|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Intelligent Design 2
#23555076 - 08/18/16 09:24 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Intelligent Design: I do not like how the term was hijacked by Christian fundamentalists, it has tainted the potentially useful scientific meaning of the term. If you came on this thread to disagree with intelligent design based on the arguments made by Christian fundamentalists you won't find much opposition here.
I propose that while life can seem to be designed intelligently there is no need to invoke the supernatural and/or divine in order to explain it.
DNA may itself be the architect behind its seeming intelligent design.
DNA is a self-replicating material present in nearly all living organisms as the main constituent of chromosomes. It is the carrier of genetic information, it is the code behind all life and evolution.
It has survived everything nature has thrown at it for more than 4.2 billion years and has vastly and exponentially increased genetic information, the general complexity and diversity of life-forms, as well as its own presence on the planet and in the universe.
With the development of human life and science, DNA seems like it could more easily begin to understand itself, manipulate itself, and perhaps eventually even spread to other planets via colonization by humanity.
It has manifested highly specialized adaptions across the entire spectrum of the earth environment such that life can be found literally everywhere on the planet.
Darwinism is the authority for most of todays dogmatic (non-thinking) biologists and other persons of science, as such a perception of super intelligence behind evolution will no doubt seem impossible and appalling to them.
However, even if I use the logic behind Darwinism, there is revealed a hidden intelligence to DNA.
Darwinism claims evolution is guided by the natural selection of completely random mutations.
the genetic information contained within a beneficial mutation (extremely rare, most mutations harm or kill the individual) could be compared to a well-written, orderly and purposeful book written in excellent prose and pretty hand-writing.
genetic information contained within all other mutations are the equivalent to random mishaps of nonsensical arrangements of letters in long fashion. If they survive, the genetic information is phased out quickly (nothing will reproduce with them, infertile, or they simply aren't as adapted to their particular niche as those in the species and die young).
a beneficial mutation reproduces and replicates its information further increasing the complexity of DNA. Some would say the true determiner of beneficial mutations would ultimately be the environment and natural selection thereof. I know natural selection is a part of the story. I feel however, the concept could be seen as more of a natural filtering of life-forms rather than a selection.
Natural selection occurs after the beneficial mutation/adaption has been created. Meaning it was a specialized adaption written in the code of DNA by DNA prior to the life-form ever encountering the environment.
What are the chances, given complete randomness were true, that DNA would create such specialized adaptions given no 'knowledge' or self-awareness or awareness of the environment. About as likely as a monkey randomly hitting keys on a keyboard and computer and somehow writing an operating system in c++.
What if as DNA grew in complexity throughout time, its collective intelligence did as well? What if DNA possesses some non-local intelligence and self-awareness? What if DNA is able to take information from previous experiences and design a beneficial mutation? What if DNA is the director of its own evolution and the true architect of life?
What if this massive intelligence communicates with us, as suggested by Leary and Wilson, through synchronicity?
Edited by hTx (08/18/16 09:30 PM)
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23557497 - 08/19/16 04:56 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
i think in the 60's game theory became a paradime in psychology we had transactional analysis what i take from this idea is that within a container certain rules apply so to fix a car engine the mechanic 'trouble shoots' he applies laws of cause and effect and logic and fixes the car after diagnosing the problem, but when he goes home and the baby crys, he picks it up and does not apply the same rules, he responds instantly.
when it comes to philosophy folks often seem to want something that applies globally.
i think mathematically, there are limitations as to what something can 'say' about itself. i'm struggling with the terminology here - but consider, what seems an obvious amazing fact, that no one talks about: space has no size, and time no duration. it is the same principle. formulate it however you like. but the consequence is that when a category exists it cannot be more or less than itself - it is hard to find the right words - why does space have no size? -1- because there is nothing to compare it to. -2- because it cannot get outside of itself to measure itself -3- because it is infinite
any category that is the ultimate of its category cannot be ... the king rules everybody, but does not have to obey any rules. the eye surveys all that can be seen but does not see itself.
since the universe is the ultimate infinte, nothing definitive can be said about it. even language tells us this: in-finite vs de-fine. as has been said: 'the universe is fine, till we de fine it'.
hence very young - not yet conditioned - children intuitively say: 'yes, but who created god?'
attempts to show a final cause, of everything are doomed to failure. whereas finding causes within a limited field, like car repair works.
maybe someone else can phrase this stuff better.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
|
|
why not call it gorgeous pattern and let things be as they are
--------------------
_ đ§ _
|
Midnight_Toker
Gone Fishin'


Registered: 09/26/10
Posts: 11,589
Loc: Canada
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23558468 - 08/19/16 09:51 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: What are the chances, given complete randomness were true, that DNA would create such specialized adaptions given no 'knowledge' or self-awareness or awareness of the environment. About as likely as a monkey randomly hitting keys on a keyboard and computer and somehow writing an operating system in c++.
The thing is that your analogy isn't quite right. You are correct that the 'operating system' is actually being written randomly, but it's not one single monkey doing it. The chances of that would be universally large which is why we don't see things like chimps giving birth to full-fledged humans.
I'd think of it more like many, many, manymanymany monkeys randomly hitting keys while obeying one rule; as the monkeys go ape on their keyboards, only the keys or combinations of keys which produce any sort of positive progress towards writing the operating system get saved onto the file, while all of those which cause the operating system to fail are discarded. With the addition of one simple rule it's now clear that no one monkey is writing anything remotely resembling a masterpiece of code/an OS, only now one is being created as a natural consequence of said rule. It's generally just happening one or two positive characters at a time while an enormous amount of useless letters are typed and deleted.
That one rule was meant to be analogous to how natural selection/survival of the fittest works in the world, although in the real world there is no code that predefines what a positive or negative mutation even is. Positive mutations are only actually 'saved' in real life because they help the organism adapt to its specific environment, survive, and become more likely to pass on its genes, while negative mutations tend to get 'deleted' because they do the opposite. Of course neither one of those assertions holds true 100% of the time due to the nature of chance and environment.
And we haven't even touched on the absolutely huge number of neutral mutations which, if popular theory holds true, seems to say that we all possess a TON of genetic code that does essentially nothing. It's useless, but because it doesn't negatively affect protein coding in any way (and because DNA doesn't have any sort of mind of its own), it doesn't necessarily ever get deleted from the gene pool.
I also don't think the entire process would be as messed up/messy as it is if DNA had some sort of consciousness and awareness of the direction it wanted to go in either. I've actually just started reading a book on the history of genetics and I'm already honestly very confused and surprised that ANY part of the process of DNA transcription/translation/replication even works, never mind how the entirety of the process functions well enough to produce something like us. It's all so fickle. Even though I'm sure it's actually not, after reading a little bit about it, it feels like the whole processes ability to function is teetering on the head of a pin.
Ignoring that last bit though, I personally find it very easy to see how the process of natural selection can give rise to so much complexity and diversity all on its own. I don't see how it would need help from any sort of consciousness.
|
beforethedawn
Registered: 06/19/16
Posts: 1,859
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
|
|
I don't want to derail but it seems to me if we trust experience we don't even have a concept for the present moment. Calling it "world" is even a bit of an assumption, ya know.
-------------------- Hostile humankind Can't you see you're fucking blind?
|
blingbling
what you chicken stew?

Registered: 09/04/10
Posts: 2,987
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23558842 - 08/20/16 12:12 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
"genetic information contained within all other mutations are the equivalent to random mishaps of nonsensical arrangements of letters in long fashion. If they survive, the genetic information is phased out quickly"
This is not true. If you look at the genome of a fruit fly it is many times larger than a humans. This is because it is full of "genetic junk" that other genes nullify. Fruit flies have short life cycles so genetic junk tends add up very quickly (their short life cycle is why they are the most studied animal regarding their genetics).
The fact remains that much of what we are is left over junk that has not been selectively removed because there were no pressures to do so. For example the reason why we hiccup is because our ancestors that were fish that used a simple lung system to begin colonising the land hiccuped to breath. Because no selective pressure could fully get rid of the spasming of the diaphragm we are left with hiccups.
Evolution is blind.
In fact if it were intelligent it probably wouldn't work because there are too many contingent factors to take into account for one intelligence to direct it. Kinda like how in communist countries the economies often failed because they were run by a central intelligence which was unable to keep up with pricing developments. Capitalism is blind, but it works because it reacts quicker to changes in the environment.
-------------------- Kupo said: let's fuel the robots with psilocybin. cez said: everyone should smoke dmt for religion. dustinthewind13 said: euthanasia and prostitution should be legal and located in the same building. White Beard said: if you see the buddha on the road, rape him, then kill him. then rape him again.
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
|
you seem very knowing and firm in your knowing. Well about what you typed, I fully disagree entirely. it is not intelligent
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23559178 - 08/20/16 05:28 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
What are the chances that DNA would create such specialized adaptions given no 'knowledge' or self-awareness or awareness of the environment.
We have covered this endlessly yet you keep failing to grasp this simple concept: the odds of something occurring AFTER THE FACT are always 1:1 or 100%.
The number of caveats and disclaimers you add are meaningless noise UNLESS you provide a clear analysis showing your math and how you arrived at such numbers. Of course, you haven't and you won't.
You have been here for years now and keep insisting that your unbacked assertions have weight and merit. They do not.
--------------------
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
|
The basics of design of reality are based on simple math. Sacred geometry and the Fibonacci sequence are things inherently within the constructs of nature that we discovered later.
This construct seems be of intelligent design. That does not necessarily mean it is but it seems that way. I personally believe it is intelligent design but not believe it is something that was pondered and thought about like a person would. More likely it was trial and error of the randomness of nature, where eventually a pattern was developed that worked.
The universe as a whole has all the time we know of to work out all the thinkable iterations of possibility of these equations. The Fibonacci sequence which covers things from the patterning of exponential growth of cells in almost all things that multiply. From the creation of seeds to the development of a zygote.
Was this pattern created or discovered by nature just as we discovered it in nature?
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23559467 - 08/20/16 09:31 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I tend to subscribe to the notion of the Implicate and Explicate Order:
Quote:
Implicate order and explicate order are ontological concepts for quantum theory coined by theoretical physicist David Bohm during the early 1980s. They are used to describe two different frameworks for understanding the same phenomenon or aspect of reality. In particular, the concepts were developed in order to explain the bizarre behavior of subatomic particles â behavior difficult to explain by quantum physics.
In his book Wholeness and the Implicate Order, Bohm uses these notions to describe how the same phenomenon might look different, or might be characterized by different principal factors, in different contexts such as at different scales. The implicate order, also referred to as the "enfolded" order, is seen as a deeper and more fundamental order of reality. In contrast, the explicate or "unfolded" order include the abstractions that humans normally perceive. As he writes:
"In the enfolded [or implicate] order, space and time are no longer the dominant factors determining the relationships of dependence or independence of different elements. Rather, an entirely different sort of basic connection of elements is possible, from which our ordinary notions of space and time, along with those of separately existent material particles, are abstracted as forms derived from the deeper order. These ordinary notions in fact appear in what is called the "explicate" or "unfolded" order, which is a special and distinguished form contained within the general totality of all the implicate orders (Bohm 1980, p. xv)."
All evolutionary change can be seen as arising from an implicate order. This has clear consequences, such as making it necessary that genetic phenomena be the result of a kind of coherent intelligence.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Lao Tzu Tao Te Ching Chapter One: first few lines: 'Tao (The Way) that can be spoken of is not the Constant Taoâ The name that can be named is not a Constant Name. Nameless, is the origin of Heaven and Earth;'
another translation:
'The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao The name that can be named is not the eternal Name.'
The unnamable is the eternally real. Naming is the origin of all particular things.
Why are some (possibly mainly westerners) so desperate to try and take the mystery out of life? What are they scared of?
or from Zhuangzi
'Once upon a time, I, Chuang Chou, dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly. I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was Chou. Soon I awakened, and there I was, veritably myself again. Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.'
The orient has ancient traditions of realizing paradox is an aspect of life or living. Like Alan Watts I wonder how 'we all' got so sidetracked, into thinking certainty is the cat's pajamas.
Picasso was not fooled
Pablo Picasso "People want to find a "meaning" in everything and everyone. That's the disease of our age, an age that is anything but practical but believes itself to be more practical than any other age."
âUnless your work gives you trouble, it is no good.â
another version
âUnless your work has mistakes, it is no good.â
(I don't have the french)
"The universe is intelligent", or "the universe is not intelligent", Watts & Picasso & Magritte would probably all agree: what pointless unintelligent thoughts, to get caught up in.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Well, I, for one, am quite uncertain of everything. From my end, the ideas I explore are not pointless, nor are they pathetic. I'm not desperately trying to imbue meaning on a cosmos I'm insecure about. I'm trying to be as objective as possible in making sense of my world. There is a difference there.
I completely sympathize with your characterization as a general principle, and I myself write about such a phenomenon at times here in this very forum. But I personally don't think certainty is "the cat's pajamas," and I'm not obsessed with generating tidy fictions about Nature.
Or perhaps you were trying to pigeonhole someone else.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Or perhaps you were trying to pigeonhole someone else.
tut tut -- perhaps I should have said re: hTx
I only hope to 'un pigeonhole' thought patterns that seem misleading.
how can the universe be 'intelligent'?
because intelligence is a relative term
(one agent can only be more intelligent than another in relation to a goal). How could the universe have a goal? Time itself has no duration and space no size and no limits. The universe is already always everywhere and lacking nothing. Goals do not apply to 'it'. And it is itself.
is a virus 'intelligent'? If so consciousness (as we usually define it) is not necessary for "intelligence'. Yet viruses easily kill us, (by using algorithms that evolve blindly in competition with 'us' ) who are supposedly more 'intelligent', and the universe contains both viruses and humans.
the same argument goes for other terms, besides 'intelligent' that some think can be applied such as 'purpose', 'meaning', 'loving', to the universe.
Edited by laughingdog (08/20/16 06:38 PM)
|
Peyote Road
Stranger

Registered: 09/02/15
Posts: 3,527
Loc: Great Lakes State
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
|
Quote:
blingbling said: "genetic information contained within all other mutations are the equivalent to random mishaps of nonsensical arrangements of letters in long fashion. If they survive, the genetic information is phased out quickly"
This is not true. If you look at the genome of a fruit fly it is many times larger than a humans. This is because it is full of "genetic junk" that other genes nullify. Fruit flies have short life cycles so genetic junk tends add up very quickly (their short life cycle is why they are the most studied animal regarding their genetics).
The fact remains that much of what we are is left over junk that has not been selectively removed because there were no pressures to do so. For example the reason why we hiccup is because our ancestors that were fish that used a simple lung system to begin colonising the land hiccuped to breath. Because no selective pressure could fully get rid of the spasming of the diaphragm we are left with hiccups.
Evolution is blind.
In fact if it were intelligent it probably wouldn't work because there are too many contingent factors to take into account for one intelligence to direct it. Kinda like how in communist countries the economies often failed because they were run by a central intelligence which was unable to keep up with pricing developments. Capitalism is blind, but it works because it reacts quicker to changes in the environment.
Capitalism is not blind, the government has set all kinds of laws and regulations to influence the "free" market.
-------------------- The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Or perhaps you were trying to pigeonhole someone else.
tut tut -- perhaps I should have said re: hTx
I only hope to 'un pigeonhole' thought patterns that seem misleading.
how can the universe be 'intelligent'?
because intelligence is a relative term
(one agent can only be more intelligent than another in relation to a goal). How could the universe have a goal? Time itself has no duration and space no size and no limits. The universe is already always everywhere and lacking nothing. Goals do not apply to 'it'. And it is itself.
is a virus 'intelligent'? If so consciousness (as we usually define it) is not necessary for "intelligence'. Yet viruses easily kill us, (by using algorithms that evolve blindly in competition with 'us' ) who are supposedly more 'intelligent', and the universe contains both viruses and humans.
the same argument goes for other terms, besides 'intelligent' that some think can be applied such as 'purpose', 'meaning', 'loving', to the universe.
Well, hTx would probably say that, due to entanglement, negentropic processes lead to increasing levels of novelty. In other words, there is increasing order potentially leading toward some transcendent resolution (or goal) in the future. I would say that is a possibility I entertain.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Well, hTx would probably say that, due to entanglement, negentropic processes lead to increasing levels of novelty. In other words, there is increasing order potentially leading toward some transcendent resolution (or goal) in the future. I would say that is a possibility I entertain.
Assuming time is real, eternity is forever. If the universe wants to achieve some 'perfection' (aka: 'transcendent resolution' or 'goal') (by god only knows what standard) what will it do forever after?, look in the mirror admiring it's static perfection, (that we have decided it presently lacks), for so many endless, trillions times trillions times trillionsof years, endlessly...
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23561566 - 08/20/16 10:18 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Just as a leaf falls in the wind genes mutate over time, some are beneficial for survival while others aren't. The only thing I disagree with is calling DNA 'intelligent', why can't random chance and the laws of nature be enough to describe the phenomenon of evolving life?
While I think any organism with RNA(all of them) is conscious(externally aware) there is no reason to believe they are 'intelligent' or have what most would call a conscience.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Well, hTx would probably say that, due to entanglement, negentropic processes lead to increasing levels of novelty. In other words, there is increasing order potentially leading toward some transcendent resolution (or goal) in the future. I would say that is a possibility I entertain.
Assuming time is real, eternity is forever. If the universe wants to achieve some 'perfection' (aka: 'transcendent resolution' or 'goal') (by god only knows what standard) what will it do forever after?, look in the mirror admiring it's static perfection, (that we have decided it presently lacks), for so many endless, trillions times trillions times trillionsof years, endlessly...

"Forever is a time word and time is that which ends." --William S. Burroughs
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
sudly
Darwin's stagger


Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,810
|
|
Tartigrades are probably the most perfect thing out there that might live forever.
-------------------- I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: sudly] 1
#23561877 - 08/21/16 12:47 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
They do NOT have mini crowns and thrones. You are just making that up!
--------------------
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Well, hTx would probably say that, due to entanglement, negentropic processes lead to increasing levels of novelty. In other words, there is increasing order potentially leading toward some transcendent resolution (or goal) in the future. I would say that is a possibility I entertain.
...eternity is forever. If the universe wants to achieve some 'perfection' (aka: 'transcendent resolution' or 'goal') (by god only knows what standard) what will it do forever after?, look in the mirror admiring it's static perfection, (that we have decided it presently lacks), ...
basically what we have here is Christian theology in the guise of science, exactly, what htx claims he isn't doing and as OG said he restarts these anti Darwin, science proves his theology, threads every so often, with no actual convincing evidence, one such thread ran for years. If folks want to go to church fine. If folks want to work with Jimmy Carter and do Christian good deeds fine. But this fanatical desire to do missionary work in the guise of science is tiresome to many. I suppose some will say not to participate if one doesn't like it. However one possible function of the forum might be to have some sort of rigor expected of scientific claims. Brendan flock? of course goes it's? own way. Perhaps that is the only true intelligence, however it doesn't seem conducive to dialogue either.
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
|
yes, eternal is beyond time. This doesn't mean that time stops. time can be tick tocking yet eternity is. People who have psychedelic experience can experience this, I did. it was when I was 15, and about my second LSD trip, and we were tripping and nopticed the clock said 1:40 am, and this had us in fits of hysterical giggling , falling about, and one guy even wrote in big pink crayon (or some sht) 'IT IS 20 2 2!' and we all fell even more about laughing
Also this sense can happen 'naturally' (put in brackets because i do not think psychedelics experience unnatural) such as happens to people like William Black who said:
Quote:
To see a World in a Grain of Sand. And a Heaven in a Wild Flower. Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand. And Eternity in an hour.
What this means is that in such ec~stasy we are beyond stasis, beyond static/rigid/fixed 'certainties as would convince our ratio_nality ( from ratio (genitive rationis) "reckoning, calculation, reason" (see ratio).). Which would respond: 'see a world in a grain of sand?BAH HUMBUG!! FACTS SIR. THAT IS HOW TO SEE THE WORLD!'
I remember when I first got online and looked for a psychedelic forum and found The Lycaeum. and found to my shock that many there clung to this kind of rational stance. Once when I was decribing a magical sense of experiencing water, lakes etc on psychedelics, I got this from someone 'WATER IS H2O!!!' lol
So if you identify with a 'logical' sense of yourself and someone claims to have experienced eternity 'in a minute' this will be met with complete non-understanding and even hostility, and/or they will insist that 'eternity' and 'time' cannot be in a same 'spacetime'.
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: zzripz]
#23564297 - 08/21/16 09:29 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Absolutely, I have had experiences that felt like I lived a lifetime in the span of a few hours. Time is incredibly subjective. What is a few minutes to a black coral that lives for 4000 years? What is an hour to a mayfly?
I also believe that the idea of eternity send an all inclusive term containing all of the infinity of time. There is also timelessness, this would be existing outside of time. I think that things like thoughts, emotions, energy, exist outside of time.
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
|
Peyote Road
Stranger

Registered: 09/02/15
Posts: 3,527
Loc: Great Lakes State
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: nuentoter]
#23564486 - 08/21/16 10:43 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I remember when I first got online and looked for a psychedelic forum and found The Lycaeum. and found to my shock that many there clung to this kind of rational stance. Once when I was decribing a magical sense of experiencing water, lakes etc on psychedelics, I got this from someone 'WATER IS H2O!!!' lol
I had the same experience, coming onto the internet expecting other psychedelic users to share my vision of a reality made out of consciousness but instead to find a large percentage of them, still buying into the scientific materialism/reductionism mythology.
-------------------- The path of the herbalist is to open ourselves to nature in an innocent and pure way. SHe in turn will open her bounty and reward us with many valuable secrets. May the earth bless you. - Michael Tierra
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
|
Quote:
Peyote Road said:
Quote:
I remember when I first got online and looked for a psychedelic forum and found The Lycaeum. and found to my shock that many there clung to this kind of rational stance. Once when I was decribing a magical sense of experiencing water, lakes etc on psychedelics, I got this from someone 'WATER IS H2O!!!' lol
I had the same experience, coming onto the internet expecting other psychedelic users to share my vision of a reality made out of consciousness but instead to find a large percentage of them, still buying into the scientific materialism/reductionism mythology.
Glad to know I am not alone! I was real shocked. it mad me ask questions though, and I began to think eg hmmmm was it that I took psychedelics so young when 15 that I feel like this? By this I don't mean others older cannot feel it, but that say someone is VERY indoctrinated in 'materialism' from 'education' and so on, and is convinced science, and the 'experts' have all the answers (or WILL do), and they take psychedelics say about early 20s, etc, well when they 'come down' maybe they are going to judge any experiences which challenge their worldview as 'distorted', 'just chemicals' etc? Because I came across all of that too from such people. I remember this moderator there who was so on-my-case that he even followed me to another forum when I began questioning the mental illness myth. We had a 99 post confrontation, mostly me and him, he called himself 'the Bricoluer' (not sure if I have spelling right)and he was into 'rational mysticism'.
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23566340 - 08/22/16 03:33 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: Intelligent Design: With the development of human life and science, DNA seems like it could more easily begin to understand itself, manipulate itself, and perhaps eventually even spread to other planets via colonization by humanity.
If American humanity does not get off its ass, stop watching TV, and start making decisions that lead to unity around preserving the constitution, globalism is going to take over, and within 300 years humanity is going to know it is going extinct.
In 100 years IF we stop all war making and and begin to control ourselves sensibly in our ecosphere, then we will have the stability and capacity to properly develop and conduct space travel. Now, no.
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
You do realize that the framers of the Constitution had the one percent exclusively in mind, right? They excluded women, blacks and unenfranchised citizens. Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Hamilton, etc. -- they all wanted an aristocracy to rule the country indefinitely. The Constitution is great, but it is not as sacred as people think.
You also write as if globalism hasn't taken over. News flash: it has. The neoliberal globalized economy is a reality, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
Also, 300 years is a long time. If we don't figure our shit out, we'll go extinct much sooner than 300 years from now. We have less time than you think on the environment, too.
Space travel is irrelevant.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: You do realize that the framers of the Constitution had the one percent exclusively in mind, right? They excluded women, blacks and unenfranchised citizens. Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Hamilton, etc. -- they all wanted an aristocracy to rule the country indefinitely. The Constitution is great, but it is not as sacred as people think.
You also write as if globalism hasn't taken over. News flash: it has. The neoliberal globalized economy is a reality, and there's nothing anyone can do about it.
Also, 300 years is a long time. If we don't figure our shit out, we'll go extinct much sooner than 300 years from now. We have less time than you think on the environment, too.
Space travel is irrelevant.
I understand the position you take differently. The framers made a compromise, but got a deal with some awesome principle made. They were appeasing factions. The underlying principals lead to solution of the issues you point out.
The key is realizing that the laws only work for us if WE use them. I'm pointing out HOW to use them.
And you are absolutely correct about globalization, however there are some things about human adaptivity you do not know. Accordingly, all that is truly negative about globalization can be stopped. Se my signature, I'm far ahead of you.
Accordingly, "figuring out our shit" amounts to agreement, unity, alignment under law, and then action under law. That will eventually enable justice. At that point we wil begin to learn about what we do not know about human adaptivity.
I will give you an example of the kind of injustice that has prevailed allowing the conditions you describe to be trends. In 1998 I tried to use my right to evidence and witness in a civil action against my county for concealing records of the old federal court that was here.
 Had those arrest and booking records been produced, I would have proven that over 1,000 insanity actions of the federal court were absent from the county state courts records. State laws mandated that almost any expense was justified to replace the value of those records to the public, so the sheriffs dept. failed to appear at the demand of the county counsel who is identified and executing an agenda maintaining the basis of secrecy for our secret government by directing them to lie about their possession of the records.
This declaration which is witnessed is by a friend of mine who saw the records 1 year before the subpoena. He is how I knew the records were there.

But, all of that is simply background for the reason we need to alter or abolish. To do that we must be unified. To be unified around constitutional intent invokes the 9th amendment. We can define rights not currently enumerated.
The root problem is that the PURPOSE of free speech is abridged. The framers were unable to include the full doctrine of free speech they learned from the SIx Nations Iroquois Confederacy. "The Greater Meaning of Free Speech".
From the practice of free speech between people, an understandings can be created. From those can come; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love, protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I learned of that from a descendent of the Seneca.
There is no doubt of the philosophical, then legal veracity of that as law serves the human interest. Accordingly, the framers were only able to include 30% of that doctrine of understanding regarding the ultimate purposes of free speech.
In a biological realm, free speech enables the sharing and understanding of knowledge needed for human survival. In a legalistic realm under our constitution and the intents of it from the Declaration of Independence, the ultimate purpose is to enable the unity required to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable rights.
To invoke the 9th amendment effectively we need to agree that the purpose of free speech is abridged and use that fact to justify directing our state legislators to work to gather other state legislators for an Article V convention via conventions in the several states.
The first order of business is preparation for Article V by specific amendment to assure all amendments have constitutional intent as Article V requires.
Highly idealistic, not a quick fix, but a permanent fix. A great way to eventually escape partisan politics. This is the first step in "figuring out our shit".
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Quote:
...I'm far ahead of you.
You can assume that, but you don't really know. I have to say, from where I sit, this is a rehash of the same old stuff I've seen a zillion times, which comes to naught a zillion times. Our society is decaying, which is the subject of another thread, but such a process does not allow for magically, all-of-a-sudden liberal democratic principles to be enforced to the letter. It just isn't happening.
You do seem to have an impressive knowledge of the Constitution.
But...
Quote:
Highly idealistic, not a quick fix, but a permanent fix. A great way to eventually escape partisan politics. This is the first step in "figuring out our shit".
It is appallingly naive for you to to assume that you have any formula at all for a "permanent" fix. At no time in human history has any form of governance or institutional order been permanent. Our ideologies are not even permanent. The Buddhists assert that nothing in the universe can be permanent. That is a major mistake, imo, to think you can fix things permanently if we will all just stop and listen to you.
And by the way, partisan politics is about 240 years old. It won't turn on a dime for you.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Quote:
...I'm far ahead of you.
I have to say, from where I sit, this is a rehash of the same old stuff I've seen a zillion times,.
You do seem to have an impressive knowledge of the Constitution.
But...
Quote:
Highly idealistic, not a quick fix, but a permanent fix. A great way to eventually escape partisan politics. This is the first step in "figuring out our shit".
It is appallingly naive for you to to assume that you have any formula at all for a "permanent" fix. At no time in human history has any form of governance or institutional order been permanent. Our ideologies are not even permanent. The Buddhists assert that nothing in the universe can be permanent. That is a major mistake, imo, to think you can fix things permanently if we will all just stop and listen to you.
And by the way, partisan politics is about 240 years old. It won't turn on a dime for you.
Do I propose it will turn on a dime for me? Where do I do that?
Where have you seen the "Greater Meaning Of Free Speech", ever?
Generalizations do not work well. And, be advised, you are now working against the survival and evolution of your species.
Our instincts are permanent, and the constitution is based on them. Maybe we fail ourselves. You are demonstrating the possibility. Things change, but trends can be permanent. We can establish that our social instincts have a capacity to dominate with positivity.
Let us try a simple agreement to demonstrate this.
Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
How do you answer?
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
|
nothing exists
master of fire

Registered: 12/15/10
Posts: 289
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
if you dont think you were intelligently designed, you probably werent.
-------------------- i like you...
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Quote:
ChristopherABrown said: Do I propose it will turn on a dime for me? Where do I do that?
Where have you seen the "Greater Meaning Of Free Speech", ever?
Generalizations do not work well. And, be advised, you are now working against the survival and evolution of your species.
Our instincts are permanent, and the constitution is based on them. Maybe we fail ourselves. You are demonstrating the possibility. Things change, but trends can be permanent. We can establish that our social instincts have a capacity to dominate with positivity.
Let us try a simple agreement to demonstrate this.
Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
How do you answer?
I don't mean to "work against the survival and evolution of my species" but I do not have so rosy an outlook on trends as you do. Government is power. The people are the governed. 'Twas ever thus.
Freedom of speech is a temporary and conditional privilege that the powerful allow citizens to have as long as they don't cause any trouble. There have been many situations in which the government has not allowed one to plead the first, and many situations in which a person's rights were taken away because of something they said. Your idealism is just sort of silly.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Driving atm on phone, will update when home but a question to clarify my point and logic here.
Would you consider GMO to be intelligent design?
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Quote:
ChristopherABrown said: Do I propose it will turn on a dime for me? Where do I do that?
Where have you seen the "Greater Meaning Of Free Speech", ever?
Generalizations do not work well. And, be advised, you are now working against the survival and evolution of your species.
Our instincts are permanent, and the constitution is based on them. Maybe we fail ourselves. You are demonstrating the possibility. Things change, but trends can be permanent. We can establish that our social instincts have a capacity to dominate with positivity.
Let us try a simple agreement to demonstrate this.
Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
How do you answer?
I don't mean to "work against the survival and evolution of my species" but I do not have so rosy an outlook on trends as you do. Government is power. The people are the governed. 'Twas ever thus.
Freedom of speech is a temporary and conditional privilege that the powerful allow citizens to have as long as they don't cause any trouble. There have been many situations in which the government has not allowed one to plead the first, and many situations in which a person's rights were taken away because of something they said. Your idealism is just sort of silly.
as regards Freedom of speech--well privacy is already very compromised.
Even the phrase 'the government' is misleading. no one person, or small group, knows what all the branches are up to. there are so many secret groups, so many behind the scenes deals, so many illegal relationships with corporations, nefarious weapons projects, favors owed, secret and illegal operations, incompetence, constant lying, misinformation, and so on. I guess we use the term because it makes us feel secure.
The CIA has experimented on US citizens. this is way beyond free speech issues.
Given this is the case, in some sense referring to the constitution as a gold standard seems out of touch. soon there will be human clones and embedded rfid chips, maybe first in china, maybe in 50 years--who knows---but the framers would already go into shock if they saw our world, i think.
still we're lucky we have the constitution, and an attempt at government--without it things could be much worse.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23571225 - 08/23/16 11:29 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
As well, OC , did you know the math was already done several years ago?
It was concluded that evolution by natural selection could not have produced the complexity of life especially considering humanity, we see today.
To fix this error it was suggested that dna contains algorithm s which help the process a long, and that these algorithm s were to be found in "junk" DNA.
Links to evidence when home.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
Edited by hTx (08/23/16 11:40 PM)
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23571226 - 08/23/16 11:30 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: Driving atm on phone, will update when home but a question to clarify my point and logic here.
Would you consider GMO to be intelligent design?
as posted earlier intelligence is relative
take the lion and the zebra there could be 3 different goals 2 opposing animal goals & a theoretical ecology one but in any case -- there is definitely suffering--whats so intelligent about that?
if one had a child and one observed their child playing and every day its games involved one doll or toy animal killing the other and eating it, one would wonder what was wrong and go to the child psychologist
but this is the natural world ( life devours life ) into which you insist on projecting your fantasy of harmony which you call intelligence
fantasies are fine beautiful classical music is wonderful but when it comes to the world we are batter off acknowledging its horrors and doing our best to mitigate them and not waste time sugar coating reality with elaborate rationalized projections
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Quote:
ChristopherABrown said: Do I propose it will turn on a dime for me? Where do I do that?
Where have you seen the "Greater Meaning Of Free Speech", ever?
Generalizations do not work well. And, be advised, you are now working against the survival and evolution of your species.
Our instincts are permanent, and the constitution is based on them. Maybe we fail ourselves. You are demonstrating the possibility. Things change, but trends can be permanent. We can establish that our social instincts have a capacity to dominate with positivity.
Let us try a simple agreement to demonstrate this.
Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
How do you answer?
I don't mean to "work against the survival and evolution of my species" but I do not have so rosy an outlook on trends as you do. Government is power. The people are the governed. 'Twas ever thus.
Freedom of speech is a temporary and conditional privilege that the powerful allow citizens to have as long as they don't cause any trouble. There have been many situations in which the government has not allowed one to plead the first, and many situations in which a person's rights were taken away because of something they said. Your idealism is just sort of silly.
You must know that I'm proposing absolutes rating to the use of our rights.
And it's true, what you say about free speech violated as it is, let alone manifesting its purpose.
None of that is reason to give up on the ideal. I wonder why you would consider it.
Or to give up on our right to alter or abolish.
But how do you answer?
Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
You never actually answered the question.. ?
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23571287 - 08/23/16 11:46 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Genetically modified organisms are in fact, designed intelligently by humans who are controlled by DNA.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23571320 - 08/23/16 11:57 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
How can we ignore that fact when considering a valid theory of evolution?
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23571598 - 08/24/16 02:20 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
hTx you ran a thread like this before for over a year apparently the results were not satisfying to you
and it must amuse bored mods on this board so they tolerate it and don't move it to 'science' or /spirituality & mysticism' or ... Enlil mod on the security board and also on conspiracy board seems to more readily call a spade a spade
2 quotes would seem to apply:
'Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.' Albert Einstein Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html
Quote:
RJ Tubs 202 said: âThe world is divided into people who think they are right.â
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
|
Human designed GMOs, I'd have a hard time calling that "intelligent" design. Maybe clever design but like previously stated, intelligence IS relative.
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23572037 - 08/24/16 07:12 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
As well, OC , did you know the math was already done several years ago?
I have seen the make-believe math from Creationists
Quote:
It was concluded that evolution by natural selection could not have produced the complexity of life especially considering humanity, we see today.
Concluded by whom? Certainly not mainstream biologists.
Quote:
Links to evidence when home.
I doubt it.
--------------------
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: nuentoter]
#23572066 - 08/24/16 07:30 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Intelligent design is Permaculture which involves learning from nature which is intelligence and source OF intelligence
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: zzripz]
#23572089 - 08/24/16 07:45 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I agree, GMO's give the implication that we know better than nature.
absurd
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: nuentoter]
#23572194 - 08/24/16 08:39 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Do you eat bananas? (Or non-GMO tomatoes, wheat, apples, corn)
--------------------
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Quote:
ChristopherABrown said: But how do you answer?
Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
My answer is that government cannot be other than it is. I cannot answer these questions, as I reject their premises. "Unalienable rights" is luminous nonsense and the powerful will not allow any faction of people to abolish government, no matter what happens.
Free speech is, as I have said, a temporary, conditional privilege. Your questions mean nothing to me.
Government is not going to undergo an overhaul, not without a major crisis first, anyway. Maybe Bernie might have given people like you a shot, but likely not, as Congress would have stonewalled him.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: as regards Freedom of speech--well privacy is already very compromised.
Even the phrase 'the government' is misleading. no one person, or small group, knows what all the branches are up to. there are so many secret groups, so many behind the scenes deals, so many illegal relationships with corporations, nefarious weapons projects, favors owed, secret and illegal operations, incompetence, constant lying, misinformation, and so on. I guess we use the term because it makes us feel secure.
The CIA has experimented on US citizens. this is way beyond free speech issues.
Given this is the case, in some sense referring to the constitution as a gold standard seems out of touch. soon there will be human clones and embedded rfid chips, maybe first in china, maybe in 50 years--who knows---but the framers would already go into shock if they saw our world, i think.
still we're lucky we have the constitution, and an attempt at government--without it things could be much worse.
All outstanding points. There are roughly three million employees under the federal umbrella, so whenever people make sweeping statements about the government they should realize they're talking about thousands and millions of working civilians. Government is obviously quite necessary, and you're right -- our system, with its Constitution, is far, far better than anarchy.
Privacy in the modern age is no more. It is a casualty; this is the consequence of technology and interconnectedness. As I have been saying, appeals to the first and fourth amendments become rather quaint and lame, as they are at best selectively enforced.
Rights are, and have always been, temporary privileges granted by the governing to the governed. If there's ever really any threat to the former, those rights will quite typically be rescinded.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Quote:
laughingdog said: as regards Freedom of speech--well privacy is already very compromised.
Even the phrase 'the government' is misleading. no one person, or small group, knows what all the branches are up to. there are so many secret groups, so many behind the scenes deals, so many illegal relationships with corporations, nefarious weapons projects, favors owed, secret and illegal operations, incompetence, constant lying, misinformation, and so on. I guess we use the term because it makes us feel secure.
The CIA has experimented on US citizens. this is way beyond free speech issues.
Given this is the case, in some sense referring to the constitution as a gold standard seems out of touch. soon there will be human clones and embedded rfid chips, maybe first in china, maybe in 50 years--who knows---but the framers would already go into shock if they saw our world, i think.
still we're lucky we have the constitution, and an attempt at government--without it things could be much worse.
All outstanding points. There are roughly three million employees under the federal umbrella, so whenever people make sweeping statements about the government they should realize they're talking about thousands and millions of working civilians. Government is obviously quite necessary, and you're right -- our system, with its Constitution, is far, far better than anarchy.
Privacy in the modern age is no more. It is a casualty; this is the consequence of technology and interconnectedness. As I have been saying, appeals to the first and fourth amendments become rather quaint and lame, as they are at best selectively enforced.
Rights are, and have always been, temporary privileges granted by the governing to the governed. If there's ever really any threat to the former, those rights will quite typically be rescinded.
True enough, but some rights cannot be relinquished, and still expect to survive after they are gone. This is not an immediate issue, it is an eventual issue.
Accordingly, the tyranny of the masses can be our tool simply by agreement. It comes down to the question of "Are we going to place our wants over our needs, before the eventual deprival of the need becomes obvious if we do place the wants over the needs?" Neglect to enforcement of the constitution can lead to its relinquishment. Why not make the agreements needed to enforce it and do so now?
I, for one, am always pointing out that we do have some good government officials and employees. Why not give them something good from states citizens to align with that is completely constitutional?
Do we have the intelligence to use the foresight in this instance, or are we too completely dumbed down and distracted to do so?
Are we too distracted to take a few minutes each day, at the right time with friends and family to put forth information leading to an understanding that we must eventually deal with this or face extinction? Clearly, government is aligned with corporations and corporate interests. As our commodities are increasingly provided and controlled by corporations, who most often value or place profits over environmental integrity, we loose control over our sustenance of our existence.
Are we intelligent enough to realize that it is media preventing us from unifying with information needed for survival? At what point are we capable of admitting that we as members of society have or are having imposed a serious mental disability in cognitively, collectively recognizing that we personally need to adapt in small, but widespread ways?
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
Edited by ChristopherABrown (08/24/16 11:56 AM)
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Do you eat bananas? (Or non-GMO tomatoes, wheat, apples, corn)
I am going to guess that you are going to mention the fact that humans have "genetically altered" foods for a long time, like with the banana and carrot. They were much different before we started to cultivate them, which led to them being selectively bred, and thus changing their genetics with the generations. This is process though allows for minor changes and for nature to do her part in much of the work. Scientists creating GMO foods are taking a shortcut, while i find nothing inherently wrong with this practice, they are missing out on the validation process of generations. Things like sustainability and impact on the environment in those areas simply cannot be calculated in such short time spans.
so like i said before, clever, but not intelligent in my book
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Our conversation has been off topic for too long. I'm done.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: nuentoter]
#23577027 - 08/25/16 05:55 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
nuentoter said:
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Do you eat bananas? (Or non-GMO tomatoes, wheat, apples, corn)
I am going to guess that you are going to mention the fact that humans have "genetically altered" foods for a long time, like with the banana and carrot. They were much different before we started to cultivate them, which led to them being selectively bred, and thus changing their genetics with the generations. This is process though allows for minor changes and for nature to do her part in much of the work. Scientists creating GMO foods are taking a shortcut, while i find nothing inherently wrong with this practice, they are missing out on the validation process of generations. Things like sustainability and impact on the environment in those areas simply cannot be calculated in such short time spans.
so like i said before, clever, but not intelligent in my book
So now you recant your earlier statement?
Quote:
...the implication that we know better than nature.
Selective breeding does indeed imply this. And everyone who eats such modern foods apparently agrees.
--------------------
Edited by OrgoneConclusion (08/25/16 08:56 PM)
|
iiilil
Stranger


Registered: 01/08/16
Posts: 369
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx] 1
#23577465 - 08/25/16 07:44 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Order signifies purpose. Purpose signifies intent. Intent signifies intelligence.
Pretty much everything in the universe operates under this pretense. You'd be hard pressed to find even a single case that it does not.
In the cases where you think this pretense does not underscore existence, it is only likely that you just don't know enough yet.
Part of man's journey is to witness the unfolding of this intelligence and subsequent understanding. This journey is to be conducted with humility. Questioning is fine in so much as it leads to new understanding. Mindless mental masturbation is very much that. Hand waving and confusion as a means to rid oneself of acknowledging the aforementioned pretense is a fools errand and only leads one further from discovery.
So.. DNA. Yeah, you have some solid thoughts... It is what it is and we can use science to discover more about it. Your views of the world will necessarily shape this discovery which is why you don't just hand wave off 'higher' level thinking.
Order signifies purpose. Purpose signifies intent. Intent signifies intelligence.
Order is present in DNA.. the rest follows. Science is the mechanism for discovering the order to things... step 1 of a longer chain.
Want to know more on the order of things? Test out your theories? Get in the pits and start getting muddy
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Quote:
ChristopherABrown said: But how do you answer?
Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?
My answer is that government cannot be other than it is. I cannot answer these questions, as I reject their premises. "Unalienable rights" is luminous nonsense and the powerful will not allow any faction of people to abolish government, no matter what happens.
Free speech is, as I have said, a temporary, conditional privilege. Your questions mean nothing to me.
Government is not going to undergo an overhaul, not without a major crisis first, anyway. Maybe Bernie might have given people like you a shot, but likely not, as Congress would have stonewalled him.
Hmmm, it is unfortunate you do not understand the constitution, which explains why you think in the box made for you. To remedy that look at the language in Article V, or what happens when 3/4 of the states agree while having conventions proposing amendments in their states.
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Having trouble seeing posts?
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: Our conversation has been off topic for too long. I'm done. 
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: Having trouble seeing posts?
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: Our conversation has been off topic for too long. I'm done. 
Having trouble seeing the intelligent design of the constitution?
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Look, I don't think you're getting this. We are OT. This thread is about a teleological unfoldment in Nature, not political documents. If you wish to discuss the Constitution, please start a new thread.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
ChristopherABrown
Human being


Registered: 07/22/16
Posts: 330
Loc: Santa Barbara California
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: Look, I don't think you're getting this. We are OT. This thread is about a teleological unfoldment in Nature, not political documents. If you wish to discuss the Constitution, please start a new thread.
I've already done that. The thread about the Countermand Amendment.
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23569948
The constitution in its original intent is natural law unfolding in human society as it unfolds in nature. I really don't see enough difference to take the objection seriously. Having stated that I will see if you post in the thread about the constitution.
-------------------- You always want what you need, but do not always need what you want. People that do not want what they need, have a problem. Can we stop doing all of the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: hTx you ran a thread like this before for over a year apparently the results were not satisfying to you
and it must amuse bored mods on this board so they tolerate it and don't move it to 'science' or /spirituality & mysticism' or ... Enlil mod on the security board and also on conspiracy board seems to more readily call a spade a spade
2 quotes would seem to apply:
'Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.' Albert Einstein Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html
Quote:
RJ Tubs 202 said: âThe world is divided into people who think they are right.â
Although similar, the thread wasn't quite the same as this one... in that thread I proposed that informational changes are primary to evolution and physical changes in the form of beneficial mutations naturally selected by the environment should or could be seen as secondary, with the ultimate goal of creating increasingly complex life-forms capable of increasing degrees of novelty and intelligence.
In that thread, I was more hinting that the universe itself is intelligent and self-aware, without ever really overtly stating so. The strategy behind this was so that anyone curious and open-minded enough to really listen to what I was saying, would come to that conclusion all on their own.
In that thread I also speculated into the forever questioned 'meaning of life' -- explaining a logical purpose behind the emergence of life and its subsequent evolution into hugely complex and intelligent life-forms.
I never directly called DNA as a whole, intelligent and self-aware, although it was definitely implied.
As well, you act like that thread was a total disaster of logic and idiocy, however, not one of you was able to prove my proposition utterly wrong in the years that thread was active.
In fact, as evidence of my proposition began to pour in, most of you naysayers were completely stumped. The last few pages in the thread are of myself and others sympathetic to the logic posting links to recent discoveries which were in direct support of the OP. Over-all, I consider the thread a major success, so I am unsure why you are posting about it here as if it was some major failure of logic that was proved completely wrong.
The mods put up with it because I did (and do) a good job defending my position.
The aim of this thread is much less broad, and is to investigate the possible intelligence and self-awareness of DNA (I haven't really delved into some of the more interesting details yet). As well, I wanted to show that we can have a discussion with regards to Intelligent Design without bringing fundamentalist ideals into the discussion.
I can tell that many perceptions here (and elsewhere I'm sure), have been tainted by the term Intelligent Design thanks to the terrible, and mostly illogical efforts made by Christian fundamentalists.
The difference between myself and them, and what I am proposing, is vastly different.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
I have seen the make-believe math from Creationists
The math which I am speaking of came from Murray Eden, an MIT engineer, in the late 60s.
Quote:
Concluded by whom? Certainly not mainstream biologists.
its not usually mainstream biologists who are appalled at the universal acceptance of Darwinism, its usually computer scientists, mathematicians from multiple fields, engineers, quantum physicists, etc. Few trained in biology can or even will try to understand the mathematical impossibilities concerning how life got to where it is today based on strict Darwinism. As well, evolutionary studies are quite specialized within the broad field of biology. Most are taught natural selection in high school or first year college bio classes and never really retouch the subject again unless they choose to specialize in fields especially concerned with evolution. Even those that specialize in evolutionary fields often ignore the emergence of humanity, leaving that to the anthropologists.
Quote:
Links to evidence when home.
I doubt it.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6051132
""[A]n opposite way to look at the genotype is as a generative algorithm and not as a blue-print; a sort of carefully spelled out and foolproof recipe for producing a living organism of the right kind if the environment in which it develops is a proper one. Assuming this to be so, the algorithm must be written in some abstract language. Molecular biology may well have provided us with the alphabet of this language, but it is a long step from the alphabet to understanding a language. Nevertheless a language has to have rules, and these are the strongest constraints on the set of possible messages. No currently existing formal language can tolerate random changes in the symbol sequences which express its sentences. Meaning is almost invariably destroyed. Any changes must be syntactically lawful ones. I would conjecture that what one might call "genetic grammaticality" has a deterministic explanation and does not owe its stability to selection pressure acting on random variation." (Murray Eden, "Inadequacies as a Scientific Theory," in Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), pg. 11) "
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23596353 - 08/31/16 04:07 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2436308
^ the above article is based on an experiment in 2015 describes how DNA can detect information about its own integrity and transmit that information back to itself, essentially making DNA self-aware.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx] 1
#23603505 - 09/02/16 01:39 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Another interesting thing i've noticed...
there have been thousands of level 5 psychedelic trip reports which all describe a "hallucination" in which they experience total ego-death then rapidly reincarnate and progress through every life-form up to and past their current incarnation, to the point where they have a realization of 'being everything that ever was'.
These reports are very similar to recounts of mystical experiences throughout written history.
I have had this experience.
Afterwards, in my experience, the being everything that ever was experience turned into an 'everything-that-ever-was Being', and it seemed the barrier between the inner and outer was completely dissolved in an objective way.
All reality was deeply connected to my thoughts and the synchronicities took on an intelligent personality in reaction to them at quantum entangled speed.
The only way I can describe it, is that it seemed reality became aware that I was aware it was aware.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
Edited by hTx (09/02/16 01:48 AM)
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx] 1
#23603515 - 09/02/16 01:47 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
How is it that this experience is mere hallucination, random meaningless noise, when so many have had it?
And if it is all insanity, its quite an interesting way to go insane, wouldn't you say?
Why would so many people report witnessing the script of evolution on psychedelics or even in non-psychedelic spiritual experiences (akashic records)
It seems psychedelics enable our awareness to operate on a non-local level with non-local intelligences, one of these seems to be DNA, of which we are all mostly robotic slaves to.
This is Jungs "Collective Unconscious", "Indras Net", the "Akashic Records".
It can orchestrate magnificent synchronicity through minute manipulations of its living creations, and i'm not the only one to witness this on a moment-to-moment basis. " I felt then as if I were the first man, the first creature, to know that all this is. The entire world round me was still in its primeval state; it did not know that it was. And then, in that one moment in which I came to know, the world sprang into being; without that moment it would never have been. All Nature seeks this goal and finds it fulfilled in man, but only in the most highly developed and most fully conscious man. " - Carl Jung
âWhat if it were true that nature speaks in signs and that the secret to understanding its language consists in noticing similarities in shape or in form?â â Jeremy Narby, The Cosmic Serpent, DNA and the Origins of Knowledge
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
Edited by hTx (09/02/16 02:22 AM)
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23603729 - 09/02/16 05:27 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
A fractal pattern permeating through all
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23604081 - 09/02/16 09:21 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: How is it that this experience is mere hallucination, random meaningless noise, when so many have had it?
And if it is all insanity, its quite an interesting way to go insane, wouldn't you say?
Why would so many people report witnessing the script of evolution on psychedelics or even in non-psychedelic spiritual experiences (akashic records)
It seems psychedelics enable our awareness to operate on a non-local level with non-local intelligences, one of these seems to be DNA, of which we are all mostly robotic slaves to.
This is Jungs "Collective Unconscious", "Indras Net", the "Akashic Records".
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23605819 - 09/02/16 07:12 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
the reason this thread has seemingly infinite legs like centipedes and millipedes is that the human brain evolved to notice patterns and we project those patterns onto the model of the world that is manufactured by the brain
the obvious fact that both time & space have no imaginable or experiential beginning (or end) will not stop it
that, that which is infinite, (as opposed to 'definite' / aka 'defined') can neither be proved to be random or ordered; that goals, and intelligence, are always related to purpose, which presumes order, which cannot be ascribed to that which is infinite; are all no obstacle to the emotional needs that inspire projection, and manufacture rationalizations.
in the end what is projected is always similar to the Christian and Muslim versions of heaven, where either angles sing forever, or virgins are provided--the new age version would be something equally insipid-- as Mark Twain said (roughly): 'why is it that people imagine heaven to be singing forever, when they can't wait to get out of church on Sunday'...and fuck the neighbor's wife---i suppose... 'Devine intelligence'... really?????????????????? also intelligence only serves to solve problems... does the cosmic intelligence have a problem? is it bored? it would seem the problems and needs are the possession of of those who feel the need to proclaim a belief in aforesaid theory
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23605865 - 09/02/16 07:27 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said:
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
I have seen the make-believe math from Creationists
The math which I am speaking of came from Murray Eden, an MIT engineer, in the late 60s.
Quote:
Concluded by whom? Certainly not mainstream biologists.
its not usually mainstream biologists who are appalled at the universal acceptance of Darwinism, its usually computer scientists, mathematicians from multiple fields, engineers, quantum physicists, etc. Few trained in biology can or even will try to understand the mathematical impossibilities concerning how life got to where it is today based on strict Darwinism. As well, evolutionary studies are quite specialized within the broad field of biology. Most are taught natural selection in high school or first year college bio classes and never really retouch the subject again unless they choose to specialize in fields especially concerned with evolution. Even those that specialize in evolutionary fields often ignore the emergence of humanity, leaving that to the anthropologists.
Quote:
Links to evidence when home.
I doubt it.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6051132
""[A]n opposite way to look at the genotype is as a generative algorithm and not as a blue-print; a sort of carefully spelled out and foolproof recipe for producing a living organism of the right kind if the environment in which it develops is a proper one. Assuming this to be so, the algorithm must be written in some abstract language. Molecular biology may well have provided us with the alphabet of this language, but it is a long step from the alphabet to understanding a language. Nevertheless a language has to have rules, and these are the strongest constraints on the set of possible messages. No currently existing formal language can tolerate random changes in the symbol sequences which express its sentences. Meaning is almost invariably destroyed. Any changes must be syntactically lawful ones. I would conjecture that what one might call "genetic grammaticality" has a deterministic explanation and does not owe its stability to selection pressure acting on random variation." (Murray Eden, "Inadequacies as a Scientific Theory," in Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), pg. 11) "
Lots of words - no math; and certainly no surprise.
--------------------
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
I don't know man, you don't seem to have much of a counter-point other than you projecting your own thoughts and protests to fundamentalism.
As said in the OP, I agree with most arguments against the average creationists idea of intelligent design.
You seem to be caught up on the terms; not actually having read anything and rambling on about projections of christian and muslim theology for whatever reason.
I don't care about any of that, nor am I projecting anything, as the inspiration for this thread happened from several direct experiences.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: hTx]
#23608845 - 09/03/16 06:00 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: Intelligent Design: I do not like how the term was hijacked by Christian fundamentalists, ...Blah blah.. I know natural selection is a part of the story. I feel however, the concept could be seen as more of a natural filtering of life-forms rather than a selection.
Natural selection occurs after the beneficial mutation/adaption has been created. Meaning it was a specialized adaption written in the code of DNA by DNA prior to the life-form ever encountering the environment.
What are the chances, given complete randomness were true, that DNA would create such specialized adaptions given no 'knowledge' or self-awareness or awareness of the environment. About as likely as a monkey randomly hitting keys on a keyboard and computer and somehow writing an operating system in c++.
What if as DNA grew in complexity throughout time, its collective intelligence did as well? What if DNA possesses some non-local intelligence and self-awareness? What if DNA is able to take information from previous experiences and design a beneficial mutation? What if DNA is the director of its own evolution and the true architect of life?
What if this massive intelligence communicates with us, as suggested by Leary and Wilson, through synchronicity?
ok original some post quotes (above)
u think u can argue from probabality to infere god aka 'intelligence is necessary
as explained, by many, this is plain stupid
if 'God" speaks to u about which stock to buy, or how to be kinder to ur kids who am i to object? more power to u and God - aka 'intelligence'-- but when u try to prove rationally that we should all believe what pleases u based on aka 'cosmic intelligence', all it actually shows is that experentially God aka 'intelligence has no reality in ur life.
finally u mistake all kinds of hopeful ideas ('grew in complexity', 'collective intelligence', 'communicates with us', for evidence of something cosmsically wonderful that we supposedly all need, have been waiting for, and will now save us.
that this thread went on on for over a year, and once again provides no real satisfaction, might maybe lead a person possibly capable of some objectivity to question, what drives behavior that has no possible fruitful result ...supose we all agree with you? what then--- maybe we all exchanged pms to fuck with u? or maybe not? what's the diff?
does god aka 'intelligence' give a shit? the sun roasts us all in a few billion years anyway... if irony of ironies we should last that long after instigating a great world wide species extinction.
amusingly most species are parasites, hardly a triumph of complexity!
although the only thought systems that include humor & paradox, are Taoism and Zen and a little bit of mathematics, a broader view really is possible... but don't take my word for it heaven forbid...
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
although the only thought systems that include humor & paradox, are Taoism and Zen and a little bit of mathematics, a broader view really is possible... but don't take my word for it heaven forbid...
Humor and paradox are part of many more systems than Taoism and Zen. Like you said a broader view really is possible, maybe you should have one. Your statement is very tailored to your beliefs.
Thought systems does not implicate religion exclusively. Btw
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
Edited by nuentoter (09/04/16 05:40 AM)
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: nuentoter]
#23613525 - 09/05/16 01:46 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
nuentoter said:
Quote:
laughingdog said:
although the only thought systems that include humor & paradox, are Taoism and Zen and a little bit of mathematics, a broader view really is possible... but don't take my word for it heaven forbid...
Humor and paradox are part of many more systems than Taoism and Zen. Like you said a broader view really is possible, maybe you should have one. Your statement is very tailored to your beliefs.
Thought systems does not implicate religion exclusively. Btw
indeed you may have some good points but like many here you cherry pick what you respond to, taking things out of context, and can't be bothered to flesh out your views or back up your ideas, so in the end you are doing the same thing you accuse me of. Why post if you are in such a hurry? You could just give me a thumbs down - would save you time and be just as insightful.
|
nuentoter
conduit



Registered: 09/17/08
Posts: 2,721
Last seen: 7 years, 21 days
|
|
I don't think that the choice to leave things open ended detracts from the meaning. I could elaborate and go on about the paradoxes of the Bible like:
(II Cor. 12:10) In this passage we see that, of all the apostles, Paul received an abundance of revelation than all the others combined. Paul wrote 14 NT books including Hebrews or about 1/3 of the entire NT! With all his God-given privileges & advantages; there was always the possibility of being proud and over confident. So God allowed a âthorn in his fleshâ which kept him lowly and ever dependent in God. Thrice he prayed for removal of the thorn but God said that His grace is ever sufficient. In this Paul rejoiced! Would you like the world to see the power of Christ rest in you? Then serve God faithfully in spite of sickness, trials, troubles. Rejoice in God. We all have weaknesses which God can use to make us aware of our limitations, and keep us humble and useful.
Or the humor of Psalm 37:12-13: âThe wicked plot against the righteous, and gnash their teeth at them; but the Lord laughs at the wicked, for he sees that their day is coming.â
The same could be said of anyone on either side, I find it amusing that God would take humor in the fact of mortality.
I am not Christian but was raised devoutly. But any religion with any God still created things like the silkie chicken, the proboscis monkey, the fucking platypus. Paradoxical humor, whimsical design.
But I did not see reason for any of this elaboration, for me to lay things out for you. I know your intelligent, just with different views than myself. By me defining meaning I am creating a narrow path of information that I have tailored for you, rather than you funding your own path of information and understanding along your own way. I do not have to back my every statement up with long diatribes about my correctness because I may very well be incorrect, and my path to understanding may not be someone else's. I simply wish to open an eye and provoke looking a little further deeper, broaden horizons through questioning, and opposition.
As for thought systems being religious or a little bit of math, this excludes any atheist who isn't a math buff?
Yeah I cherry picked that statement because I agree for the most part with what you posted but not the part I exclusively quoted. Why wouldn't I cherry pick the point I disagree with when giving a comment about that part?
--------------------
The geometry of us is no chance. We are antennae, we are tuning forks, we are receiver and transmitters of all energy. We are more than we know. - @entheolove "I found I could say things with color and shapes that I couldn't say any other way - things I had no words for" - Georgia O'Keefe I think the word is vagina
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Intelligent Design [Re: nuentoter]
#23614257 - 09/05/16 10:05 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
nuentoter said: ... Yeah I cherry picked that statement because I agree for the most part with what you posted but not the part I exclusively quoted. Why wouldn't I cherry pick the point I disagree with when giving a comment about that part?
thank you for your thoughtful reply.
It is apparently a mistake on my part to attempt a logical analysis of the OPâs ideas, as folks generally tend to see the trees for the forest, in such a case. So here is the âforestâ or âbirdsâ eyeâ view of the whole business as I see it:
I am asking: who is the target audience?, and what the point of the thread is for the OP, as he has kept up this, obsessive compulsive, diatribe for years, without ever getting satisfaction.
if the science is right, he should be talking with scientists or collecting his nobel prize. End of story as regards the âscienceâ, he proposes.
⌠if he wants to prove the existence of some undefined, but God like âintelligenceâ he perhaps should consider 4 things:
1) beliefs do not cause mystical experience, or constitute any sort of proof
2) people here already know how to get such experiences without his brand of âmythologyâ or âinsightâ
3) a tradition at least 2500 years old of meditation, which has stood the test of time, and produces profound experiences ( & is now medically proven to have benefits), also exists.
4) numbers 2 & 3 exist precisely because of number 1: beliefs do not cause mystical experience
The whole multi year effort to prove some supposed deep insight, on the internet, will never give the OP the satisfaction he seeks. If one does a web search for âpatterns in the prime numbersâ, one will likewise find those who persist, but never get the satisfaction they seek, and are ignored by those who would presumably be the proper target audience if the ideas they wish to spread and possibly get some credit for had any real merit. Searches having to do with âTeslaâ and âfree energyâ show similar patterns.
a few additional considerations:
5) whether he calls it âintelligent designâ or not, he hopes science will prove a philosophy or belief system that all should adopt and be benefited by, and such behavior is essentially not only religious, but missionary as well.
5B) Lastly, strangely such behavior seems to be peculiar to some white Christians, (and their groups and foundations) in the USA, and the end result of this is a dumbing down of science textbooks in Oklahoma and Texas. ( Meanwhile some other countries have long been surpassing the USA in education, especially science and math ).
6) While there may or may not be a sacred dimension to life, the attempt to logically prove such a notion seems both self defeating, and logically flawed.
If it was a simple open questioning for the first time, I could see the point of the thread but what is the point of the thread for the OP, since he has kept up this, obsessive compulsive, diatribe for years, without ever getting satisfaction?
No one here can validate his science to his satisfaction. If we all agree with him what then? Should we join him and hold meetings to spread the word? On the contrary if one examines the old thread(s) there are pages and pages of folks pointing out the flaws in his notions.
And mystical notions are a dime a dozen on these forums: âparallel universesâ, âthe matrixâ, etc. and a dime a dozen in books, movies, Tv etc., so why try, obsessively, to sell us all the same old âdog and pony showâ for years? Doesnât seem a recipe for happiness. On the contrary it seems sad. Perhaps he is simply so caught up in these ideas that he has forgotten what the original purpose of them was. He seems fuzzy in his aims. I don't know his aims. I attempt to consider the alternatives, and find that none of them seem capable of producing a desired result.
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 1 day, 6 hours
|
|
Well to design would take intelligence necessarily..so we are left with a quandrum.. or quandry so to speak..we can say that there are parts of the universe that exist without having been created..and then there are parts, via technology...that are created with intelligence behind it..
This comes down to God or some first thought form being having created space..and galaxies...there probably was one first man..who did this..you know if your initiated..
|
|