Reddit: Post Divulgado para Anunciar a Matrix/DNA Theory (testando)


Nao tem jeito mesmo. Um alien tomando a forma humana e falando sua visão de mundo para terráqueos jamais seria sequer ouvido. Mais uma prova e’ a reação dos moderadores do Reddit, copiada abaixo.

The DNA is 13,8 billions years old! from philosophy

The DNA is 13,8 billions years old! (self.philosophy)

submitted – dez – 12/9/2016 -by TheMatrixDNA

A new theory (The Universal Matrix/DNA of All Natural Systems) is suggesting that astronomic and atomic systems are ancestrals of biological systems because has identified the building blocks of DNA as the building blocks of those systems, at less evolved shapes. But,… the theory has built different models of those systems, suggesting that the academic official models are wrong. Do you thing it is rational and possible? Or do you believe that the stupid matter of this lost planet has invented the DNA?

CanadaDuck 0 pontos

Human DNA confirmed present at time of big bang! Amazing!


Yes, CanadaDuck, the theory found that waves of light ( like those emitted at the Big Bang) contains the code for DNA. I can’t explain everything here, but if you see the figure of the electromagnetic spectrum by Matrix/DNA Theory, it shows how the seven different kinds of radiation composes end acts like the seven molecules of the DNA. But it is not “human DNA”, it is a universal Matrix evolving and changing shapes under a life’s cycle, which at humans we call “DNA”.


Um moderador removeu o post alegando o seguinte:


Your post was removed. A moderator determined that it broke the following rule:

Rule 1: Posts must put forth a substantive philosophical thesis and make a serious and sustained attempt to defend this thesis in English (with some exceptions, e.g. news about the profession, interviews with philosophers, and so on). Questions belong in /r/askphilosophy.

If this is a self-post, you may edit your post to fix this problem and message the moderators to have it reinstated.

E  minha resposta enviada ao moderador:

Message to moderators

from TheMatrixDNA sent 12/10/2016

Post in question:

I can’t agree this question has no “substantive philosophical thesis” and there is no “serious and sustained attempt to defend this thesis”. As we can see at

To sum up, a thesis statement should: Be specific. Be narrow enough as to be practicably defended within the length parameters of the assignment. Make an interesting claim, one over which reasonable people might disagree. Provide some hint as to what the main line of argument will be.

I think the very moderator’s problem seems to be “indoctrinated by known world view when at school”. Like when the philosophy academic course was dominated by the geocentric world view… any mention to a different other-centric view was seen as absurd.

There are three possible alternative as the cause fr DNA’s existence: 1) Was created by God and by magic; 2) Was created by matter of this planet ( or any other – panspermia) 3) Is the result of universal evolution, or the long chain of causes and effects that is coming since the Big Bang

Is there another alternative? Please, I don’t know. Human species has knowing only alternatives 1 and 2. Modern universities advocates alternative 2, so, alternative 1 must be absurd. As never nobody thought about alternative 3 ( or nobody has introduced a substantive frame of work like mine, developed during 30 years – after 7 years studying the Amazon biosphere, applying comparative anatomy among all its systems for identifying its connections and evolution as you can see at alternative 3 ( or any other) will be immediately classified as absurd, without learning and questioning the real facts enrolled as proof/evidences and don’t believing in those hundreds of confirmed right predictions. I understand it because before the jungle and learning to see the world from the brute nature perspective, I had reacted some way did by the moderator.

But, alternatives 1 and 2 are not rational. Both has broken the universal history into two blocks without any real evolutionary link between them, so, the big gap between cosmological evolution and biological evolution are fitted with magical gods or magical randomness. So, they are not substantive philosophical thesis.

There is no way to resume a new universal history of 13,8 billions years into a post on Reddit that contains the “serious and sustained attempt to defend this thesis”. They are listed in that website and would be introduced/debated in the comments section.

I think that any natural theory ( by the Greek definition of the world theory and not by the followed modern invention called “scientific theory”), is, at its essence, a philosophical thesis because it argues about the meaning of existence. Then, again: To sum up, a good introduction to a philosophical thesis should: (1) be concise, (2) contain a clear statement of your thesis, (3) introduce, very succinctly, your topic and explain why it is important, (4) indicate, very briefly, what the main line of argument will be, and (5) map out the overall structure of your paper.

Philosophy – as its very subject, the human mind – must be opened to its own evolution. Classifying any new tentative for openness as absurd is a kind of philosophical evolution-stopper. Maybe I am wrong here…? Cheers…


Tags: ,