Posts Tagged ‘reddit’

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

sexta-feira, dezembro 9th, 2016


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…


Definições Sobre o que é Vida, pela versão da Ciencia Oficial e versão da Matrix/DNA

sexta-feira, janeiro 10th, 2014

Experimentando o Reddit: Questão publicada.


Enviado há  por TheMatrixDNA esta postagem foi enviada em 


I have found that atoms, galaxies, stars systems and waves of natural light have their own DNA! Living things?!

What was registered into those 300 genes of the first biological system (aka, living being)? It was the history of an unique universal system that has evolved since the Big Bang. This system is based on a universal Matrix, the DNA is only its biological shape. Of course: the stupid matter of this lost planet couldn’t elaborate the extraordinary engineering of a DNA. And we got the picture of the Matrix at every stage of cosmological evolution.

Meu comentario por enquanto:  Se houver respostas, com certeza vurão com pedradas, ovos chocos e muita gozação. Não apenas porque a pergunta parece coisa de louco, nunca ninguem nirmal pensou nisso, mas tambem por causa da escrita; deve ter erros em Ingles, erros de concordancia, o que vai revelar de pronto que sou da cultura inglesa, e isto já suscita desprezo e ironia, num ambiente anglo-saxão, como tenho sentido muitas vezes em outros debates. Mas… eu não sou um crente, fundamentalista, estou pesquisando uma hipótese que acho valida na minha maneira de pensar, e estou bem equipado com conhecimentos para responder quando usam fatos reais, fenomenos naturais. Mas geralmente se esquecem destes e ficam girando em torno de palavras, conceitos humanos, que nada tem a ver com o tópico. Querem combater uma teoria com outra teoria, isto não existe. E… se o carteiro fosse brigar com cada cão que late no seu caminho, ele nunca entregaria as cartas, por isso, não respondo e não me afeta criticas não fundamentada em dados realmente conhecidos e comprovados.

Oh… la vem a primeira pedra:

[–]mchugho [score hidden]  atrás

Are you high bro?(Ele está sugerindo que estou drogado…)Minha resposta… vamos dar uma chance…:

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

No. Maybe I have understood Nature and our existence more than you did.Any real fact for criticising the non-scientific but philosophyc naturalist question? Any scientific law, real data, known natural phenomena? So, do you think they are “primitive life”? What’s life?

Segunda pedrada:

[–]Trudence [score hidden]  atrás

…Okay then…Good for you. …Is there a question ?

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

yes, there is two questions. 1) There is no such thing as non-animated natural system. People confuses systems with processes. If humans call them “alive”, and humans are natural systems, why not the others? 2) What was encrypted at those 300 genes, knowing that one gene can have millions of information?

[–]chefranden [score hidden]  atrás

What question?

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

Let me put it into different words. We have learned at school the theory of abiogenesis. If DNA is a kind of code present at those ancestral systems ( be it with magnetic or mechanic composition), why not call the process of biological systems formation of “astronomical embryogenesis”?

Ohhh… agora veio uma resposta séria, falando de fatos reais…

[–]mchugho [score hidden]  atrás

Life is defined as “the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.” As far I as I am aware we are the only things discovered so far in the universe that satisfies these criteria:

1: We are made of organic material (ie hydrocarbon chains)

2: We grow by assimilating other organic material.

3: We have functional activity, we can move and react to the environment.

4: Continual change, our cells divide and repair themselves continuously.

5: Death, eventually our forms expire.

6: Reproduction, this is the key point that distinguishes us from non life. We are able to store large amounts of information in our DNA to pass along to the next generation. So far life on earth is the only thing with the capacity to do that to these levels of complexity.

As for your philosophical point, I can see your point. What really distinguishes life from non life? It is really subjective to some extent and really has to be distinguished in terms of information density and complexity. We are dense areas of atomic complexity in a pretty uniform universe. If we were to find gas “creatures” on Jupiter that behaved in ways that satisfied the criteria previously defined (maybe even barring the one for them to be made of organic material) then I don’t think it would be much of a step to classify it as primitive life, (which is much the same case for arguing the classification of viruses as life swapping the organic material bit for the reproduction bit.)

The point is that we don’t defy any naturally occurring phenomenon as simplistic “life” simply because most natural phenomena are fairly predictable and relatively unchanging with simple chemical composition.

E minhas respostas, dividindo a grande resposta, feitas rapidamente talvez com muitos erros conceituais e de linguagem:

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

The definition of life is completely wrong! They are doing comparison between a natural working system ( any living body) with parts, pieces, portions of other systems ( this case, inorganic matter composing the stellar system)! Ok, my theoretical model of galaxies shoes how they was born, grow, reproducts its internal organs, and continual change preceding their fragmentation. The other things in the Universe are not known yet, we have theoretical models. And the properties of life are not easy to see into them…

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

1) Who told that every natural working system must be made of hydrocarbon? At the periodic table of elements there are more 27 elements with same properties of carbon atom. So, it is possible we will find natural intelligent systems made off boron, for instance.

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

2) That’s happen because we are opened system and biologicals. Original galaxies are closed systems, they have only internal movements, does not changing anything with external world. And they are half-mechanical/half-biological. It is different. Atoms absorbs particles, photons. So, what?

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

3) Atoms, galaxies, have internal functional activity.It is the way evolution works: the internal activity of primitive species becomes external activity at more evolved species.

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

4) Every time that dies a star in the sky, the galaxy make other replacing it. Every time an atom loose a bit of energy, it’s imbalance try to get it again. The continual change of biological systems occurs due the process of life’s cycle acts over the system, changing its shapes. At ancestral systems this same process acts only internally.

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

5) Death is the evolutionary product that came from the process of self-recycling, present at ancestors systems. A system is attacked by entropy, it is fragmented in its bits-information or dust, the dust girates at its own axis, the axis becomes a vortex, the vortex makes a new system. If you want that the system died and resuscitated again, no problem.

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

6) Reproduction? What’s the final result of any process of reproduction? At original galaxies, a pulsar emits magmas from giant volcanoes, the magma take the shape of comets ( which is the shape of comets), these comets are captured at the central nucleus where a vortex mix them with stellar dust and make new seed of a new astronomical body. That’s mechanical reproduction. But, long before that, we can see the mechanism of reproduction emerging at the Big Bang, when two quantum vortex with opposite spins join together and becomes a third element. There are lots of shapes of reproduction…

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

I think this issue is very important for we solve a lot of problems torturing humans today. The focus in chemical composition is wrong because it is a phenomena limited to biological systems. Organic chemistry needs a universal solvent like water, but galaxies has no liquid states, only gaseous and solid, atoms only magnetic, etc. The final results obtained by chemistry organic here can be obtained by others process there. We can’t eliminate the mortal traditional diseases because we are not understanding nature because we don’t know nothing about natural systems. And it happens because we are ignoring the evolution of system when ignoring our ancestors, till the Big Bang.

[–]mchugho [score hidden]  atrás

The formation of galaxies is a natural process but why should we deem everything that occurs in cycles as life? Its unnecessary.

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

I think that unnecessary and wrong is the use of the word “life”. It is separating us from our real Nature, the Cosmos. We are separating the Natural Universal History into two blocks, and for fulfilling the abysm between then, we have invented mythos. We have a non-complete theory of evolution because we separated Biological Evolution from Cosmological Evolution and that is not right. There are informations, mechanisms coming from cosmological evolution that fit the gaps in Darwinian’s few known mechanisms. And we could advance our technology turning humans free from repetitive and brutal work if we know the automation used by those ancestors. The people of Intelligent Designer should be satisfied when knowing that LUCA, to whom every biological process are reductive, is in the sky, and not here.

[–]TheMatrixDNA[S] [score hidden]  atrás

It is important for these young people recuperating a sense of existence also. They are learning that we are merely monkeys and this world is a product of big bangs occurring by chance. The schools are killing these children, by inside. If DNA is really a new evolutionary shape of a universal Matrix/DNA, we are not 15 or 20 or 50 years old, but, 13,7 billions years old. And certainly there is the transmissor of this universal DNA, so, you have a father, a mother, not merely monkeys.