaves opened to possibilities, included a non-biblical kind of “god”. So, although evolution must be a fact, the Darwinian interpretation must be a theory.
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ” Ephesians 6:5
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.” Colossians 3:22
“Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed.” 1 Timothy 6:1
That’s why earthly masters are the fundies of Christianism and appreciate that book – the Bible. And why you see the high authorities of the church always hand by hand with earthly masters. The very group of predators, mimicking the rules of the salvage system of the jungle for building social systems for humans. That’s why I hate that book since everybody treats me all my life as slave because I was born without family and homeless. I don’t understand why the preys are so indoctrinated.
since many times creationists are accused of inhibiting science because of their presuppositions (the God-did-it-so-there’s-nothing-more-to-study idea; but in reality, it’s just the opposite—“God did it” so we have every reason to study it!). Creationists for many years have argued that non-coding DNA is not junk (see “Junk” DNA Is Not Junk)
And now the scientific thought is acting as a science-stopper again. Due some success explaining evolution by Darwinian mechanisms and due our Astronomy still beginning and doing wrong cosmological models (as the wrong model of spontaneous generation of astronomic bodies), modern scientists don’t are stimulated to search the links between cosmological and biological evolution. The result is that changing in species are not understood because there are mechanisms coming from cosmology.
Ohno stated, “The earth is strewn with fossil remains of extinct species; is it a wonder that our genome too is filled with the remains of extinct genes?”1 Due to his evolutionary presupposition, he assumed that non-coding DNA was merely a “genetic fossil” that may have been useful somewhere in our evolutionary past but had been discarded as we evolved into more complex, higher organisms. Since this “junk” DNA was no longer needed,
Ohno had great intuition, he is in the right track. But he is touching something deeper, he can’t imagine that. Since we discovered that the fundamental unit of information of DNA – a horizontal base-pair of nucleotides – is just a copy of the fundamental building block of old galaxies, we have everything for supposing that DNA is merely the biological shape of a universal Matrix evolving since the Big Bang. If so, junk-DNA is memory of 13,7 billions years of evolution!
Mutation and natural selection, thought to be the driving forces of evolution, only lead to a loss of functional systems. Therefore, antibiotic resistance of bacteria is not an example of evolution in action but rather variation within a bacterial kind. It is also a testimony to the wonderful design God gave bacteria, master adapters and survivors in a sin-cursed world.
Not in relation to a closed system. Entropy attacks these systems beginning at periphery and advancing internally towards the center. There are no loss of energy/mass but degradation. From periphery goes the bits-information of that system, but if these bits reaches a platform, like a planet surface, a neuron in the brain, they have two alternatives: mixing with locals elements, reorganizing themselves as mutants end lift up as a new system. Or, as in Alzheimer’s, they does not re-organizes.
I’m pretty sure you know the Bible isn’t written in English, close enough is what we get, as long as the meaning is exactly what it is supposed to be expressed as, the Bible is surely more perfect than any other book available today. You should tell a judge that eye witness is INCREDIBLY FLAWED and there are no truthful people in the world, not even if God’s inspiration is flowing, OH WELL you wouldn’t ever get that. Besides they have no gain in writing a biased testimony, doing it to die.
I have my own theory about the Bible. Some events and places described in Genesis ( the Garden Paradise, Adam/Even, the selfish serpent, the fall to Earth) are real metaphorical but exactly descriptions of the state of the world and the event occurred before abiogenesis. They describes the body and process of LUCA – the Last Universal Non-Biological Ancestor. But I Ching, The Secret Doctrine, also describes the same LUCA. Explanation? Memory of past times registered into junk/DNA.
1GODISNOWHERE1: “Nothing in the periodic table of elements needs Darwin’s theories”
They need. The elements are different, diversified, because their origins was under the laws of evolution. Mendeleev discovered that each element of positions derived from 7 have the same properties. And Matrix/DNA discovered that different shapes of those elements corresponds to the different shapes of living beings under vital cycle. So, lithium and neon are babies, beryllium and magnesium are kids, etc. Louis Charles Morelli1:56 PM – Wed -17
XXX
I wonder what the more believable theory is: that everything was created from nothing during the big bang or that matter was already here and was just re-organized by a higher intelligence into what we now call the universe. Higher intelligence or nothing that is our choices.
I think there is a problem about the scientific community interpretation of Big Bang and this problem is that the Universe is being studied by Physics and its theories are elaborated with mathematical intellectual exercises. One sample? Physics arrived to “maximal amount of entropy” causing the Big Bang. But, a biocentric view see universes produced by Big Bangs as spermatozoon explosions and zygotes being formed due entropy attacking a human body system. Which method is the best? I don’t know.
All things that are cyclic replicates the last shape automatically, does not need repeats internal evolution again and again. Sample: the first cell system was organized by symbioses, but after that it does not do it anymore, it merely replicates. There is other argument for a theory of recycling universes?
Things that are cyclic repeat stages, they need not do so the same way.
Seaons are cyclic, this does not mean it is going to rain on the exact same days every spring or that the snow will fall in the exact same amount.
The cycles can contain internal variation.
Note I said I beleive, not proven, but…
Stars convert lighter elements to heavier ones, logicaly we will eventually end up with only the heaviest which through gravity of thier mass should recolapse
Ok… I think we are based in two different things: I am based in systems and you in processes. That’s why I appeal to a system (a cell) and you to a process ( seasons). The weird question is: the universe is a system or a process? If it is a process, you earned, the universe is self-recycling. But, I am not sure. Stars makes heavier elements. But I always search parameter in Nature here. Womb’s cells makes dense placenta for discarding it in name of embryonic evolution, not re-cycles.
Again, our problem is “process or system?” You said that your preferred theory is a self-recycling universe. I prefer an universe under evolution reproducing an old universe but increasing a little bit of complexity. Reconsumed placenta is a process among a lots of them that composes a whole system. In relation to embryonic evolution and its womb, placenta is discarded forever. In relation to Universes, matter will be discarded in name of an embryo of counciousness. You are part of that embryo.
We have no acceptable theory of evolution at the present time. There is none; and I cannot accept the theory that I teach to my students each year. Let me explain. I teach the synthetic theory known as the neoDarwinian one, for one reason only; not because it’s good, we know it is bad, but because there isn’t any other. Whilst waiting to find something better you are taught something which is known to be inexact, which is a first approximation
There are other theories than neoDarwinian theory that has found as existent the natural process of evolution, working with different mechanisms and suggesting new worldviews. Then, why you don’t know them? Because they can’t be published, the established mindset does not permit it. For instance, I will talk about Matrix/DNA Theory, which arose applying the method of comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems – trying to find a link. But, the found link is not ideologic accepted
Yes, the theory is not argument against evolution, as I said: “it found as existent, the natural process of evolution”. The problem is about the differences between the final results between the two theories. 1) The link of Matrix/DNA is the same LUCA – the last common ancestor of all biological systems – hypothesized by Darwin, but Matrix/DNA found LUCA to be an astronomical system and not a microscope organism; 2) Matrix/DNA suggests 7 variables instead 3 of ToE. This changes the whole view.
I am sorry Louis but that is still a biogenesis argument not genesis argument. I understand the basics of matrix but it still doesn’t fit into this debate.
Yes it is a genesis argument also. What is the first moment of your body? The “”big bang”of a spermatozoon inside an egg. Now, try to project this real event here over the Big Bang theory and see the Universe as an cosmic egg. But then, the event here suggests that was there, before the Big Bang, a previous design for evolution here, inside the parents (system) that produced the Big Bang. It is genesis by a natural being without using intelligence and magics, but with consciousness. Makes sense.
Actually you have a good point and that is what really exist without consciousness to understand it. Is there an universe without conscience life. Good question which I would say no. Nice point.
The problem arises when we try to develop this theory, trying to go deeper into the final mystery..The models suggests that any wave of natural light is the code for imprinting life into inertial mass. You can see why in the theory website. So, it suggests that the ex-machine system that triggered the Big Bang made it using only light. But the source of this light seems to be a kind of vortex (based in QM). Is it “the natural god” a kind of vortex? A vortex with consciousness?! I am lost now
The theory is based in a formula made like a computer’s software diagram but at same time is a unit of genetic information. The surprisingly thing is that all known natural systems fits exactly when superposed upon the formula, suggesting that the formula is the way nature organizes matter into systems, from atoms to galaxies to human bodies. Later, we noticed that the functions of that formula can be expressed as the seven different frequencies of light waves and it explains the vital cycles.
To say that Humans evolved is to say that intelligence/science saw birth with Humans — that science was at stage zero prior to Humans — as humans are the most intelligent entities — this is conflicting, because there existed things beyond human understanding prior to humans. <= Do grasp your mind very well around this. This only concludes that there was intelligence prior to humans which engineered them.
I don’t understand. It is not what Nature is showing here and now. The nowadays bodies of human beings are made by parents through natural genetic process without parents applying intelligence and although it happens, these bodies evolves and reveals intelligence. That is the real way nature works facing our eyes. So, a rational mind must apply the same process when inquiring the origins of first human beings. The non-living matter must have the forces for intelligence, but doesn’t applied it.
Only one problem(if Bill is honest) with his narrow-minded assertions. The fossil record. As every paleontologist knows, the fossil record displays a consistent pattern of sudden appearance followed by stasis, that life’s history reflects variation around a set of basic models rather than one of accumulating improvement and finally that mass extinction has been predominantly by catastrophe rather than gradual obsolescence.
These three questions are solved by Matrix/DNA Theory, unifying cosmological and biological evolution. The most complex non living system must be direct ancestor of the less complex biological system – of course. Since this ancestor is astronomical – it is the building block of galaxies, a system that works as perfect natural machine and shows all life’s properties – and the first living is microscope, Nature used the same process we see here when miniaturizes a human body inside chromosomes.
First there was simple single celled life. Then suddenly, about 530 million years ago, most major animal phyla were here. The fossil evidence is missing showing how life went from the single cells to the major complex divisions of animal life we have today. After the early Cambria era explosion of life there is fossil evidence that that life was now here. But no fossil evidence beforehand showing how simple single celled organisms suddenly became very, very, very complex.
No. The Big Bang of “your life” can be watched here and now, every time is exploded the envelope of a spermatozoon inside an ovule. The Universe only can create things like itself was created. Abiogenese is not going from single soup to single cell, it is about the almost perfect closed system that works like a machine called “galaxy” and nanotechnologically going to a single biological cell. Mother Nature does not play dice with us. She is showing here how she works. Why are you cheating her?!
(Fill in the blank, whatever your blank is) bless Bill Nye. My childhood, for what little of it you were a part of, was that much more awesome while you were in it. Let’s hope you’re right. Let’s hope in the future, the outdated ways of thinking which rule today are gone. Replaced by education and knowledge rather than fear and overreaction. The only saving We All Need is from ignorance.
“The only saving We All Need is from ignorance.” That’s the most beautiful phrase I like and I would ad my bit: “and saved from our selfish gene”. This selfishness expresses in everybody. The result is forgetting that our little brain facing this immense mystery can not grasp the final Truth. So, we watch evolution here, but is it blind without purpose? I watch evolution inside a womb, a shape of blastula becoming unrecognizable in the next shape as fetus. But, then…there is purpose. So?!
These debates are mostly useless. I never try and “win”, I just interject verses from the Bible and let God work on your hearts when you read them.
1 Thessalonians 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.
It does not works with me. The History of America, my ancestors, its fairy tiles, folklore and traditions in first place, that’s what I want for my kids, not those of foreign origins. And there are no mentions of interventions of God in our History. So, if the god of foreign people is real, he has not talking with us, then, he is not real for us and not our friend. You are practicing mental terrorism on my kids. Let’s the people of America alone for discovering the meaning of our existence.
Why do so many Christians pretend that science and/or evolution are religions? This is a difficult question to answer because there are so many possibilities. Perhaps religion so controls their lives that they can’t think outside of religious categories. Perhaps they can’t imagine that anything which makes strong claims isn’t religious.
They have something (a fault on modern scientific thought) for hold on: 1) Darwin should never talk this: the diversification of life shows that species were not created one by one ( by God). Because Darwin was not prepared for explaining the origins of species; 2) Scientific worldview resists to link cosmological evolution with biological evolution and had inserted, in this big abism, the magical thinking of randomness. Scientists need avoiding to extrapolate to worldviews for avoiding enemies
1) Your science is simply an extremely negligible STUDY of an existing, indescribably sophisticated science/intelligence. Nothing simply ‘be’ be it not Time-Space. The engineering of the tree is the utmost science; the making of the star is the utmost science, the systematic, purposeful, flawlessly timed, synchronizing of cosmological entities is the utmost science; the engineering of the brain is the utmost science…
Search the natural matrix formula that organizes matter into systems and discover from where is coming all this “engineering”. If after that you will say loud that this is the formula created by God for creating things in these Universe without magics, I will show for you that this formula is coming from something natural, extra-universe. But you still will say that the extra-universal was created by God… and here I will stop. I don’t know.
1)Do you realize that your science, as a subject of Time-Space, is lesser than Time-Space, making Time-Space greater (than all) — as such, your science CANNOT explain Time-Space. And, it certainly not with physical approach. Your science is very negligible. It’s no hot stuff! It’s sad that you believe that Time-Space can explain by physics alone. You ought to be begin to understand that Time-Space simply ‘be’; that, in itself is illogical, metaphysical, it cannot be explained with physics.
Science does not explain what does not exists. Time-Space are not entities the per se, they are human imaginary creations. Think the Universal as a ball. Beyond the ball is nothing, infinite. There is no space in nothing. Now, take any object from the ball and put it outside. Now you have a distance for measurement. You created the space. Something for time. Imagine everything stopping moving and coming back moving again. How much time was there? Zero.There is measurement of a chain of events.
Your science will erroneously claim that intelligence dwells within biology, as it seeks to deny all possibilities of anything outside of physics. Intelligence does not reside in the body. “Thoughts” may, allegedly, be influenced in the manner you mentioned as a result of the mechanism/the biology being affected by the drug; i.e, when you alter/impact a vehicle’s part, the vehicle may perform differently; this does not mean the operator/driver/intelligence of the vehicle is ONE with it!
Alzheimer’s is proof that intelligence/consciousness resides in our bodies. As the brain decays so does the intelligence and personality. Your ‘soul’ assertion dissolved with a single physical decay.
I will suggest an argument for your theory. Think about a computer decay like Alzheimer, but, die fire. The hardware goes destroyed, but what happens with the software? As said mechanicmike69, the scientific theory uses Alzheimer as evidence that consciousness reside in our body. I think that computers are evidence that consciousness is separated. The software resident in computer is destroyed but the same software is in other places, like the mind of his creator, other computers. Do you agree?
The “software” in humans is the interconnection of billions of nerve cells, that die when you die and have no duplicate copies. Your argument is rediculous.
Hold on. Bits in a computer does not organizes themselves for running a software and does not creates their own software. And for clues that my argument is ridiculous you need bring on the paper peer-reviewed that reveals the mechanisms by which neurons are related to thought. There is no one. My theoretical models suggests that a natural software composed by photons is transmitted by galaxies over primordial soups driven abiogenesis. This software, later, becomes human consciousness. Weird,but
EVOLUTION DOESN’T MAKE FOSSILS; FOSSILS ARE NOT EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. STOP HIJACKING THE EVIDENCE OF THE GLOBAL FLOOD OF NOAH FOR YOUR EVIL ATHEISTIC PSEUDOSCIENCE OF EVIL EVOLUTIONISM.
That’s funny! You say that one real natural phenomena – the amount of collected fossils – are being used by evil evolutionism as evidence for evolution, and at the same time, you point out one real natural evidence that sometimes in that place in the past had some flood and uses it by yours evil religionism as evidence for your imaginary fairy tales. If you think this behavior is a sin, why you do it?!!
In a way, I’m sure it is kind of mean. My area is neuropsych, though, and I intend to study clinical psych (in fact, just got an RA position in a neuropsych and social cognition lab so we’ll see how that goes). From what I understand so far about it, cognitive behavioral therapy is actually fairly difficult and challenging, in that the therapist or clinician challenges the client’s beliefs and cognitions where they are maladaptive.
Living in the jungle I woke up for the salvage chaotic state of this biosphere. All creatures, from any plant to any animal are tortured in this existence. But, then, suddenly we see a beautiful small flower. It seems not belonging to that world. We see a bird nurturing its offspring. We see the tall tree offering flavor fruits. And we see the salvage natives. A mother holding her baby and a male bringing on food to them. This is order lifting up from chaos. This is divine evolution.