Michael Egnor, neurosurgeon, has made a bizarre post in which he reveals that he knows nothing about how the brains he cuts up work. Egnor claims that it is impossible for the brain to store memories. Yes, he knows that neural damage can cause loss of memory, that certain delicate areas of the brain, if harmed, can destroy the ability to make new memories, and he waves those awkward facts away to announce that there is simply no way memory or information of any kind can be stored in a meat-organ like a brain. He doesn’t say where memories are kept, then, nor does he account for any of the physiological correlates of memory, nor does he seem to give a damn about any of the neuroscience experiments that have teased apart the underlying molecular mechanism. By pure reason alone, if we can call his argument a product of reason at all, he deduces that the brain could not possibly have any way of storing memories.
His first argument is by cock-eyed definition.
It’s helpful to begin by considering what memory is — memory is retained knowledge. Knowledge is the set of true propositions. Note that neither memory nor knowledge nor propositions are inherently physical. They are psychological entities, not physical things. Certainly memories aren’t little packets of protein or lipid stuffed into a handy gyrus, ready for retrieval when needed for the math quiz.
The brain is a physical thing. A memory is a psychological thing. A psychological thing obviously can’t be “stored” in the same way a physical thing can. It’s not clear how the term “store” could even apply to a psychological thing.
So his first argument consists of defining memory as a certain category of thing, and then asserting that that particular category is obviously
incapable of being represented in a physical matrix. How does he know this? It suits his thesis, so he simply insists on it.
But if memory is patterned activity in the brain, then of course that pattern can have a physical cause: the spatial arrangement of axons and dendrites, the localization of proteins at synapses, subtle changes in synaptic boutons that modify their electrical properties.
For example, Eric Kandel won a Nobel (with Carlsson and Greengard) in 2000 for figuring out how memories are stored in Aplysia.
Eric Kandel, Center for Neurobiology and Behavior, Columbia University, New York, is rewarded for his discoveries of how the efficiency of synapses can be modified, and which molecular mechanisms that take part. With the nervous system of a sea slug as experimental model he has demonstrated how changes of synaptic function are central for learning and memory. Protein phosphorylation in synapses plays an important role for the generation of a form of short term memory. For the development of a long term memory a change in protein synthesis is also required, which can lead to alterations in shape and function of the synapse.
Aplysia can learn to associate a touch with an unpleasant stimulus, and will remember that association when touched in the future, which is a psychological thing
. We know how that psychological thing
is stored in the brain of Aplysia, as changes in the strength of synapses. Egnor is therefore refuted on his first claim.
His second argument has to be seen to be believed. Here he is talking about a memory of your grandmother, and how you recall it.
As you try to remember Nana’s face, you must then locate the engram of the memory, which of course requires that you (unconsciously) must remember where in your brain Nana’s face engram is stored — was it the superior temporal gyrus or the middle temporal gyrus? Was it the left temporal lobe or the right temporal lobe? So this retrieval of the Nana memory via the engram requires another memory (call it the “Nana engram location memory”), which must itself be encoded somewhere in your brain. To access the memory for the location of the engram of Nana, you must access a memory for the engram for the location for the engram of Nana. And obviously you must first remember the location of the Nana engram location memory, which presupposes another engram whose location must be remembered. Ad infinitum.
He lapses immediately into dualist assumptions. There is a separate you
from your brain, which has to go searching through the brain like a garbage picker rummaging through the rubbish bins to find that portrait of Nana. But that’s clearly not how it works. There is no external entity that has to trace through a series of memory locations — memory is a set of invoked associations. It’s you. There isn’t a homonculus somewhere rifling through the stacks of memories, but instead, those memories are part of the youness of you, and triggering that pattern of activity is part of the consciousness being expressed by your brain…that is, your mind.
This imaginary engram search story only makes sense if you assume dualism and that memory is co-dependent on finding a memory in a disorganized heap, and as Egnor points out, it doesn’t work. By his own reasoning, his model fails.
It’s bizarre that a neurosurgeon would have such medieval ideas about how the brain works, while simultaneously being aware that making a mistake with the organ under his knife can directly affect memory, behavior, personality, and health. But then, neurosurgeon does not mean neuroscientist, as he clearly demonstrates.
I suspect that these silly ideas of his are a product of a fear of mortality. If the mind is a product of the brain, when the brain dies, the mind dies, too; there is no afterlife. As a surgeon who probably deals with patients with serious deficits in their brain caused by stroke or disease, the dependency of self-identity on the physical structure of the brain has to be made glaringly obvious to him with depressing regularity, so he has developed this myth to cope. There must be a Magical Spiritual Essence that is working through the meat in your head to produce you, so even when disaster reduces a person to having the cognitive capacity of a carrot, it just means the Magical Spiritual Essence is blocked from pulling the strings on your corporeal puppet…but have no fear, it’s still there, and when it finally gives up on your flesh it’ll be able to flit up to Heaven and join Nana and Sparky, your childhood puppy, and all will be well.
So, what does the poor boy use for a brain?
Memory is better described as information than as knowledge. And we store information physically all the time. Like in the RAM and on the hard drive of the computer Eignor typed this stupidity on. Or books. Or photos.
And computers store and manipulate connections between pieces of information all the time (pointers, references, keys, etc.) without falling into pits of imagined “ad infinitums”.
Yeah, if i ever need to have any kind of surgeoning happen to my brain, i’d very much like the person doing it to not believe that imps live inside my head.
So my inability to remember a severe bicycle accident, in which I lay unconscious in the street for twenty minutes before someone noticed (quiet neighborhood) and called an ambulance – how would he explain that? Was my soul unhappy that a car may have turned in front of me? Or was my meat-brain simply incapable of storing the last moment before – something – happened?
How about the two years’ interval + physical therapy before my balance recovered enough to ride again? Or my continuing problems with prospective memory? Soul again?
(Yeah, I goddamn well well wear a helmet now)
You’d need to remember where the data was stored, and you’d need to remember where your pointer to the data was stored, and so ad infinitum. This is why computers don’t work and never will.
“You’d need to remember where the data was stored, and you’d need to remember where your pointer to the data was stored, and so ad infinitum. This is why computers don’t work and never will.”
It almost sounds like a strange version of Xeno’s paradox.
Daniel Dennett must be spinning in his grave after that treatment of qualia.
Before anyone asks: I am assuming that reading that article also killed him.
Drat, elronxenu beat me to it.
Does Egnor believe Intel mass-produces souls?
No! No!
He must be right!!!!!
We’ve all seen those illustrations of heads with little guys working away inside!!!
The whole thing of souls remote controlling our bodies doesn’t really make sense to me in light of personal experience.
I once went into surgery where my consciousness went from having a conversation with the anesthesiologist to waking up with pain from the surgery. If the anesthesia merely interfered with my connection to my body, wouldn’t that mean I was sitting in the ether, twiddling my ghostly thumbs until I stopped getting a 404 error on my body? That’s not how I remember it.
Sometimes I get groggy after eating a big, greasy meal. It’s more than my body becoming sluggish and unresponsive, it’s my thought processes, too. Instead of thinking about productive stuff with clarity, I keep drifting to thinking about lying down and daydreaming. If I do both, I often start transitioning to actual dreaming and the narratives in my head start incorporating strange story elements that don’t make sense when I’m more lucid.
Ahh, yes. This brings back memories (heh) of when I took Philosophy 101 back in the day: these questions have been debated for centuries.
As a computer guy, I can draw a parallel. The programs and apps I write physically exist as patterns that have meaning. They are simply structured alterations of existing physical devices: thumb and hard drives. When a computer runs my code, it decodes electrical patterns (1s and 0s) into meaningful operations.
I suspect that my memories are chemical electrical patterns in the neurons of my brain. When I die, the electricity will no longer flow and the “me” will cease to exist.
Some time ago, I did not exist. In the future I will also not exist. I’m comfortable with that reality. Hells no would I want to “go to heaven” and be forced to praise and worship some insecure angry giant forever.
Yeah, my first thought on reading this was also “How do hard drives, work, then?” Because I’m pretty sure that if human brains are incapable of storing “retained knowledge”, and working out how to retreive it, then a far simpler magnetic film would be even more incapable of doing so…
Ah, the fiction produced by the religious fanatics to pretend they won’t die. Standard baffle-gabble of those who can’t produce one whit of evidence for souls or any other form of non-biorware manifestation of consciousness.
All to avoid the evidence: how the brain makes memories.
Fail in the first 2 sentences
He doesn’t define what knowledge is and he doesn’t recognise that there is false knowledge.
Yeah, I’ve never gotten the soul thing. When I was growing up, I found out that soul food was part of Black culture, and soul music was too, so at 7 I asked my mother why white people didn’t get souls (she said no one did, which seemed more fair; yay atheist parents!). :)
I shared that story with a Black friend once, and he said he’d asked his mother the same question, but with more seriousness, after he was suspended three days for fighting back against two white kids who’d jumped him after school. They weren’t suspended, of course, because my friend was a demonic Hulk-figure (he wasn’t at all). His mother told him she didn’t know why whites were soulless arseholes. :/
When he states
“memory is retained knowledge. Knowledge is the set of true propositions”
So straight away he makes a comment that implies we cannot have memories that contain false propositions! If someone gives you information that is false, does the brain just refuse to create a memory which contains that false proposition. But crap, how did the person offer the false proposition hold the info long enough to remember what the false proposition was int he first place. A little wave of the wand while uttering “Ad infinitum” and it would seem that humans are incapable of false propositions in this guys world view.
See also this claim that computers don’t actually store “memory”.
That’s crap. However, I more-or-less agree with Egnor’s original claim — one of those rare times that I agree with him. He is not denying that we have memories, nor that this involves changes in the brain. He is denying that it is anything like the information store/retrieve operations that we see in computers.
Here’s an analogy. You call in the piano tuner, and he gets your piano finely tuned. Every time you play a note on that piano, that note is evoking a memory of what the piano tuner did. But he did not store any information. And when you played the note, you did not retrieve any information. Rather, the tuning changed the behavior of the piano, and the memory of that tuning is observed in that changed behavior rather than in retrieved information.
His categorization of memory isn’t just convenient, it’s begging the question. In fact, the whole excerpt you posted is just begging the question. He assumes dualism and states the entire case based on that assumption and lo and behold the conclusion he reaches is that dualism is true. If he’s going to try to base his entire case on “reason” in the face of all experimental evidence, it behooves him to understand logical fallacies and examine his though process for them, not simply because they make bad arguments, but because they reveal flaws in his thinking that anyone trying to come up with real answers purely by thought would want to find.
Also, does this mean that sea slugs have souls? Do they go to heaven? I can only assume that he agrees with the Pope that all dogs go to heaven.
The name of this neurosurgeon struck a bell, and a quick check online shows that this is the ID proponent who claims that evolution is not relevant to the practice of medicine. So I guess he does not understand antibiotics either. What is it with neurosurgeons? There is also the one who claimed to have died and had visions of heaven. He got lots and lots of gushy attention for it.
Still, the Wikipedia site mentions that Egnor did successfully perform a very complicated and innovative surgery on a boy with massive head injuries. So he may well be a very good neurosurgeon.
Some years ago Egnor wrote that the brain was like a cell phone and needed something like ATT to function. In Egnor’s crazy world ATT is God.
Oh, wait …
One wonders what goes on in Egnor’s brain. Even though he’s not a scientist, he’s got to know enough about the brain and how it works to contradict his own arguments, or he couldn’t do his job. He’s got to be capable of processing quite a bit of highly technical information and retaining it, or he couldn’t do his job. He’s had this all explained to him by his colleague, Dr. Novella, yet he still spouts the same ignorant, poorly reasoned nonsense. It’s got to be willful, and there must be some terrible cognitive dissonance going on daily. The fear, as PZ mentioned, of his own mortality that he experiences must be truly horrible to maintain this nonsense. Unless it’s just profitable. Does he still practice, or does he make all his money now endorsing creationist nonsense?
I assume he has evidence for such a claim.
Neil Rickert:
This isn’t about whether it simply “involves” changes in the brain. He’s a dualist. He denies that mental activity just is brain functioning.
Your piano-tuning analogy is… I don’t know what it is. Maybe it’s okay. What’s “information”?
He doesn’t understand it, that proves without a doubt it can’t be anything other than magic.
@20 marcoli
Evolution doesn’t have anything to do with his practice of medicine. Remember, he’s a neurosurgeon. He only has to know anatomy and pathology…what to cut out and what to leave behind. How those anatomical structures “got there” is irrelevant to the fact that they are there now.
In the same way that my 7th Day Adventist (aka, young earth creationist) otolaryngologist does not need to know evolution in order to pick the wax out of my ears.
It’s actually comforting in a way…that ignorance of biology does not fundamentally change the practice of medicine in any substantive way — except when you get to the issue of pathogens resistant to medications. And then there’s hand-waving about those pathogens “still” being bacteria (or whatever) and microevolution. Never saw a bacteria turn into a frog, did you?
Just another way of saying that medicine might use the tools of science, but by and large it is not science. It’s a craft whose primary discoveries were made by science.
Glad you asked, rossthompson. They are operated by onboard DJs, who are directed by little persons inside their heads, and so on…
Wow. That article is a rich vein of rectally-sourced assumptions. It isn’t quite the case that every single sentence is somehow stupid and wrong, but it must be close.
Fucking electronic displays, how do they work?
I’d hazard a guess that, if pressed, he’d say that only human minds can really ‘know’ things. Anything that can be embodied in physical form isn’t really ‘knowing’. I guess that would cover animals, computers, literature…
I wonder if mathematics is a psychological concept in his world.
I must confess that I don’t know what mercy straining is. Can anyone assist with that one?
Quite so.
I wonder if the good doctor sees holograms as evidence for the supernatural.
Can we go back to this opener: We know that memories are often false. Therefore, either his definition of knowledge or his definition of memory is wrong. Or would he argue that all memories are true?
Thus, conveniently also proving that the electronic computer is impossible.
Incidentally, his definition of knowledge is bogus, though complies with the standard position of mainstream philosophy: knowledge is justified true belief. The trouble is we can never know absolutely what is true, and so knowledge thus defined is an empty set, and hence pretty useless. If we are determined to continue using the word knowledge in rigorous scientific and philosophical discourse, we had better adopt a more practical definition, something like “a rationally supportable high degree of confidence,” i.e. something reflecting the true (!) probabilistic nature of learning.
Add this guy to the growing list of neurosurgeons peddling nonsense. Ben Carson, the pediatric neurosurgeon-turned-politician, Eben Alexander, the Heaven is Real guy (and whatever what you think of him, Sam Harris did an excellent takedown of Alexander on his blog). Surgery isn’t the brainiest field in medicine, but come-on..
I’m guessing Egnor is laying the groundwork for some expert testimony he’ll be paid to provide at some future time. Hard to believe he’s a total moron so a money trail has to lead somewhere…
It’s a reference to Portia’s speech in Merchant of Venice:
The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blessed:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
The name of the neurosurgeon under discussion triggered a memory [see what I did there, Egnor?] that we modified his name into a meme of “Egnorant“.
.
He is stuck on a single model of “data” and “memory”. That data is a physical object and memory is just storing that object someplace in particular. Analogy: data ::= books, memory ::= library shelves, ‘recalling memory’ ::= riffing through card catalog to locate where that book must be.
His paper isn’t saying, “the brain can’t store memories”, he’s saying, “this model of memory don’t work, and here’s why”. [I hope that’s his intent]
.
Earlier, a previous commenter, [ georgewiman @4] triggered my non-memory of my similar TBI incident, when I was cycling and got T-boned by a car; in a coma for 11 days, and rehab for months; with absolutely no memory of the incident, the day before, and little of the months of rehab. My neuro-psych, tells me the amnesia is a good response, to prevent being overwhelmed with explicit memory of the incident (and all the associated pain/agony). He also told me of “emotional memory”, distinct from “info memory”. I’m also aware of “muscle memory” distinct from “info-memory” (like when carelessly driving, your body goes into auto-pilot mode).
I think it is pretty clear that the brain stores memory far differently than Egnor tries to model it as. Has being a neurosurgeon, completely divorced him from considering Psychological models of brain activity? Isn’t that a necessary consideration to be successful surgeon?
I had anterograde amnesia after a head injury, I was unable to form new memories.
I can tell this guy that yes, that piece of meat was necessary.
During the time that I had the problem, I was talking, interacting, but I didn’t exist. I’d known before that the mind was in the brain, was a life-long atheist (not raised that way, I didn’t know until I was an adult what my parents thought…), it’s just that nothing else made sense.
But that period of not existing proved it to me. I can remember “fading back in,” I can remember the blankness from before that, or rather not remember it, and I can remember my memories of self and my history coming back – but sort of like a replay. Ever since they my pre-accident memories have seemed more detached. I feel more like this life started when I was 18 and the meat of my brain started working again.
Nothing brings it home quite like that. Nothing teaches you that your brain is who you are like sustaining damage to it… and struggling afterward (sometimes to no avail) to be the person you feel you used to be when what’s gone is gone for good.
FTFA:
There are no memories in a computer, except in a metaphorical sense. Computers are devices made of metal and electrons that we configure to aid our own memories.
This is almost the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. Is it Dunning-Kruger or is Egnor so ignorant that he risks drowning every time he takes a shower? YOU DECIDE.
“How do hard drives work?”
They don’t (says longtime hard drive engineer). They just spin (really, really fast). They store data as encoded arrangements of magnetic fields on the disk surface. The computer does all the work to locate those proper field arrangements and decode the arrangement into the data it’s looking for,
But that’s just technobabble.
Everyone knows that what makes electronics work is Smoke. Everyone knows that the surest way to make something electronic NOT work is to “Let the smoke out”
I don’t know, he’s an odd one. He might include some animals, but not the rest.
Given , the only sense I can make out of it is that you have some stuff in your head, and the important part is how it is arranged. So far, this is not wildly different from what a physicalist would say. I know this all sounds extremely technical (lol, Aquinas is medieval and ignunt) but wait, there’s more! The soul is what moves your brain-matter around into the right spots at the right times. Nobody cares how it supposedly does that. Physical embodiment is a necessary part (for living people, but no longer necessary for gods or souls after we’re dead… no idea why). However, it’s only half the story, because souls are necessary to move the stuff around in this case — the source of this motion is different from the ordinary physical motion of inanimate objects and maybe even other body parts. Got the picture? So it’s a bit of a mystery why we need to pump lots of sugar into our brains to keep those fuckers running. They ought to have at least some energy coming out of nowhere, since the souls knock the little bits of matter around like billiard balls to reconfigure it or “inform” it (literally put it into a form). Yet when we actually check things like this, there is no extra energy which is coming out of nowhere.
It’s odd how that works, and how I need to know next to nothing about what’s really going on in brains, or anything new we have learned about them in the past century or more, to see that his idea is incorrect. Because this is a very old problem, and they should already know better by now — they’re just being dishonest at this point. This is not a case of him saying unverifiable things and us being stumped by our inability to disprove it: we can check whether energy is conserved in brains. It is, so he’s wrong. So is every other dualist.
“Benjamin Solomon “Ben” Carson Sr. is an American author and retired neurosurgeon.”
QED.
The stomach is a physical thing. ‘Digestion’ is an abstract thing. How would the material world relate to an immaterial one?
Magic.
There are numerous sorts of computer memories which do not require “pointers” per se, nor any need of “remembering” how to lookup (find) the data (not “information” or “knowledge”) which is stored. Two examples are Content-Addressable Memory, and Associative Memory.
And regardless of the sort of memory technology involved, there’s nothing that says the lookup needs to find only one item of data, or that all (or indeed, any) of the found data is what is wanted.
Oh! Also @ Kevin Kehres, the application of evolutionary biology to medicine isn’t just restricted to knowledge of pathogens and evolved resistance to drugs; there is also cancer (selection occurs on somatic cells to evolve resistance to chemo/immuno/target therapies). There is a small but growing interest in applying ecological models and evolutionary biology to tumors. There are also papers by Randolph Nesse at ASU, and Steve Sterns at Yale on the role of evolution in medicine. It actually is important and may change treatment, but we haven’t realized this yet, even as we were all taught that “nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”
I thought it was TPC.
Even from his own experience, Egnor knows that human memory uses associations to store and access memories. He himself must have used many mnemonic devices when he was in medical school, such as this:
Alzheimer’s disease: progressive phases
ABCD:
Amnesic phase (forgetting keys, leaving cooker on)
Behavioural problems (antisocial, wandering)
Cortical phase (incontinence, falls)
Decerebrate phase (return of primitive reflexes)
So he must know that we do in fact have a built-in data retrieval mechanism, it’s just not the address/data dichotomy that computers use. If instead we did have a little homunculus that acted as a file clerk, mnemonics such as this would actually make it harder to retrieve data because it would clutter up our memory system with useless junk. So, he is just another liar for Jesus.
Sometimes it seems to me that dualists are the most extreme hardcore type of materialist fanatics. Only things that exist can actually exist to these types so if language, ideas, information, patterns, memory, aw fuck it, *waves* (which travel through a medium but have no physical components in themselves) don’t exist *physically* there must be some magical other meta-place where all these thing have a hyper physical (or meta-physical) existence.
To which, the response is and always has been for millenia “Read a book”. Sheesh.
(I’ve always hated the term “materialism”. This is why.)
======
A nitpick: Computers and pointers? Welllllll…. Computers themselves don’t run autonomously retrieving files because the computer decides for itself it wants the file.
PZ said:
Now, PZ, you (a lowly PhD) should not tell Egnor (an MD) what Kandel would think. Egnor knows better than you because Kandel was one of his professors at Columbia (and a super-smart MD to boot):
We PhDs don’t even understand the science we are doing. Best to leave it up to the medical professionals.
He doesn’t say where memories are kept…
Why, he doesn’t have to. Memories are stored in the Akashic Record, of course; that’s obvious to the meanest intelligence. All was revealed in that documentary series Eureka.
Funny and coincidental: reading a book that mentions this topic (rather in passing), incl. the never-ending iterations of levels.
And I find it funny that memories are non-existent when I clearly have memories. Or something awfully similar.
blf (#43): I thought it was TPC.
Definitely it’s TPC. (Ref: The President’s Analyst)
Godfrey Cambridge: “You’re the great humanitarian? You wanna save the world? Take the gun!“
#33, tulse
Thanks! It didn’t even occur to me that it was a quotation. I was trying to work out whether he meant strained in the culinary or mechanical senses, which was rather puzzling in context.
#38, consciousness razor:
Maybe there’s an underlying assumption that the energy used by a brain cell is actually being used by the soul to do stuff? Or that brain scrambling (sophisticated phrenology?) is some kind of magical isentropic process? I’m having trouble even finding straws to grasp here.
Still, it is all quite a fascinating window into a world I was largely unaware of. I’m familiar with engineers going off the deep end with bizarre worldviews, but I’ve not really noticed similar things from medics before. I probably haven’t been paying enough attention.
woozy:
But they think there exist things that aren’t material….
Huh. Well, I think everything that exists can actually exist. If it couldn’t, it wouldn’t. Things that don’t actually exist but can… well, those don’t but they can. If it exists but doesn’t exist physically, then what you’re saying is that there is some other thing that it is which isn’t physical. Or else it doesn’t exist. It’s just what the words mean. I don’t see the problem with that reasoning or how reading a book would change anything about it.
And all of the things you list are physical, so I have no idea what you’re talking about.
Also, metaphysics doesn’t mean something in addition to physics. It’s about what there is, whether or not you add anything to the physical picture. If a physicist doesn’t actually have any such thing, they don’t have an actual theory about reality. They’re not telling you what there is, which requires some metaphysics. If they claim not to be involved in it but they are actually saying what there is, then they are just confused about what the word means.
Nope. Souls are immaterial, don’t exist in space and don’t move. So there is no sense in talking about their “energy.”
Well, the word “magical” lets you get away with practically anything. You win. :)
I’ve been musing recently on the tendency of one’s consciousness to self-report that it is just the same under all circumstances. Get a little tired, or a lot drunk, and you still feel like you. Follow time’s arrow from eight to eighty, and inside you still feel like the eight-year-old you (though, as Terry Pratchett says, “wondering what the hell just happened”), despite all the changes that must have occured.
A sense of identity is probably a useful thing to have, but it does seem to me to be at the root of this sense of an “essential” self, unchanging, immortal, immune to time’s effects. We sober up, the sedatives wear off, and we look back and note how wasted we were, or how we seemed not to be there because we didn’t lay down any long-term memories, when others will confirm that we were, in fact, there and even produce documentary evidence that we were. This thing which is us does change; we hope that it grows and learns, and we know it does forget, but the shared identity of all these states should not blind us to the fragility of it. A change in the balance of neurochemistry, a sharp blow to the skull, a surgeon’s knife and our consciousness can become something else, something radically different; yet still it reports, “I’m still here!” when it really isn’t.
It isn’t ad infinitum. It terminates with us being like “hmm I don’t remember”. We DO go looking through our memory like a garbage picker. Often we have difficulty remembering something and have to SEARCH our memory.
Oh good, someone got it! Yeah, definitively TPC.
woozy #45 wrote:
Seems that way to me as well, despite their constant harping on the “immaterial.” They seem to have serious problems with the concept of abstractions, inventing a strange middle category of the supernatural where important thoughts, ideas, values, or anything else which trips their significance meter and can’t be physically picked up and measured are somehow instantiated as spiritual essences. The abstract becomes concrete as irreducible things: like can only come from like. We get our memories from Memory Land where the Memories live and know how to behave like memories so we don’t have to work hard.
Dualists are therefore greedy reductionists and hyper-materialists in a way which actual materialists find bewildering. Iirc Egnor once said that if materialism were true then he ought to be able to cut open the brain and see the ideas sitting in there, like marbles. Instead, he apparently thinks ideas exist like ethereal marbles, whole and perfect and irreducible, possibly in the Akashic record. Or maybe he doesn’t think in detailed terms at all (one of the perks of supernaturalism.)
consciousness razor #51 wrote:
Ah, but you’re using the technical philosophical definition of “metaphysics” — which is not the same as the more popular meaning of “higher truths pulled from our asses which can’t be attacked by the less spiritual.”
Ah, and now you’re using the technical scientific definition of “energy” — which is not the same as the more popular meaning of “magic force or power.”
I keep considering pulling you from my feed because you’re so ‘wicked smaht’ that I often don’t understand the science. Then you go and post something like this last paragraph, and I just gotta hang witcha. If people would stop being so afraid, they might turn out to be funny, the best thing to be. That will be a glorious day. ~TH~
@51
But they believe these non-material things behave exactly like material things except they exist … somewhere else … and are made of … something else.
I was being facetious. A book contains information. Information exists. Information is non-material. But it can be represented by placement of material things without being dependent upon it’s material. This isn’t magical. It isn’t even “deep”. It’s information. But to the dualist this seems inconceivable. They seem to be only capable of conceiving something exist if it has some physical or uber-physical existence.
When I said I personally (and I do mean this as a statement reflecting only my and no-one else’s opinion) don’t like the term “material” I said it because I believe non-material concepts such as information, thoughts, concepts, mathematics, language, etc. do “exist” for all practical uses and meanings that the word “exist” should have. However there is no magical existence-substance that must be applied to turn the non-physical into the meta-physical to make them exist.
Memories, thoughts, information, language all exist and are not physical. They are communicated and “stored” on physical material and they are the processes and/or product of physical phenomena but they are not themselves physical. But again there is no magic in this.
Agreed, but the dualists seem to see it this way. Souls, thoughts, memories, etc. not being physically real must be in some meta-physiscally real way that is just like physical real but existing … somewhere else.
Hence, my sneering and calling them “materialist fanatics”.
And using the logic of the dualist, waves should be meta-physical as they travel through but are not made of material.
This guy should get together with a heart surgeon and a pulmonologist, to figure out how we all keep our hearts beating and lungs pumping.
Fucking autonomous bodily functions, how do they work?
Ya woozy has a very interesting point. Don’t get caught up in the sematics. They actually can’t conceive of something that isn’t it’s own object, or a substance named after itself. A “memory substance”. They can tease apart the molecules of the brain and go “but where is the thought substance that thoughts are made of?” They beg the question here, and their “materialist obsession” is what prevents them from seeing they are doing so.
To them, everything has to be a thing, an object, a substance, rather than an arrangement and activity of a more fundamental substance. Hence “substance dualism”.
Mind/brain dualists are common enough (hopefully less so among neurosurgeons), but what caught my attention was the infinite regression argument. I think this may be a distinct category of math crackpot. I have seen this kind of argument made before, and may have even taken it seriously when I was much younger.
In my experience, a mathematical argument that looks like it will become an infinite regression can usually be fixed, but the fix requires a key observation that will be ignored by someone who wants it to be a paradox.
An example of this comes from the well-known coding exercise of writing a program that prints out its own source listing (and not by referring to its file name). At first it seems that the program cannot encode something as large as itself. Once you realize that the program can apply some transformations to produce a string longer than the program listing, though, it is not hard to embed a compressed representation of the program in the original code, which can be decompressed, allowing the program to print a copy of itself.
A similar potential paradox comes up in the area of self-replicating machines. I remember first seeing this explained in William Poundstone’s book “The Recursive Universe.” At first it could seem that to replicate the machine, you need to replicate its recipe and to replicate that, you need another replicator with a recipe, etc. Poundstone makes the distinction between trivial and non-trivial replication (presumably not new to him), the former being applied to the recipe. This rough distinction applies both to von Neumann replicators and the replication of living things (which are able to copy DNA without falling prey to an infinite regression).
In fact, I whenever I see the phrase “ad infinitum” appended gleefully to some alleged paradox, my first assumption is that there is some fairly obvious fallacy that can be teased out just by identifying a base case.
Um, knowledge is definitionally true? I’m quite certain that most of what has been termed “knowledge” (or equivalent words in other languages) throughout human history has turned out to be false. Also, I can have paradoxical knowledge which, by virtue of being a paradox, is not true nor false (or is both): thinking and remembering a self-reference paradox like, “This statement is false at the point in time when its truth value is evaluated,” should be sufficient to disprove that assertion.
His second argument is apparently that a file allocation table (or any other computer file system) cannot possibly exist. I very much wonder how he thinks the servers for his blog store his shitty content. Magic? Computers therefore Yahweh? Holy fucking hell.
And here I thought I was sending everything to the iCloud, and when I can’t remember something it’s cuz I’ve run out of space and am too cheap to buy more. Aren’t I the iMe? Aren’t we all owned by Apple? (Hey, I’m no scientist, but makes as much sense as having a little me running around my brain saying, “Nana…Nana…nope, not here. Nope, not here.”)
@61, Paul BC
Or take the paradox of what is holding up the earth. Is it simply floating against the pull of gravity, or is it turtles all the way down that hold it up against gravity? The paradox is built into the assumption that the source of gravity’s pull is infinitely far away, rather than close enough to build a structure around (or to land turtles on).
I agree with this part:
In the most general sense, I would define memory as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteresis “the dependence of the output of a system not only on its current input, but also on its history of past inputs.” It is a property exhibited by many common systems, though sometimes given short shrift because stateless systems are more tractable. A “memory foam” mattress exhibits this, and can store an approximate memory of Nana’s backside, if not Nana herself. The brain is a bit more sophisticated and allows levels of abstraction and retrieval of these memories, but both are examples of hysteresis.
Using Egnor’s definitions, false memories would seem to be impossible.
THIS! This this thisthisthis.
I have a *terrible* memory, to the point that I joke that I’m practicing to get Alzheimer’s and I’m going to be really good at it. (Alzheimer’s runs in my family, so in a way this is true/whistling past the graveyard)
When I want to remember something I did yesterday, I first see what I can remember at all. Then I go mentally digging for the things that led up to that moment, or followed it. I leap frog my way through events of the day, hoping to find whatever it was I needed to recall. Much of the time, I come up blank especially if it involves names or numbers, or a verbal direction. If it was a physical event, I recall that much easier.
As an addendum, this also means that my sense of the passage of time is incredibly skewed. Things that happened last week can feel like they happened months, or years ago, and things from years and months ago can feel like they happened last week. This has led to many instance of deja-vu, when my brain insists that the information/event I have just been reminded of really really REALLY happened a long time ago!
Actually he’s right that memories are not material but he is wrong in claiming there is a brain because
George Berkeley – subjective idealism.
@69, vereverum
False. Evidence favors the hypothesis that there are brains and other things, and weighs strongly against idealism.
@Rowan vet-tech
Same :P
Though it’s not quite that extreme for me.
Christ on a Crutch! What hospitals does he work at. I want to make sure if I ever have a brain injury I am never within 50 miles of the place. Better yet want to start a fund and send him this textbook:
Mechanisms of Memory, 2nd Edition
http://store.elsevier.com/product.jsp?country=us&locale=en_US&isbn=9780123749512&gclid=CjwKEAiAqrqkBRCep-rKnt_r_lkSJAArVUBcn8tV4cttr6FrYtOvmsqXF_jv9dkH_xR9uxE2XIfznBoCqCfw_wcB
Seriously The Stupid It Burns!
Okay. That does read very differently to me.
But this really is not what “materialism” means. (Semantics? Sure. We mean certain things, and doing that reliably is the point of communicating with each other.) It makes “materialists” sound really dumb (and woozy claims to hate them) when the target of criticism is actually people who are not materialists and are not thinking the same way at all. If they’re both making mistakes, they’re at the very least making different mistakes.
Memories are made of matter, for instance. Yet a materialist isn’t the sort of person who says there are memory particles. (Some could of course, but they would be wrong.) And when they look and smell the matter in a brain of a person remembering a peanut butter sandwich, they wouldn’t (or shouldn’t) expect it to look and smell like a peanut butter sandwich. Because the map is not the territory. This big, complicated collection of stuff can represent this other collection of stuff. Landscape paintings are not made of flowers and trees and mountains and happy little clouds, but they along with the things they represent are both made of physical stuff. Different physical stuff. And that relationship is a physical relationship. Because (at least as far as we’re concerned) it’s all physical. All of it. Everything. It is false to say that it is nonphysical. You just have to think a little harder sometimes to come up with a clear and coherent description in those terms, that’s all. That doesn’t mean it’s something else.
@73, consciousness razor
ya, agreed.
*eyes the clouds suspiciously for signs of happiness substance*
RQ at #48 said:
“And I find it funny that memories are non-existent when I clearly have memories.”
That merely shows that you don’t understand creationist “logic”. You are just having a false memory about having a functional memory. Egnor (often known by the nom-de-plum Egnorance) doesn’t know how brains actually work because his is so near to not working that he has to remember to breath, and he forgets to do this all too often. Sufficient levels of Anoxia eventually lead to brain death, as the scientifically illiterate neurosurgeon so very eagerly illustrates for all.
For those who don’t already know, Egnor is a regular “contributor” at the Dishonesty Institute and science can’t actually “explain” anything to him because it always conflicts with his marvelous alternate reality worldview.
Indeed, and their reaction is to exude copious amounts of purple dye.
I used to collect this dye at low tide when I was an undergrad at UCSB, and use it to… color the shampoo of various neighbors in my dorm as a practical joke.
you’d be surprised how often people don’t even look at what they are washing their hair with.
It had about a 25% success rate, which was well worth the effort.
:)
I’m thinking Vereverum meant that as satire, but I could be wrong.
conclusion:
psychology is the study of magic.
wait…
yeah, no. no psychologist who actually has a degree would think that memories aren’t based on the physical.
During my rehab, my neuro-psych told an example of such a “touch-memory”. A previous patient of his, with severe amnesia (memory retention duration of only hours). He once tricked him into shaking his hand while the psych wore a hand buzzer. Next day, with no memory of the previous day, when offered to shake hands, he simply refused, saying he, “had a bad feeling about shaking hands.” Thus his body remembered the buzzer, though his “mind” did not.
I smelt the dualist argument after like the first sentence. Mind, I have some sympathy for the philosopher David Chalmers, who at least argues for dualism by relying on the fact that we haven’t completely figured out consciousness yet (his argument… zombies). Which is a bit silly: we haven’t figured out how high Tc superconductors work, but aren’t going to make progress by talking about zombies. Nonetheless, I’m sympathetic. Because I like thinking about zombies. But also because, when you have a relative who argues for reincarnation and life between life stuff every other time you have a conversation, you become inoculated to things like this. Reading PZ’s post, a part of me also went “Hmm, could be worse, I wonder if he’ll parlay all this into a movie deal.”
@73
Whoa! I said no such thing. I said I hate the term “materialism”. I am, so far as I understand the term, a materialist but I don’t like the term.
Memories are stored on matter and use matter as a medium but memories themselves are a process; not a physical object. To say they are matter is equivalent to saying literature is paper and ink.
… but it’s the map and representation, only and totally, that define and make up and is the existence of non-material things such as memories, thoughts, books, paintings, etc. The material through which they exist is all but irrelevant. Yes, they *need* material to exist but the material is not at all important in defining what they are. Not really.
It’s also relational, linguistic, and conceptual. And for informational and “psychological” (to borrow Egnor’s probably inaccurate distinction) things the relational definitions are more important and relevant than their physicality.
What for instance is the physicality of the story of Beowolf? Perhaps its a million different processes of neurons firing in a million instances of individuals encountering the story. but that a pretty useless way of defining it.
Actually coming up with clear and coherent physical descriptions of, say, triangle, fear, four, thought, understanding, the German language, stochatic distributions etc. seems a pointless endeavor and just makes things less clear and less coherent then the abstract non-physical descriptions. Although, yes, they exist in physical media in individual instances and can be defined thusly.
Agreed! They most certainly are not something else nor do they exist somewhere else.
I did say at least three times it’s nothing magical existing in some magical other realm. It’s definitely a shortcoming of the so called dualists that they can’t seem to conceive of anything except in physical or meta-physical terms.
woozy:
There’s a big difference between an object and a veritable fuckload of physical objects in a complicated physical relationship with one another. And you can call it a “process” which occurs over time, but it’s still a physical process for fuck’s sake, which is the only point I’ve been making.
It sort of looks like you’re eventually going to concede this later on in your comment…. If so, what’s supposed to be the problem?
Who cares how useful it is to you? How is it supposed to be relevant? So we have more useful descriptions which leave out many such details and represent the actual, underlying physical relationships in a more convenient, simplified, and almost certainly misleading way. The world’s complicated. So what? What else would you expect? That does not mean it is in fact what you find most useful or convenient or simple, what makes you feel most comfortable, or what might be maximally misleading while reinforcing all of your preexisting intuitions about reality. That’s no way of figuring out or coming to terms with what is actually the case.
Per Egnor’s argument, couldn’t you also argue that information is not physical? And if information is not physical, then how can it be encoded into a DNA sequence?
Check-mate ID.
By his logic, hard drives don’t work. Every single thing he’s saying about memories is just as applicable to data stored on a computer, or heck, to information written down on a piece of paper.
No one has ever said that the data is literally the medium itself. It is more of an emergent property. In a book, it’s all just ink and paper, excepting that you have a language and a set of characters. With those things, the positioning of those blots of ink gains meaning, it is emergent. On a PC storage medium (from a hard disc to an optical disc to data stored in RAM or CPU cache), it’s nothing more than magnetic polarity, pits, or electronic “gates”. Done in certain series, they “become” meaningful by way of manipulating the hardware, the “machine language”. “Windows” as a functioning program doesn’t actually exist purely when stored as data on a disc, it only actually “exists” in a meaningful way when it is actually being “run” by an operating system. Brains are very different in function from either of these (namely, brains are the medium in which books actually gain their meaning), but are the same in this one respect. My understanding is that synapse pathways and chemical interactions form this “chain” of memories, but only a living working brain actually gets any meaning out of them. It takes all the interactions of the full chain, one memory leading to another and another, and all this activity is where the experience of “remembering” emerges from. No one cell even matters. Heck, my understanding is the entire brain, physically, is replaced every decade or so, so the individual cells don’t matter so much as their interactions and configuration, and so long as THAT is maintained, the sense of being the same person (illusion or not, it doesn’t really matter) is maintained.
Wot?
How is this computer that I am typing on working right now. I’m confused Egnor can you set me straight.
…For what definition of “information”?
I am surprised. Don’t they even check that the right amount comes out of the bottle?
That egnorant distinction of and has to end, where the one gets a different education from the other; and so has the egnorant distinction of medicine students from biology students – medicine should be something you learn after you’ve learned biology, because medicine is an application of biology.
Yeah, sorry. I always get grandiose ideas when I’m angry like that.
Mind you, “information” has multiple definitions, and in information theory they’re all VERY specific, so if he’s going to make a claim like this he’s got to define his terms a bit too. Also, information is tied up in physics in very interesting ways (different definition for physics), in that information can’t be created or destroyed, just like matter and energy, and hence the need to come up with “Hawking radiation”, as an explanation for where information goes when it enters a black hole.
Does the brain store memory? Yes and no, the answer depends on the observer’s relative point of view. To explain let’s use an analogy: the body of a pregnant woman, stores information and memories that go directly into the body of the fetus she carries in? No, because this information will go with the embryo at birth; yes, because anyway, while the embryo is inside the mother’s body, this is a great deposit containing a smaller deposit. If a macro-observer looking at the mother’s body from the outside in, he would say “yes!”; if it is a micro-observer located within the fetus, looking from the inside out, will say “no!”. This is not merely an analogy, it is the waves of cosmological evolution. It is the universal process repeated every time that a new natural system emerges. So, in this new evolutionary jump, when Nature is producing a new natural system that we call “mind”, “consciousness”, etc., the brain represents the placenta/amnion, the skull is the egg, and the human mind or self-consciousness is still a fetus/embryo.
Why the input of information/memory changes and/or produces new configurations of synapses and phosphorylation? And it does so through proteins? Proteins are the biological counterpart of the flow of information running inside the systemic circuit, as we can see the formula at Matrix/DNA Theory. If there are 20.000 proteins, it means that the circuit is shared into 20.000 slices.
So, this new system composed by a still unknown substance ( plasma-photons?) emerging from the brain is built by proteins at chemical level, which produces synapses at energetic level. Any external stimulus produces a new thought, which are systems being built by the process of life’s cycle. Normally, any thought is born, grows, becomes mature, degenerates and dies, but it is registered as building block of the “mind”. Normally all thoughts must obeys the same configuration of the Matrix/DNA universal formula for natural systems, but the external stimulus is absorbed inside the circuit, changing and producing a new variation. This absorption, at “plasma-photon level” is what we call “memory”. More informations and formulas can be seen at “The Universal Matrix/DNAs’ formulas for Natural Systems and Life’s Cycles Theory”.
@louismorelli
Maybe you’re used to people being impressed by you throwing around fancy words, but around here, we know better. I mean, just take a sentence like this:
It’s gibberish. It doesn’t mean anything. You’re just stringing together words that you clearly don’t understand, hoping we’ll be too intimidated to call you out on it. It’s utterly transparent, and really rather sad.
If you’re genuinely interested in this subject, I suggest you educate yourself from real science textbooks, rather than listening to whatever screwball websites that served you this pile of shit.
LM
Beyond this point is unscientific and unevidenced bullshit. Memories are in the bioware of the brain. Evidence otherwise, not mentally wank about it. Unevidence speculation is dismissed.
And the liver? What about the liver? I think it’s the liver which produces the photo-plasmons that then get turned into plasma-photons by the spleen. Or possibly the pineal gland.
Has anyone else looked at louismorelli’s website?
@ louismorelli 89
What does this mean functionally? What are you referring to as “information”?
Also pregnant mothers do indeed store environmental information in the unborn (through various hormones and other messengers) and that information is simultaneously stored for themselves. The information is different in that it shapes basic instinctual drives and carries no specifics like images or sounds, but it is still there.
On one level you have some accuracy. Metabolic processes, cells, tissues, organs and organisms are hierarchically stacked and integrated (at different levels) in patterns that give us information about what the past was like. But none of our ancestors were in any sense like fetuses or embryos in such a grand sense. That implies a goal for evolution that is simply anthropomorphism.
Because molecular and cellular biology. We have some of the details.
Indisputably.
You will need to unpack that. Why are proteins not “information”? What is this “circuit” and “matrix” you speak of? When you use different language to describe what is in textbooks you need to explain yourself more than this.
The system is not “new”, it was always there. Synapses are extensions of protein studded bags of phospholipids, what does “energetic level” have to do with it?
Thoughts are sub-parts of the stream of consciousness. They are assembled and lead to new thoughts as pieces are arranged with memory and/or perception differently. Thoughts are combinations of parts and “die” in the same sense as a particular configuration of a Rubiks Cube “dies” when you twist things around. Memories can be said to “die” if they are altered relative to when they were stored (and many many are).
Universal Matrix? This got anything to do with David Icke? Maybe that’s another matrix.
FIFY :-)
I thought it’s just the logical conclusion to the question of what Heisenberg uncertainty does to an event horizon?
This is what “plasma” means. First learn what words mean, then use them – not the other way around.
Lol… several posts criticizing my post, thanks to everybody for helping me testing my theory and bringing on useful informations.
To LikeX:
“So, this new system composed by a still unknown substance ( plasma-photons?) emerging from the brain is built by proteins at chemical level, which produces synapses at energetic level.
It’s gibberish. It doesn’t mean anything. You’re just stringing together words that you clearly don’t understand, hoping we’ll be too intimidated to call you out on it. It’s utterly transparent, and really rather sad.”
Matrix/DNA answer: “LikeX, Nature does not care if you believe or not in its natural formulas, like VSI ( Variation, Selection, Inheritance), and it does not care if you does not like the results from its formulas, like VSI producing the transformations of amoebas into monkeys and monkeys into humans.Then the Matrix/DNA natural formula is suggesting that is occurring the emergence of a new shape of system produced by the brain. The brain was built by and upon that formula, like all others natural systems, so, we are supposing that this new system called “mind” is following the same systemic configuration – and there are lots of evidences favouring this hypothesis. . . We have discovered that below all natural systems and the first shape of Matrix’s formula was merely a natural wave of light,but, them, we discovered also that there are lots of secrets in this waves, included the code for life’s cycles, like you can see our graphic for the electric-magnetic spectrum of light. So, we are supposing that the bombardment of synapses is building a kind of hologram which substance is this natural light, like a mirror reflecting and storing each set of synapses of each thought.
Like Darwin suggested the existence of VSI, and scientifically we are testing and accumulating evidences for his formula, now I am suggesting the existence of the Matrix/DNA formula, waiting more data from science for testing it. Yours post have no one real proved natural fact against my post, and… nature does not care about our opinions.
louismorelli
Doing this
<blockquote>paste copied text here</blockquote>
Results in this
It makes comments with quotes easier to read.
It won’t help with the content.
Also.
If you have difficulty with spelling, just copy/paste the nym.
To Nerd of Redhead:
Yes and no,
Beyond this point is unscientific and unevidenced bullshit. Memories are in the bioware of the brain. Evidence otherwise, not mentally wank about it. Unevidence speculation is dismissed.
Matrix/DNA answer: I can’t understand why you are asking more evidence for my theory than to those saying yes and those saying no. While Neurology does not discover how neurons are related to thoughts, nobody have proofs of anything. We are debating theories here because its good when more brains with different approaches to the problem, thinks together. I am accumulating tons of evidences but searching facts that could debunk my theory also. . The unique way for you proving to me that memories are in the bioware of brains is opening a brain and showing to me the image of my died grandmother stored there… But, my theory is suggesting that yours theory is good and rational also…
louismorelli, #97
Oh dear.
We did? What a “code of life’s cycles” and can you cite that discovery? Sounds like a pretty huge discovery so you should be able to find sources very easily. Wikipedia for some reason has avoided including an entry on such a monumental truth.
Louis Morelli,
Dude, what you have is not a theory. What you have is a mental wankjob–which unfortunately is too messy to clean up with a kleenex. Do come back when you have some testable predictions based on your theory.
louismorelli
<blockquote> goes at the beginning of the quoted text
</blockquote> goes at the end of the quoted text
the
/
is vital.
@louismorelli
OK. I’m not sure if you are quoting in some of this. After you say “Matrix/DNA answer: ” are you quoting someone? For the purposes of this answer I am going to assume that quotation mark was in error.
I asked you what those things meant. I don’t have to care if you can’t actually describe the meaning of the technical terms you are using, and provide and example of the research that uses them.
That paper that I linked showing that protein is required for memory formation? I’m quite willing to discuss the contents and the meaning of all technical terms if you are willing to do the same. If you can not do this why should anyone converse with you?
I need your version of this or there is no point in paying attention to anything you are saying.
cite>NeuroLex.org is a freely editable semantic wiki for community-based curation of the terms used in Neuroscience.
You are not suggesting, you are asserting via your “…nature does not care about our opinions…”. I have yet to see why your view of nature means anything.
I screwed up the quote from NeuroLex.
NeuroLex.org is a freely editable semantic wiki for community-based curation of the terms used in Neuroscience
That part is not my words and is from the “about” section of the site.
Dark Jaguar @88:
You’ve got that backwards. Hawking radiation seemed to imply that information wasn’t preserved, and I don’t think the matter is settled.
David Marjanović @96:
Nah, that’s just the pop-sci version. As Hawking wrote in the original paper,
louismorelli
/
“informations” is not a word in english.
/
/
/
Minor correction to #107: Hawking’s virtual pair picture for black hole radiation didn’t drag Heisenberg in, because while the outgoing particle has positive energy, the ingoing state has negative energy. However, the usual energy-time uncertainty nonsense is often invoked in popular descriptions.
Okay, are you deliberately spelling people’s nyms wrong?
@louismorelli
The relation you set up involves real phenomena in actual research. The part of your relation that says “no the brain does not store information” says nothing about what you mean by information. The “automatic nervous system” (which is not a term that I encounter in brain science) effect IS information. You need to be more specific
You need to provide a “something else” that describes your technical terms and concepts.
Somewhat reasonable. I would say the mind is what the brain does and memory is the record of what the brain did. That record involves many changes to things in hundreds of thousands of papers. I need to be able to line up what you are talking about next to what I know about those papers that I have read. Opinions are things that do not count for this process. I need data and information about the concepts and methods used to get that data.
All those bold bits are things I want to understand but can not without reference material, or sufficiently detailed definitions from you that reference what support the concepts that you represent as terms that we are not familiar with. Any claims that you make about the italicized portion can not be accepted without it.
***
Let me give you an example of the right way to do what you are trying to do.
I have Tourette’s Syndrome*.
I have been obsessively reading about this condition since I was diagnosed five years ago since it and the associated ADHD basically ended my science career. I have been very excited, some would say manic, about the things that I have discovered. On top of this I think I have managed to synthesize a picture of what TS is functionally and developmentally that I can’t find in the science literature. I think I have a really big story to tell too.
All of those are warning signs. Just asserting that I know something is not good enough. I have to be able to explain what I know, why I know it (with references to literature, concepts, and vocabulary), and many other potential challenges. So I am right now in the process of creating a set of description of what I think is going on.
That short description can be unpacked into a set of supporting arguments and references to supporting literature.
That set of arguments and literature references can be unpacked into specific experimental observations, rationales and supporting logical connections that lead to the argument as a conclusion.
I must be able to answer questions about everything that I myself claim and reference. If I don’t I am not worth taking seriously.
*Since I bring this up the topic is fair game. I will not be offended by any challenges or things that might accidentally be insensitive and this will not be used as a “criticism shield”. As far as I am concerned if I use myself as an object in a conversion you are allowed to discuss the object in question.
So, are you one of the special few who sees this wonderful fact and knows the formula? Or is this some mystical notion that you don’t even have yourself?
Stop throwing confused analogies into a blender for a moment. What is this formula? If it has a form, clearly state what that is supposed to be.
Also, what (if anything) could convince you that you might not be on the right track? Is there any procedure someone could do, or any sort of thought process that might be employed, which would convince you to reverse your thinking? Is there some fact of the matter about what you’re saying? Is it a logical impossibility for it to be any other way? Do you not yet realize that you are just blathering nonsensically?
louismorelli
Are you deliberately screwing-up the blockquotes?
It’s funny how anti-scientific assholes seem to love using “relativistic” as if it means there’s no fact of the matter, that it’s all about “perspective” or some shit. You don’t just change some abstract coordinates in your mind to calculate the same old things happening that Newton would’ve predicted. No, relativity makes definite, coherent, factual predictions about actual physical events in reality. It does not matter which frame of reference you are in — those events are either happening or they are not. Einstein did not have a theory which goes something like this: “meh, it’s just physics, and everybody has an opinion, so who cares?”
Looks like we habe the biological equivalent to Time Cube coming from our visitor here. Bio Cube. Also doubles as a name for a sequel to Bio Dome, so perfect.
@louismorelli
Just as I can not use the fact that I have Tourette Syndrome as a defense against criticism of my claims, you can not use 30 years of hard work as a defense. History is littered with the wreckage of people that look like us.
I am aware that proteins are arrangements of matter with characteristics and relationships with other things that can be described with the concept of information. I’m even fine with information used in the plural.
*I need a link to a specific part of your website where you describe how you are using the word information. I’m not going to “go fishing”. You are the advocate, so advocate.
*I need a link to a specific part of your site where you define the formula that you perceive between the concept you call “Matrix” and DNA.
When I try to run my ideas past a professional I will able to link to all vocabulary, concepts, and arguments they support. I will also be able to do this casually in the comments sections of blogs. It’s a serious discussion so I will have serious tools.
What is the “spheric flow” What are the parts it connects to? What is the pattern that exists between the flow and the parts that constitute the system. A formula can be diagrammed.
There is a lot of research on how light interacts with biology. What research do you use to support how you think light produces this system/formula?
None of this last part can be demonstrated without the information I requested. Without it you are essentially asking us to believe your opinion.
quantum
quanta
quantalia!
quantumnal
@louismorelli
<blockquote cite=""If it is not new, you need show to me where is the mind or consciousness at amoebas, lizards… at all ours ancestors.
I mean that your explanation is new. What you refer to, if it exists, should be explainable via human knowledge that you can point to in support of your ideas. Synapses are extensions of protein studded bags of phospholipids. That is accepted fact and needs no reference to the mind or consciousness. YOU refer to “energetic level”. Energy is not some amorphous thing. It is the ability to do something specific stored in specific forms like atomic bonds.
I’m aware of the fact that we are collections of matter created by physics and chemistry in an astronomical sense. That does not make anything in particular self-aware.
This does not make anything else in particular self-aware. How does our self-awareness, chemistry and physics relate to your Matrix and formula (when you finally get around to supporting that).
A formula you are very conspicuously avoiding to describe in any detail that we can compare to what we already know beyond emotional characterizations about the universe.
I’m intimately familiar with the one under discussion.
None of which I have to pay attention to until you start getting specific about all of your terminology and concepts. The evidence that I have brains and minds originating somewhere between 500 million and 1 billion years ago. I have no experience of minds without brains so until you start getting specific I just don’t believe what you are saying reflects reality.
Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging is a specific technology with known mechanisms. The energy is transmitted to the atomic nuclei via magnetic fields and precisely what the energy is and how it is stored and used up are things that can be described.
How does that relate to any energy level that produces synapses instead of resonating atoms? You are talking about forming a complex structure so the energy has to exist and move in describable ways.
This has been interesting but I’m unconvinced and done until you support what you assert in the requested ways.
Quantum tomatoes.
Quant on Make-Up
Close the fucking blockquotes you fucking asshole.
Iyeska
:)
That was a weird one.
Chigau:
Yes. At least that one was entertaining.
I was making fun of an ignorant, ludicrously self-important numpty, incapable of even learning how to blockquote.
@louismorelli 133
I’m posting this last thing to you because I think you are being sincere, and I am sincerely telling you that as a general matter the way you are approaching this will not be accepted by anyone in this community. I have sounded a lot like you do at other times but I have made an effort to know the material as the professionals do, and that I am able to talk about it at a level that at least approaches how they talk about it. Physics, chemistry, biology and other things sandwitched between them are systems of thought with a language of symbols in common and unique to them. You have to be able to make connections that show that there is a reason to think that what you have is compatible with what exists in some manner. If nothing else take my comments as the difficulty level you face. I have the same one.
When I say emotional characterizations that is not an insult, that is a descriptive statement of what you are doing. You are saying that you feel you can do certain things but you have to be able to do a certain minimal amount of work with your ideas if you want someone to look closer.
How are you inserting galaxies, atoms, etc? How to they connect to the things they are inserting between? You say you are doing it but you do not show how you can. How does your formula let you discover new things? A theory is a tool and it does things functionally. If it actually produces things you should be able to show how with some minimal level of functionality. It is not our job to wade through your chaos, you must organize it to a certain minimal level before we can tell what you are trying to say.
DNA is a molecule that interacts in specific ways with specific characteristics. You need to be able to work those characteristics into your explanation. No one can just see something without structure and form beyond “See this thing with a body of knowledge in this new way without me telling you how it’s known functions and characteristics relate to my new way of looking at it.”
You can say ancestor metaphorically in the case of atoms and galaxies, but ancestor as it is normally used refers to people with identities, sex, reproduction, age and death. When you bring up a technical term like formula, matrix DNA, or energy you need to give an answer that tells a story functionally using those concepts and functionally describing characteristics of the terms and how they relate to one another and the concepts.
A formula is a set of symbols that represent other objects or symbols and a description of how they interact.
A matrix is a specific way of relating symbols or objects (depending on if it’s a mathematical, biological, chemical, or geological matrix, that combine them in particular ways with particular consequences.
A DNA is molecule that has specific features that I need to see you reference and try to describe in terms of how at least a small part of the layers you are talking about fit into a chain that is different from the one I can already read about.
What theory? What you have is nothing but flimsy airy mental wanking of drug induced hallucinogens.
Physical evidence is required for it to be a SCIENTIFIC theory. Your theory is a not even a guess. Just utter bullshit.
I read louismorelli’s stuff and even a little at his website and it brought back a memory (provided my memory was actually stored in my brain otherwise I don’t know where it came from) that about 10 years ago there was a website that would generate a short paper complete with citations (I don’t have a memory of if the citations were collected as a bibliography at the end or not) on a chosen topic. The paper read very well but was total nonsense. It said absolutely nothing but it was fascinating. It was a fun website. Somehow, reading louismorelli recalled that memory.
vereverum #139
Here’s something like that.
http://sebpearce.com/bullshit/
louismorelli, #119
How many did you take?!
Reading louismorelli put me in mind of this song. Hey Louis, don’t bogart that joint, my friend.
LM, irrelevant mental wanker
A classic case where citation needed is required. Nothing but bullshit without the citation.
Otherwise, mental processes called consciousness evolved as a manifestation of the bioware called the brain to interpret its environment, and help the organism to survive.
Fun fact. I’ve partaken in quite an amount of green while reading journal articles, text books and organizing information in excel and other areas. It’s not such a crazy thing, it just requires some high standards when you think about it all later.
If someone told me these are Rustin Cohle lines from the deleted scenes of True Detective, I’d believe them.
Oh, and the mind system before the Big Bang, nothing but a sleight of hand way to show an imaginary deity existed to cause creation. We have a theist/deist here folks.
Al Dente
Your link in #142 may not be working as intended.
@ chigau #140
Thanks for the link.
I hear it! I hear it! I drink water. I found it! I found it!
Sorry, got caught up in the moment.
.
I searched generated papers and found this
http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/
which is similar to what I remembered but limited to topic. There does seem to be a wealth of informations (heh heh) about generated papers. And now I have some interesting reading ahead cause I dint know there were so many generated papers being published as legitimate.
.
I was hoping I could plug some text into the generator. I guess our ability to embarrass lazy professional organizations has not yet evolved to the point where I can insert Nostradamus into a generator and see what it gives me.
@ Brony, Social Justice Cenobite
From http://eg.radioworldwide.org/
.
Though the generation is rather simple and repetitive, you could cut and paste some areas to make a decent information free paragraph. Though would a paragraph really be information free? If memory serves me right….
louismorelli,
*snicker*
Brilliant.
Please tell me you’re writing a book.
louismorelli,
Trolling…
Dang it. I was hoping you were being serious all this time. You got me.
louismorelli
I’m not telling you anything until you start using blockquotes correctly.
Saad
The goal of electromagnetic forces is to plant the seeds of choice rather than selfishness.
Brought back a memory of this:
http://socsci2.ucsd.edu/~aronatas/project/cartoon.math.miracle.3.12.htm
Thanks again, man. I need learning these details about computers because at the jungle we have no other way and time for learning it. The content of Matrix/DNA Theory embraces the whole Universe so, I am very busy with it. I will go back to USA and will pay the next beer… Cheers…
FTFY.
Translation, I HAVE NO EVIDENCE. We must either believe your abject and obvious bullshit, or accept it without any skepticism. Since I’m a skeptic, no evidence, dismissed without evidence. End of your bullshit.
It embraces nothing but your delusional thinking, and means nothing to science and scientists. Only to fellow delusional thinkers who babble nonsense.
FFS
Translation, out of your ass. Either you evidence your ideas, or they are bullshit. Failure to even try to evidence pieces of your claims is prima facie evidence of bullshit.
Prove me wrong by showing real scientific evidence, not just mental wanking. Your claims are dismissed without evidence, especially the one where you are correct.
loiusmoreli,
TRIGGER WARNING: LINK IS TO A GRAPHIC VIDEO OF LIONS KILLING AND EATING A HUMAN BEING
You’re a shameless liar: not only is it not obvious, it’s not even coherent. I link to a video of a man being killed and eaten by lions. Now show us a corresponding video of natural light waves imprinting the dynamics of life’s cycle into inertial mass, or shut the fuck up and piss off.
Brony: Okey let’s go try to fix this:
I said To LikeX:
“So, this new system composed by a still unknown substance ( plasma-photons?) emerging from the brain is built by proteins at chemical level, which produces synapses at energetic level.
LikeX answered: It’s gibberish. It doesn’t mean anything. You’re just stringing together words that you clearly don’t understand, hoping we’ll be too intimidated to call you out on it. It’s utterly transparent, and really rather sad.”
I said: “LikeX, Nature does not care if you believe or not in its natural formulas, like VSI ( Variation, Selection, Inheritance), and it does not care if you does not like the results from its formulas, like VSI producing the transformations of amoebas into monkeys and monkeys into humans.Then the Matrix/DNA natural formula is suggesting that is occurring the emergence of a new shape of system produced by the brain.
And now you says: I asked you what those things meant. I don’t have to care if you can’t actually describe the meaning of the technical terms you are using, and provide and example of the research that uses them…. see NeuroLex…
My answer: I am talking about formation of new natural system due Matrix/DNA is suggesting that “mind” or “counciousness”, is a natural system under formation. So, the “mind” is taking the shape of the universal formula for natural systems, like all system in this Universe. Before this issue belonging to the field of Neuroscience, it belongs to the field of Universal Evolution. So the technical terms searched by the great enterprise that is NeuroLex does not apply on this issue, while we are talking about universal evolution. Neuroscience is a reductionism here, applied only to brains as systems. But… wait, if you are in the neuroscience business, you could beneficiate from paying some attenption to Matrix/DNA.
I will cite one. The brain is a system built upon the Matrix formula. So, I already have located several systemic features in the brain using this formula. The elements of the brain like the glands are disposed in a linear sequence determined by the formula and the functions of each element is determined by the formula. Now… the “mind” is merely a projection, a kind of mirror of the brain as a system. If you know how works the brain as a system, you can look to the synapses and others data being obtained by Neuroscience for calculating how the mind is being formed as a system. This is a great opportunity for you, a great jump in our knowledge about brains, psychology, mind, consciousness, etc. But, then, you will need to familiarize with terms that are being created now, because this is a new and very different approach. I am trying to find names for these things pointed out by the Matrix formula and you could help here.
loiusmorelli,
Piss off, liar. You have not “located several systemic features in the brain using this formula”. If you had, you would (a) be able to describe these “systemic features” in detail, and (b) already be famous for your achievements. Also, liar, where is your video of natural light waves imprinting the dynamics of life’s cycle into inertial mass?.
CITATION MOTHER FUCKING NEEDED TO THE PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE, OR YOU ACKNOWLEDGE WITHOUT SUCH EVIDENCE YOU ARE NOTHING PRESENTING THAT YOU ARE A LIAR AND BULLSHITTER.
Notices lack of link, which means you acknowledge you have no evidence other than your delusional views. Which will never be evidence per se.
Yours problem, Nick, is that yours mind is not trained to recognize the presence of life cycle’s process inside a system because you does not understand at deeper level what means a life’s cycle. Did you forget that here is a debate among theories? Nobody brought here a video showing a brain storing memories and/or a video showing a soul in the brain storing memories. The two groups ( Engnor(?) and Novella, PZ Myers, are debating their theories. So I am bringing on a third theory. There is no video showing original natural light waves imprinting the dynamics of life’s cycles into matter, but there are lots of evidences and a graphic illustrating it ( see “The electromagnetic spectrum” at my website).
But, before that, I will try help you to discover the obvious about light, because, I know, that lions appreciates eating humans is not obvious for butterflies and those organisms living at the ocean.
Think about a space filled with lighter inertial mass, at the beginning of the Universe ( you could call it “the Higgs field”). Suddenly, this mass is penetrated by waves of light, coming from the Big Bang. Look to a light wave. It changes shapes, intensity, vibrations, frequencies, while it is propagating. We normally shares these transformations into seven frequencies: gamma ray, infra-red, X-ray, etc. Now, leave the light wave and look to yours own body. Yours body had propagated into time and space since it was born. It has changed shapes, vibrational states, energetic intensity, etc. Why yours body did it? Why a stone does no do it? it is due yours body obeys the dynamics of a process called life’s cycle. And the stone does not. But… the sequence of changes of yours body propagating into time and space are the same sequence of a light wave when propagating through the Universe. it means that light waves obeys the same process of life’s cycle. It is a living thing, brother.
So, what came first: light waves or human bodies? of course, it is light waves. So who brought this novelty of life cycle to mass-bodies? Of course, it was light waves. it is so obvious, my friend… when a person learns what means life’s cycles, natural systems and knows the Matrix/DNA formulas…
louismorelli the shameless liar@170
No, I didn’t forget it, because that claim is just another of your lies. You have not produced a theory, just a load of incoherent drivel, the same as Egnor did.
This is just more incoherent drivel.
Liar. If there were, you would produce them here.
No we don’t, you invincibly ignorant fuckwit. The electromagnetic spectrum is continuous.
No it isn’t, liar. A light wave travels at great speed, and follows a geodesic through space-time; my body does not. A light wave does not mature, nor age; my body does. and you’re a liar.
More stupid, dishonest, evidence-free crap. Piss off, liar.
I’m no friend to liars.
@ louismorelli
Alright then! Practical application.
Tell me what your formula says about Tourette’s Syndrome.
@ vereverum
I’ll check that site out and see what happens. Nostradamus is just so vague and twist-able into anything that I got curious about what a computer could do with it.
Straight out of the bullshitters manual, script one. No inovation by you.
No, but there is evidence of electrical stimulation to portions of the brain stimulating memories. You lose. Your word is never evidence.
Why is it obvious to a proven bullshitter, and not physicists working on light for years? Your word is not and never will be evidence.
No, you are bullshitting without evidence that your hallucingenetic claims are real, and not bogus. Your word is not evidence. Never will be. Third parties are required.
And this has nothing to do with consciousness or the mind. Only your delusional connections that are bullshit.
Relax, Nick, today is Christmas and I will give to you the best gift of the world: learn how to get an evolutionary mental jump. Wait, I will explain…
The first feature seen at brains that it is produced by Matrix/DNA formula is the the division between left and right hemispheres, having the corpus callosum in between and the cerebral cortex above them. My problem is that I can not bring the Matrix formula here, so, I can’t tell you: put the figure of Matrix side by side with the figure of the brain and immediately see how they are the same image. You need pick up the formula from my website for doing that. So…
1) The matrix formula is shared into left and right face. The circuit’s flow of energy/informations begins at F1 ( the hippocampus), goes to F2, till F4 and here the flow is shared into two flows. F4 is the final of the left face and the cerebral cortex is representing it at brains’level. One flow is a lateral blanch advancing internally to F1 and the other flow continues the spheric circuit going to F7/F1. This is the right face. F4 is the universal function that builts the male function for reproduction process, and this function is carried on by the internal flow as F5.
Every external stimulus that triggers a thought began this circuit, going first by the left hemisphere till reaching the cortex ( F4). And here is yours problem that make things like not seeing natural light waves as the first origins of the vital principle in this Universe. It happens that when the flow of yours thoughts arrives to the cerebral cortex, they does not continues the pathway towards F7. A thought able to do that is a complete thought, embracing the whole thing, translating the real Nature and this world. Instead, yours thoughts are middle-thoughts, because they are cutted at the middle, and from the cortex they takes the internal lateral branch going back to the hippocampus.
The left hemisphere, you knows, is the field of critical thinking about the immediate time and space, while the right H. is expanding this limited horizons, it is the reign of holistic understanding. But yours thoughts stands as circular reasoning only in the left H. You never makes an incursion to the right H. world. Poor man! You will be a very practical surviving man, very good for earning money, good for scientific reductionism, for maths… etc., but…
Have you read the book or watched that video about a neurologist scientist that had a stroke in the left H.? I don’t remember names ( this is a problem for those that practise using the right H also), And she is saying that with only the right H working, she saw everything as light? The whole space, our bodies everything is a new dimension in the reign of light.
But, if you have not trained yours thoughts for trespassing the corpus callosum and penetrating the right H. the very fact that light waves imprints the code for life cycles into matter will not be obvious for you. Sorry… But still you have time: meditation, imagining the circuit flow of synapses entering the right H. and you will get it…
Notice: I never saw light waves imprinting its own sequential dynamics into mass, I am not a liar. But, I have noticed that light waves exhibits the same process of life’s cycles that my own body does because I have trained for grasping these signals from Nature.
I smell bullshit.
Yep, your word is not evidence, nor anything directly from your web site. Third party evidence…
Whereas your problem is light has nothing to do with the brain, other than it interprets photoreceptor information. Show us the light inside of the brain….by third party evidence….
WRong, you are liar and bullshitter.
Are you sure, louismorelli, that you didn’t perhaps sample some strange leaf or animal dropping whilst in the Amazon? “Psychedelic mindfuck” is pretty much what your “theory” sounds like.
@louismorelli
What does your theory say about Tourette’s Syndrome. Your ideas have to be more useful than vague waving at systems and non-specific energy. I could stick a wire into my nucleus accumbens and get some amazing pleasure.
@louismorelli
You have to start getting down to practical reality at some point.
How can your formula explain or do anything about the ragged edge running parallel to every part of my perception? That thing that feels like a startle that’s always on and pools like needles in my joints and bones, fire in my muscles, and electric prickling in my skin? Can it explain the externally-felt force that’s laid over my whole consciousness, pushing my attention to things that most would find disturbing?
It’s like the opposite of a hallucination, did you know that? Your perception is perfectly clear, but the emotions and signals tied to that perception are associated with things that do not fit. Can it explain the kid with Tourette’s Syndrome that I met while moderating a website a while back who suffered these inverse hallucinations? Can it explain how or fix how he would get fits that felt like someone attacking him and stabbing him over and over and over? I have some interesting things like that too.
At some point you have to start being useful. That presence I feel overlapping with me thinks you are pretty useless too. They are much less polite than I am being though.
Merry Crankmas, everybody.
louismorelli seems to have grokked blockquote.
It’s a Xmas miracle!!
louismorelli:
You have a simple choice before you. You can spend your life as a crank, convinced of your own superiority and wondering why everyone else is refusing to acknowledge it. Or you can start making actual sense.
So, in the interest of helping you along with the second option, try this: Describe a practical prediction that follows from your “theory” and a method for testing it. The prediction should follow these criteria:
1) It should be an actual prediction. I.e. something we don’t already know.
2) It should be unique to your theory. I.e. it should be something that distinguishes your theory from every other idea out there.
3) It should be practically testable, with an objective measure of success or failure. I.e. no “you have to feel it”, no “if you use your left hemisphere, it’s obvious”, no “the jungle will tell you the answer”.
I’m sure a person as staggeringly intelligent and well-educated as yourself will recognize these as basic rules of proper scientific investigation and therefore have no objection to complying with them.
louismorelli@175
If you’re going to be a condescending arsehole, it’s best to have something to be condescending about.
The use of unexplained neologisms is a sure sign of the deluded andor dishonest crank.
Look, you invincibly ignorant, swollen-headed numpty, the cerebral cortex is divided into left and right hemispheres. It is not above them. You have just proven your complete ignorance of the most elementary neuroanatomy. Well done.
This is simply another sign of your invincible ignorance: that claim is a pop-psychology factoid, which bears little resemblance to the complex results of research over the last several decades. Here is what a recent article has to say:
Moreover, most activities involve use of both hemispheres, and lateralization differs between individuals: left-handers tend to be less lateralized, and a substantial number have language production and comprehension predominantly in the right hemisphere.
I have looked at your website. It is complete gibberish, with no useful content whatsoever; a grab-bag of poorly-understood fragments of science, and ample examples of your invincible ignorance. The “Matrix/DNA formula” is nothing more than a diagram festooned with meaningless labels and arrows.
To give a single example of the ignorance on display:
The first living being was not a plant cell. Plants are eukaryotes, which did not appear – almost certainly by symbiosis between simpler organisms – until billions of years after life began on Earth.
louismorelli, the one question you must answer, is “what would it take for you to acknowledge your idea is refuted?”. Cranks cannot/will not answer that question.
1) A real proved and known fact or event occurring or occurred in the Universal Nature that is outside of the stream of the whole Universal Natural History described by Matrix/DNA Theory;
2) A real proved fact or event found in Nature that can prove that Biological Evolution had an spontaneous origin and is not merely a sequitur of Cosmological Evolution as believed by materialists/atheists;
3) A real proved fact or event occurring in Nature that could prove that Life, biological evolution is not a merely sequitur from cosmological evolution and had a spontaneous origin by the interference of supernatural forces, like gods and so on, as believed by creationists/deists.
MatriX/DNA Theory is a description of the Natural Universal History from the Big Bang to consciousness following a unique line of logics: the development of a cosmic process of genetic reproduction of the unknown ex-machine “natural” system that was existing before the Big Bang and produced this Universe. Bring on over the table only one real fact that fills up only one of the three conditions above… and matrix/DNA theory will go to the garbage. But, since that never, in any nation or time of human history, somebody published this kind of world view, while you does not bring the mortal fact, I will keep testing and researching nature until my last day. Because the state of the world, the kind of social system, existing here was very bad for my life and I believe that the moral code emerging from this world view and the new source for technology suggested by Matrix/DNA formulas and models are the best for a better life for our next generations, which is the supreme reason of my life here. That’s it…
I wonder if this makes sense in Portuguese.
Okay, how about the fact that:
a) multiple animals produce milk or milk-like excretions,
b) which, using a combination of bacteria and fungi, can be curdled into cheese,
c) coupled with the fact that such cheeses are iconic cultural items with regional variations, and
d) contrasted with the fact that various bacteria and fungi can function as pathogens, both for the humans eating the cheese and the animals producing the milk.
Please, explain, in detail, how this fits the Matrix/DNA theory. I fucking dare you.
And while we wait, can somebody get some pop corn?
LykeX (louismorelli, note spelling)
I like cheese grated on popcorn.
Your claim isn’t and never will be EVIDENCE. Just your delusional thinking. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE.
Being worked on, and unlike your delusions, is scientifically based. Your deidty doesn’t exist. It is obvious you are trying to pretend there is one.
Since this is nonsense, anything that happened will refute your rubbish. You can’t show you are right. And you can’t admit you can an are wrong.
This crank… I think they’ve done a marvelous job at masquerading Kalam’s dressed up as something incredibly more convoluted.
Rather it seems a mish-mash of Kalam’s and fine-tuning, coupled with presuppositions… But still no evidence.
Brony, I said since the first post that Matrix/DNA models are suggesting that proteins are required for memory storage in the brain and you keep repeating this issue as if Matrix/DNA does not agree with you . I think this problem is due my poor English, sorry. I will try to write what Matrix models suggests,describing its version of the origins of proteins:
At 3,5 billion years ago there was no organic matter and biological systems (organisms) in this planet. The Planet’s surface was bombarded “non-biological genes-bits/information” coming from two sources a) from the Sun which have informations of the right face of matrix/DNA universal formula for natural systems; b) from the Earth’s nucleus, which have information of the left face of that formula. These bits-information are photons emitted by the astronomical system under entropy, which makes a system being fragmented in its smaller bits, and each bit is a unit of information from the system. The total set of these bits is the total information of the system, which is degenerating, “dying”. In other words, the bits coming from the Sun ( and other sources of cosmological radiation) plays the role of chromosome Y and the other half of bits coming from planet’s nucleus radiation represents the chromosome X. The whole set of bits-information represents the astronomical DNA of the astronomical system, which is an evolutionary state of Matrix/DNA universal formula for natural systems.
These photons-bits penetrates terrestrial atoms till reaching its particles, then, they get the control of the atom machinery, driving them to new kind of atomic connections. These connections are driving with a purpose: the bits-photons has the tendency to joining with their antique neighbours bits-photons when they were composing the astronomical system. So, the final result of this connections should be a reproduction, a copy, of the astronomical system. But, the astronomical system was formed with only two states of matter – solid and gaseous – and at earth surface the bits meet a third state – the liquid state. By another hand, the environment at a planet surface is different from the empty space when the astronomical space was formed, differences of gravitational forces, etc. So, the resulting copy here will suffer severe mutations, the liquid state will bring the novelty of organic chemistry reactions, and Biology will born. The Carbon atom will be the selected atom for occupying the center of the first organic compounds because the carbon having six protons/electrons is the atom that best reproduces the Matrix’ formula.
After infinite numbers of tentatives and billions years, the right amino acids will be formed and appears the first real copy of the astronomical system, which is a lateral base-pair of nucleotides. This is a real and complete and functional organic copy of Matrix/DNA formula. This is the Solar System and the Milk Way “DNA” that falls over Earth.
The production of nucleotides systems produces a kind of biofilm which produces the projection of the small system into a big system as copy of itself. For doing this bigger shape of the system is necessary to install the systemic circuit and building the working parts. For doing that the aminoacids are arranged into “biggers aminoacids” which we call “proteins”. Each protein is made by the photons inside particles inside atoms, photons that were neighbours at astronomical level. Each protein is the organic counterpart of each slice of the whole formula’s circuit. An from here, we will arrive to the first complete working biological system: a complete cell’s system.
So, from the last more evolved species – which was astronomical systems – cosmological evolution suffered a severe mutation from closed into opened systems and became biological, a big evolutionary jump as those appreciated by Gould.
Now, after 3,5 years, another big cosmological evolutionary jump is occurring: another state of matter is being formed and it is producing a new shape of this evolving natural system. The occurrence is happening inside humans head and the new shape of this system is called “mind” or “consciousness”, or another name you like it. Nature is being translated, is being reproduced in its entirety into this new shape of system and again, the vehicle of this information must be photons, I think. Memories, thoughts, etc, are data being arranged, organized and the first level of this organization is again, thought proteins. So,yes, proteins are required for memory storage. But, don’t forget that must be there more and more dimensions of matter that we still does not grasp them, String theory is suggesting 11 dimensions. So, this new organization happens at several layers of dimensions and protein is the dimension at the bottom of this process. Tanks if you could read something about matrix/DNA Theory and more thanks yet if you can criticize it, because everything here is merely a theory under testing against real proved natural facts.
Citation mother fucking needed, or useless drivel to pretend to sound sciency, when there isn’t anything to back up fuckwitted and presuppositonal claims. UNTIL YOU CITE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, ALL YOUR CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED AS FUCKWITTERY.
Until you are able to cite those facts from the peer reviewed scientific literature, you claims are dismissed without evidence.
Where in the peer reviewed scientific literature is YOUR “THEORY”?
How about you start by demonstrating the existence of these photon-gene-bits. While you’re at it, make up a new name for them. You’re clearly not talking about the particles that the rest of us call “photons”, so maybe stop using that name. It only causes confusion.
Meaning what? Is this a metaphor or should we take it literally? Either way, what the hell does it mean? In what way are these hypothetical solar particles playing the role of Y chromosomes?
Wasn’t this supposed to explain the origin of life? You know, the life that existed long before sexual reproduction developed, never mind specific chromosomes.
From our last crank/loon, which, of course, is still appropriate:
You are a crank/loon if……
You know you are the brightest one out there, but nobody appreciates your genius
If the idea you promote doesn’t have any real third party evidence
If you take criticism as personal insults instead of criticism of the idea
If asked what it would take to show your idea is wrong, you can’t/won’t supply an answer that can be falsified
You promote your idea by infesting and threadjacking other peoples blogs, and not by the normal scientific methods of publishing in scientific journals and talking about your ideas at professional meetings
Good point. What is “memory”? What’s its substance? How and where happens this ” record”? From my interpretations of Matrix>DNA models, I only can say:
1) I have the picture, the photography of this “record” and I am crazy after looking all images got from MRI and others about synapses, trying to see a pattern, or something that have the same shape of this “photo”. Each time a new external signal called “memory” is captured by the brain, triggers a thought, and the thought absorbs the signal as a part, Each thought is a system, each memory is a new and different shape of a part of that system, so,memories does not come along, they cames as a system. We know the original universal template of this system, which is the Matrix’s formula, so, this template makes possible to localize the record because this record is merely a pile of those templates.
2) each memory stored in the brain produces a new shape or differentiation of the Matrix systemic formula, like each new nucleotide-unit of information is the first nucleotide with a small differentiation. So, like we have the DNA as a pile of different shapes of a unique system, called “lateral base-pair of nucleotides”, must have in the brain a kind of pile of memories, or different shapes of the initial system that was the Matrix formula. This brain’s internal pile is the mind’s DNA.
3) What is its substance? In this Universe is occurring a genetic reproductive process of the unknown natural system that was existing before the Universe. Like the reproduction of a human body recapitulates the history of biological evolution, the reproduction of that productor of universes is a cosmological history repeating the history of formation of that producer. The first stage of this cosmological reproduction began with quantum bits in shape of vortex that were propagated as light waves which penetrates the inertial space substance or Higgs field creating the first elementary particles as quarks, leptons, etc. So, the ex-machine mysterious producer were manifested here fragmented into its bits-information in shape of vortexes and light waves were its arms and hands for building things, with the purpose to build its “son”, or reproductive copy. It means that when this process will reaching its ends, the whole Universe composed by these particles, which we call material universe, will be discarded like is discarded the placenta. The baby will be formed with the substance more next, nearest, to the ex-machine creator, which is light and quantum vortexes.
By another hand, like humans bodies develops obeying the process of life’s cycle, the universe evolution must obeys this process also. So, humans embryogenesis recapitulates the embryogenesis of the ex-machine creator. Since that consciousness appears at human embryos only after the brain is formed ( maybe about 6 or 8 months old?) and if consciousness appeared here inside the universe it must be a component of the ex-machine system, we have strong elements suggesting that the consciousness substance must be composed by original light and quantum vortexes. So, we can suppose that inside our heads is occurring what we see at the sky: the sparks of energy that seems synapses produces illumination which is absorbed by the cloud. If these sparks becomes continuous, the cloud will be luminous forever, registering those sparks. This luminiferous cloud is the substance of the mind.
4) Why we does not capture the substance of the mind? Why we can’t see it, neither ours powerful scientific instruments that are extensions of our cerebral sensors? First of all, human consciousness is still a fetus or maybe an embryo. maybe it was already born yesterday in cosmological times. But we know that it did not well formed yet because it is in the state of fetus/embryos and babies that did not opened its own eyes for to see its own body. This opening of this eye will be our “third eye”. Second: the light as substance of this cloud that is the mind is not the light that we can see and grasp with our instruments. because this original light was emitted at the Big Bang and is not the light that we see in the Cosmos today. The initial generation of light uses stations for re-transmission called stars, quasars, so on. These are third, fourth generation of the original light, not so pure and strong like the first generation. The first generation makes us blind, like the strong light of a car at night. Only a third eye and more developed scientific instruments will be able to “see” it.
So, as we see here, we still need developing our cerebral sensors, creating new sensors and resuscitating antique sensors, like the antenna of insects/animals able to grasp magnetic fields that is today our pineal gland. But, we are not lost yet. We have intelligence, which can help us to see, or at least, theorize, what will come next. Like we can’t see the matrix formula, we couldn’t see that was the Earth orbiting the Sun, we couldn’t see anti-matter, etc, but our intelligence predicted their existences, we now can produces a map of the mind, or a picture of memories’ records, as a guide for finding the real thing.
Louismorelli, may I recommend a visit to Timecube? You and Gene Ray have a lot in common.
Has anyone figured out what he means by “matrix formula” yet? Because he’s clearly not talking about an actual formula.
Tuppence a pound, with bonus kaleidoscopic entrails and a tomato-Bates coefficient of three o’clock CE (Gregorian).
Where in the peer reviewed scientific record is YOUR evidence?
Bullshit sophistry, dismissed without third party (scientific) evidence. Meaningless drivel by a crank.
No creator, no recapulation, nothing by bullshit from YOU. Third party evidence, or dismissed as fuckwittery.
We do, with MRI PES. And it all refutes you solidly. All memories come from the bioware, nothing external. That is Occam’s razor until your provide solid and conclusive PHYSICAL evidence for you imaginary deity/mind. Until then, it only exists in YOUR delusional mind.
LykeX@200,
Follow my link @183. It’s just a diagram: he “thinks” in images.
Nick Gotts
Oh, so that’s the actual formula? I sensed that the circle diagram was important, but I wasn’t sure quite how it fit in the system. Thanks.
Louis:
Why do you insist on using words that already have an established meaning? If you say “formula” when you don’t mean “formula”, people are bound to get confused. If you really think you’re on to something, you should probably put more effort into making sense.
I can draw a stick person. That that mean people are made of sticks????
It’s code words used by every crank. They pretend it is a gottcha phrase. More like a point and laugh phrase….
First) The definition of “formula”: a recipe or prescription giving method and proportions of ingredients for the preparation of all natural systems ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/formula )
Second) You can’t understand the formula that is behind each moment of this universal evolution in a day, or one week, LykeX. It has take to me 25 years and everyday i am discovering new things in this formula. Does not wait a complex mathematical formula, because here you are dealing with the most powerful intelligence of this world – Nature – which is able to pass the Occan’s razor over all complexities and telling everything with one single diagram. This is the simplicity of this most complex possible formula. So, please do this:
Go to http://theuniversalmatrix.com/pt-br/artigos/?p=8633
First there is the “picture” of Matrix/DNA formula. Following, there is a second picture. Click on it for seeing it better. For understanding the initial things here, you need know that:
The agglomerate of galaxies that we call Universe is like an egg ( it is not an egg but I can’t explain here and now), where inside is occurring the evolution of a universal system. This evolution obeys the process of life’s cycles, which changes the shape of this system through time. These shapes are the spheres, each one with lines in a specific color. So, we have about six spheres, from the first shape of this system that was a light wave till the shape “Human Familiar System”. But, notice that each system has its parts formed by the same process of life’s cycle. So, the parts of these systems are arranged in the sequence that they were formed, like embryo>baby>child>teenager. Now a briefly help for you:
a) At the Center, the system “human hands”, built by Matrix/DNA formula
1) Blue Sphere: Atoms
2) Yellow: Nucleotide lateral base pair
3) Green: Light Wave
4) Blue: Cell System
5) Black: Astronomical Systems’ building block
6) Red: Human Ideal Perfect Familiar System built by A Unique Human Body rolling under the process of Life Cycle
This is the whole Universal natural History in a single picture. It is possible because this History was written by an unique author – the Matrix/DNA formula, which is also under evolution and began as a simple light wave. If you see something wrong, some element out of the time/space of the scientific academic theoretical history of this Universe, please tell me.
Jesus wept.
Stop licking those toads.
louismorelli
Congratulations. You’ve reinvented the idea of ‘as above, so below’, a favorite of mystics and mountebanks of every stripe in dozens of cultures. It’s not any more accurate this time around, and if you’d been at all competent during your 30 years of ‘research’ you’d already know about it. Seriously, the New Age clowns chewed this cud over again not 20 years ago, and it’s still current in a dozen schools of ‘magik’ (if you have to ask why it’s spelled that way, you’re even more stunningly ignorant of the topic than you already look). Your theology has nothing new or interesting in it, and I’d bet that if you were honest about it you cribbed the most of it from the likes of Silver Ravenwolf, or possibly websites passing on variations of same.
LykeX 204
It’s a mysticism thing, don’t ask.
chigau 208
Licking them actually just makes you sick as hell. You have to scrape the slime off the toad’s back, dry it out, and smoke it in order to get high. How (and why) anyone figured this process out is beyond me.
Not a citation to peer reviewed scientific literature, merely your personal hallucinetic drivel. Dismissed as fuckqwittwery.,
Only in your delusional evidenceless mind. Drivel, lies, and bullshit without third party EVIDENCE. Everybody but you knows that. Which makes you a fool and crank.
I love this place.
I always learn stuff.
Congratulations, Dalai Lama. You didn’t get the real meaning of a single world at Matrix/DNA world view. I know those cultures since my infant times when I read thousands of books and every world vision produced by Humanity, and I didn’t agree with no one. That’s why I made the return of 180 grades on my artificial urban life and went to the heart of Amazon jungle, searching the real crude Nature for answers… and the jungle told me a never before imagined world view that is very logical and rational. By another hand, yours theology based on “as my teacher, as me” does not make sense for me. Yours teachers – Lawrence Krauss with his “Everything from Nothing” means also that “what is above, everything”is different below – or Dawkins with his “a bunch of atoms called genes have purposes, like spreading by reproduction the most possible ways”, or still Hawking “I see in the sky giant ghosts black holes that are evil and cannibal of whole worlds – were also my teachers teaching some scientific proved facts but not their fantastic nihilist doctrine.
Just for yours information: In Matrix/DNA world view, everything above and in the past are different in relation to everything here and in the future just because everything changes under evolution.
This is now making me sad.
Since your matrix/dna world exists only in your mind, and not in the scientific literature, where it must be evidenced to but published, you can only blame yourself for being misunderstood. Basically you have nothing but delusional thinking. Publish your work or shut the fuck up about loon.
The not even wrong it burns.
You mean god. Period, end of story, a deity, which like all others, is devoid of evidence to show it exists. No amount of philosophical wanking changes that fact. You are arguing for a deity.
And I am still waiting from you a unique real known proved natural fact that debunks this theory. Or lots of facts that are still missing for you proving yours theory. I will cite some of them:
1) My theory suggests that LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor of all biological systems never lived at Earth surface but it still is alive in the sky. And the theory goes further showing a picture with the face of LUCA. But you saying that LUCA lived at Earth, so next to us and somuch easy for being hunted, you never produced neither a draw or project of his face… Where is it?
2) Tell me the supernatural fact that help the Darwinian evolutionary formula convincing a female reptile that was putting eggs out for making the biggest sacrifice of keeping the eggs in and so, developing the extraordinary engeenary of pregnancy; ( Matrix/DNA formula have solved this problem 30 years ago);
3) Where is the microscopic atom that had all matter and energy and like yours god could create this Universe…
4) Where and how were all forces and elements that converged to Earth for creating biological systems, aka “life”, if yours astronomical standard model did not show neither one till now? But… Matrix/DNA Theory has already located in the sky, billions years before lifes origins all these elements and forces…
And so on…
By another hand, at my website I already wrote 1620 articles ( Portuguese) and most of them are related to evidences that I am discovering every day. But, don’t worry because I have still thousands of evidences written by hands that I will bring to the website…
What?! Are you saying that in the scientific literature our respectful ancestors like atoms and galactic systems didn’t have DNA? Are you saying that this extraordinary engineered DNA was invented by the stupid matter of a lost planet and inside ancestors like amoebas?! No, thanks my friend, I will not publish my job in this “scientific literature”… in the good name of my loved students…
Nerd
Please, stop.
Oh, sh… are you still here? Ok,boss, I will stop. The force of the Light Face of the Matrix be with you. Happy new year!
fucking troll
I think you need to learn the difference between evidence and confirmation bias. The fact that you can take just about anything and jam it into the same simplistic diagram isn’t evidence of anything other than your ability to delude yourself.
If you actually think your “theory” has scientific merit, then I refer you back to my post at #182. Of course, this will require you to express yourself in words that can be understood by other people.
Incidentally, you’ve written over a thousand articles and you still can’t give a simple, coherent explanation that other people can understand. Doesn’t that imply to you that you’re doing something wrong?
Citation mother fucking needed. What is DNA but atoms of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorous, and metals like sodium and potassium? You have something ancestor to atoms that is made of atoms. You lose loser. This is utterly and abjectly stupid.
And you do mean for your dna/matrix to be god, which is obvious. All proofs of god are presuppositional. You presuppose the answer, and try to fit the data to your presupposition. That is how religion works. That is what you are doing.
Science looks at evidence first, and you have no evidence to back your claims, or you would have cited that evidence.
For fuck’s sake, are you so stupid you don’t know what your argument really is? If you don’t, you should be banhammered for terminal stupidity.
Stop using the same nonsense terms over and over. Religionists do that, because by repetition, they confirm their belief in nonsense. You do the same. It’s still drivel by any other name.
If you don’t understand science and how to do it, you need to shut the fuck up and listen to scientists, as you are doing it wrong.
Nope, your matrix is your god. You describe no natural systems, like science does. Your inquiry methods are religious, not scientific. If you were scientific, for example, and asked for a citation, you would provide a link to a paper in the peer reviewed scientific literature. Like the power of natural selection.
The pious louismorelli has won me over. I am ready to convert.
How does one tithe the Venerable Church of the Light Wave Matrix?
I shall stay up tonight to watch the Matrix
trilogytrinity. Verily, it is a DVD set most blessed..
Very, very good, LikeX. Thanks a lot. I have copied yours “formula” into my files for studying it carefully. But, you need to understand that I am completely lost just now dye to much accumulated work. I am dealing with +- 50 different scientific fields, 500 opened chapters of thesis for research ( like last week I was studying depression because I have a relative with this problem then the formula is suggesting that needs an effort in adrenaline but with a new ingredient so I need the atomic composition of adrenaline following a predictive suggestion extracted from Matrix/DNA formula, but this research goes from adrenaline to the spectrum of Earth’s magnetic field making comparison with my interpretation of light waves which interfere in this magnetic field because the atomic composition of adrenaline must had followed the force of life’s cycle that I have detected in the periodic table of elements… because this field was operating when Nature built the secretive gland, etc…) It seems a big and lost salad but it is not: I deal with natural systems and any phocus upon any system opens the door to all others systems in the Universe and if you does not compose all connections you will not know in full what’s the object you have at hands. But, let’s forget this issue…
Hundreds of suggestions for labs research suggested by a different and never tried before approach are the results of these opened chapters/thesis and all them are stopped half-way due my poor conditions, missing time and the technological apparatus and counselors from experts at each field. Let’s see an example just now, that is almost metaphysics but i remember it due I like it: about solving the problem of life’s origins.
The Oparin’s final board of reductive atmosphere at life’s origins that was mimicked by Miller/Urey in lab resulted in production of some amino acids. They are not the right amino acids selected by Nature meaning that something is wrong in Oparin. But this is not the big problem. The problem is that those amino acids stopped their evolution at that point, being unable to transpass to the second step that must be the arrangement of them into proteins. Why? Looking for answers in Matrix/DNA formula and models, you get a suggestion: change the electric sparks applied by Urey by energy obtained from Earth’s nucleus radiation, which could be inside sulfa and other elements. You need drive this process obeying chirality and chirality is about the left face of matrix formula which tells that it must coming from bits-informations located at Earths’nuclei. Other possibility that must be tried is solar energy but accordingly to the formula, you could get proteins, but not chirality. By the way this research is opened not finished here yet because I need more data form Geologists and from astronomy for thinking about the ingredients used by Urey, because the formula could point out missing elements. How we will apply this energy upon the tubes, how we will reduce millions of years used by nature into few days used in labs, for nurturing the “soup” these are questions that can be solved.
But we need practical results for problems just here and now, not about metaphysical life’s origins. Then I can show you a sample of practical research: go to my homepage and see the figure about “cholesterol”,click on the image. The Matrix formula suggests that the good cholesterol becomes bad cholesterol when an intruder from outside is entering by the wrong door in the circuit. it is the triglyceride HDL entering between immature VLDL and mature VLDL. I stopped this research here due missing time but for following it I need to trace the origins of this HDL, its chemical atomic composition for making comparisons with the right atomic composition suggested by the formula, etc. and etc, I need scientific data that experts knows it and could easily our job here.
Then, I am very grateful by yours formula or recipe because now I can go back to this issues trying to put some order in it and writing suggestions for labs’ experiments.
My friend, i am convinced of my inferiority since my 3 years old when I lost my parents and my home and became nobody till today. The fact that my brain came out with this thing called Matrix/DNA world view does not is foundation for any filling of superiority because any man that do what I did will get the same or a better result. escaping from slavery I went to live alone in the jungle and any man doing that are able to do what I did. I will explain in short words. We, as urban citizen, bombarded by information, and loving Sciences, have the whole western mindset and lots of scientific data composing a “culture”formed by 15.000 years. When you arrives in the jungle you meet the hell and first thing the malaria gets you. I got the two types, falciparum and vivax. Everything there is poison and animals like the scorpion, the spider, the anaconda like sucuri and jibóia, the big cats, the crocodile, and the sporus of plants, what to expulse, to kill you. Tons of smaller mosquitoes are vampirising yours blood that make you felling it as a fever. If you get surviving, after three months you forget all 15.000 years culture and yours brain is washed, empty. Then, the rules and spirit of the jungle begins to occupy yours neurons, regretting to the monkey salvage state. If you go back to civilization and remembering yours civilized culture you cam sum the two mental states and getting some thing like the Matrix/DNA world view. it is not an issue about intelligence, genius, it is you rolling under the laws of Nature, my friend. I am not superior than you, the opposite is true, you have more information and is more able to survive here because you have a home, family, a country behind you, i have nothing. I came here asking help for not losing a good chance and leaving this work to my grave, and the way I can do it is calling attention like; “Is the brain able to stores memory? Yes and no, it is a relativistic issue.” Do you understand?
I does not wonder it because this is the normal reaction among different cultures and their different interpretations of natural phenomenas. And I don’t try to impose the suggestions of my theory to nobody because I don’t believe in my world view because I know that my little brain can not grasp the right world view. But, the dialogue among different world views is good for Humanity. Cheers and once time more: I appreciated yours inestimable contribution here which can be good for you in the next future…
Official Science have abandoned the study of natural systems and is studying merely some processes among some parts thinking that it is systems. One proof is the unsolved mortal milenar diseases because we does not understand the human body as a system; or climate change due the wrong astronomical system model.
The first model of a perfect natural system is the Matrix/DNA formula. I never saw published another complete and working model. You are not seeing it because 1) you have a ideology like everybody, and this formula/authorship goes against yours ideology; 2) you refuse to study the formula.
After few tentatives like Fritjof Capra ( The Tao of Physics), or Mereschkowski, Margullis ( symbiotic theory for organelles) and the great job of Bertalanffy with his General Systems Theory, the study of systems took a wrong way with Rosemberg, Wiener going towards artificial systems and cybernetics. The fail of Bertalanffy is that he didn’t know what’s a real natural system.
If you are interested, I will explain how Nature built the first naturals systems before reaching the state of self-reproduction:
1) Take several samples of an object in free space;
2) Apply over these objects the process of life’s cycle ( merelly penetrating them with natural light waves);
3) The objects begins being transformed into different shapes, tottalizing seven principals shapes;
4) Each shape is attracted by the sequential next shape ( same pattern of light waves sequencies of frequencies);
5) First there are two linked shapes, next these duos are linked into four, till happening an entire filament with all seven shapes; inside the filament runs the flow of energy/information, responsible by the bridges;
6) From here these filaments are driven to became a closed spherical filament because the initial shape connects with the final shape;
7) When the circuit flow arrives to shape 4, begins the entropic process, energy begins to decrease. It is shared into two flows, one going normally spherical to S6, S7, and the other flow is driven internally towards S1;
8) This internal flow carries on energy before being attacked by entropy, it is increasing energy and when it reaches S1 is mixed with the dust resulting from S7, resulting in a new initial object. So, the closed system recycles itself.
Biological systems are results of entropy attacking the closed building blocks of astronomical systems, and they emerges as opened systems, due the new environment and substances. One thing you need to observe is that each shape became each part with a specific systemic function. That’s the explanation that in Matrix/DNA formula I have changed the “Ss” by “Fs”, which means Function one, Function 2, etc. Now see my avatar here two samples of Nature’s application of this formula: the astronomical system building block built by one initial body under life’s cycle, and the human perfect familiar system where each human body shape has a specific familiar function.
Now I am waiting from you the model’s system as you said above, that sciences describes it…
Saad you have not read the Introduction at my home page where is witten:
“The aims copyrighted restrain any use by third parties for individuals or groups seeking financial goals, political or religious. They are released since that we identify its use for the benefit to Humanity as a whole without distinction of race, color, religion or other discriminatory predicates. Another reason for divulgation is the possibility suggested here that the new mechanisms and natural processes, if proven true, could contribute to the development of current technologies, sciences, especially medicine, as well as the behaviors and wealth for individual and social. Although this is not a work with scientific pretensions, the models are scientifically falsifiable or testable since there are resources to do so.”
So, there is no churches and never will because there are no gods, no magics and no supernatural forces in Matrix/DNA worldview. But, I will resist to answering and playing these jokes because the topic here is brain and memories, and if the boss, PZ Mayers, discovers what we are doing in his blog, going far away off the topic, he will be furious and will delete these comments.
Don’t go there tonight because it is a fake god. Instead you must go with me to the church of my beloved God, the Almighty PinkUnicorn. Talking about him, he has called me by phone today and said he is watching this debate and he loves Saad. He promised that will give to you pink popcorn in the Heaven forever, for all eternity. Think pink, the Universe is pink, the truth is Pink…
At last! You’ve said something that’s both coherent and undoubtedly true! Why not quit while you’re ahead?
Seriously, the word salad and complete non-comprehension of science is strong with this one.
Right. You got it right. Your world view is gibberish. You don’t know how to do enquiry. All you can do is repeat your gibberish ad nauseum, which is not a argument. It is ego run amok.
You want folks to listen? Stop being a crank.
You are a crank/loon if……
You know you are the brightest one out there, but nobody appreciates your genius
If the idea you promote doesn’t have any real third party evidence
If you take criticism as personal insults instead of criticism of the idea
If asked what it would take to show your idea is wrong, you can’t/won’t supply an answer that can be falsified
You promote your idea by infesting and threadjacking other peoples blogs, and not by the normal scientific methods of publishing in scientific journals and talking about your ideas at professional meetings
You are a scientist if….
You publish in the peer reviewed literature first, and often
You only try for the public after you begin to achieve a consensus you are right
You avoid blogs and forums unless specifically asked to post or only pass through with ten or less posts to clarify a discussion
You respond to scientific refutation by either citing the literature, or by doing and publishing original research to solve the question
You always acknowledge you could be wrong, and are upfront about what would refute your ideas
So, until your work is published in the peer reviewed scientific literature, you have nothing but crank gibberish. If your only support comes from you, crank gibberish. You must take it outside of your self to find support for your idea in the peer reviewed scientific literature. Which you can’t do, as it doesn’t support your gibberish.
“PZ Mayers”
That’s a new one.
You’re gonna break FTB at this rate.
I don’t believe. I conclude, based upon EVIDENCE. Your opinion isn’t and never will be that evidence to change that conclusion, when you speak gibberish.
Nope, I don’t say that, nor does science. Science approaches the truth, but will never attain complete knowledge.
Except your gibberish is not a world view. It is bullshit.
A couple of quick questions, louismorelli:
Does the Earth pass through four simultaneous days in the course of 24 hours?
Are we are taught to be stupid by evil educators?
I’m really hoping that English isn’t their first language, because honestly, that’s the most charitable interpretation that I can make of their extremely incomprehensible sentences.
Unfortunately I suspect it is. Now expecting that science can or will solve all humanities problems would be foolish. But I don’t know any scientists that do that. It’s a tool for finding out about the universe, nothing more, nothing less. Unfortunately it runs into humanity which, to be honest, has a real talent for taking knowledge and making a mess of things with it.
<blockquoteNerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
Right. You got it right. Your world view is gibberish. You don’t know how to do enquiry.
My method of enquiry Nature has worked very well and I am seeing yours is wrong. Everytime I see a new natural phenomena or natural event my first question is: How Nature did it? This is an effect, which is its cause? Ok, I found its cause, now, which was the cause of this cause… and so on till arriving to the beginning of this Universe as I think it. Yours enquire about everything biological here stops at biogenese, because you have broken The Universal Natural History into two separated blocks without the links between then. My biological evolutionary history is always explained by something contained in my model of cosmological evolution. I challenge you pointing out any visible natural phenomena here and now… and I will describe its history of 13,7 billion years old. Of course: for explaining this history when entering the ages before life’s origins, I will enquire the Matrix/DNA formula as you, everytime that need to explain any living being, need bring on and enquire its DNA formula. Go to the jungle for discovering that “you”need enquire nature and not only reading books or listen to teachers like creationists lost the ability to enquire because their sacred book explains everything. Make yours own world, my friend, because no human being knows the truth and they makes wrongs interpretations of natural facts.
What is the air speed velocity of a fully laden swallow?
Nerd, you broke it, you fix it.
Qual é a velocidade da velocidade de ar de uma andorinha com a carga máxima?
chigau @240
Is that an African or a European swallow?
Nope, you haven’t and can’t convince me you are right. That requires going outside of your self and having other people verify what you say, which is called EVIDENCE. You have nobody but yourself, and your self-delusions, and that isn’t evidence. Gibberish is your world view.
Define the cause and solution for the Staebler-Wronski effect.
Al Dente
How do you know so much about swallows?
<Shamelessly stolen from the “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” trivia section of IMDB>
Finding out about the Universe was the goal of the founding fathers at the Illuminism, due their dissatisfaction with religions, etc. But what they began – the human scientific enterprise – was appropriated by human predators and took a wrong way with nowadays bad effects, the worst one is the indoctrination of children in the schools prejudicing human mental evolution. Two or three evidences ( cosmic background radiation, galactic expansions, light spectrums…) in a Universe that requires millions of evidences, were used for pointing out a theoretical beginning – the Big Bang – and a private interpretation of this beginning, and it is being inserted as Truth, as scientific proved fact, into the mind of ingenuous children like any other religion did it. If you does not know what is happened with yous children in schools, look to the texts of scholar curriculums. The first lessons began… “so, there is a theory called Big Bang, or a theory called abiogenesis, a theory called darwinian evolution”… but, after few lessons ahead, the texts forgot that told “theory”and began talking… “so, from the Big Bang the galaxies were formed in this way…”, or “from that primordial soup in oceans emerged the mechanisms of variation, natural selection and inheritance that has transformed amoebas till human beings…”. Science is one thing, is the work in labs or in the field, it is not macro-theories. What is the difference with ” in the beginning God created the light, then, we have the day and the night…” You know that they are a liars. And you know the enormous prejudice it caused to human kind. If you loves Science and the human being at same time, you can not permit that predators among humans uses yours production against 7 billion human beings. That’s what I am trying to do.
louismorelli @248
I was wondering when the Illuminati would appear.
Citation mother fucking needed. LM, trying you shutting the fuck up, and linking to third party evidence. Try it for one post even, just two or three links.
And human mental evolution is more gibberish. You can’t show it isn’t occurring without your belief in your imaginary matrix.
Then, we need a judge here watching us applying our method. It is not mine or yours opinion that will solve this debate. Let’s go taking real visible proven natural facts known by everybody. We can beginning with the tail of crocodiles, or the branches of trees, or the noses of humans, or anything else. You must explain it by a unique logis line of rationalization, telling its evolutionary history till the Big Bang. Which one do you will choose?
So louismorelli has proven that they don’t know the definition for the scientific theory. Big surprise. Not. Didn’t answer my question. Not at all surprised.
Pam wnaeth y cyw iâr groesi’r ffordd?
Fact: generally a close agreement by competent observers who make a series of observations about the same phenomenon. (Can change when new methods of observing become available).
Hypothesis: An educated guess that is only presumed to be factual until supported by experiment.
Principle or scientific law: A hypothesis that has been tested over and over again without being contradicted.
Scientific theory: a synthesis of a large body of information that encompasses well-tested and verified hypothesis about certain aspects of the natural world.
(Conceptual Physics Fundamentals, Hewitt, P. 2008)
If you are not using these definitions, then you are not using proper scientific terminology and we can safely ignore you as a crank and/or pseudoscientist.
反対側に取得する。
Those facts were determined by Science with Evidence. You lost before you ever started. There is no debate. There is reality, and then there is your continuing gibberish, where you can’t shut the fuck up like an intelligent person would do.
Science, as your is gibberish/bullshit/mental wanking.
What’s happening here?! Are you furious? Relax, man… be educated… Are you blind? I cited one source as evidence: the texts of scholars curriculum. I read some of them, Did you? The other evidence I will cite now: go in front a school and asks the students about their world view. They will began with ” In the beginning there was a microscopic atom that exploded… ” like when you go in front of a church and ask to them, the answer will be “In the beginning there was God…”can’t you grasp the stupidity of this two answers?” That both lost the control of pure natural rationalization? What will do the modern students? The same lame and totally wrong social system and stupid relationship with Nature that the ancient people did due the churches indoctrination. They will increase the nowadays 7 billion humans as slaves in misery to 20 billions…
I can’t show that mental evolution isn’t occurring? I didn’t say that. I said it is occurring on the wrong and suicide, mortal way. Humanity is going towards the Huxleyan “Admirable New World” under the government of the Orwellian “Big Queen”, like insects societies ( bees, ants, etc.) went before. And do you know why? Because here is occurring a process of genetic reproduction of our creator. He/it is a closed system surrounding us, modelling our biosphere, encrypted inside every nucleotide of our DNA. Go to Matrix/DNA’s figure of the face of this creator and you will understand it.
By the way, another way for showing that human mental evolution is in a wrong way is enough to remember two known facts: the number of humans in misery as slaves is growing and we are destroying our habitat. If you considers these as mental evolution… enjoy it yourself, not me.
This is total nonsense. Those facts were determined by Nature… once time more… Nature… Real Natural World… and not by any human “science” or any metaphysical creation like yours “materialism”. And does use the name “Science” here, it has nothing to see with yours ideology.
Is this yours strategy? When arriving to the moment for bringing on real facts over the table for the judges watching, you deslize going out of scene? This is cowardly. What real natural phenomena do you will choose. I am waiting. Pr I will choose one. What about the natural phenomena most evident to humans, that one that is in front of our eyes all time: the human hands?
I will begin my defense with an argument. I will put over the table a big picture with the Matrix/DNA genetic code or formula. Now, put yours left hand over the formula. The palm most be upon F1, so the minor finger at left will be F2, till the thumb as F7. Since that the formula describes a system formed by a body rolling under the force of a life’s cycle ( like you can see here at my avatar) the fatal conclusion is that the shapes ans sequence of yours fingers tell the evolutionary history of yours own body: look to the minor finger and look to the shape of a baby; look to the function and size of the next finger and look to a child; till looking to the last finger, the dump and make comparisons with yours body last shape, a senior curved by life.
Now I will bring on the table a figure with a lateral base-pair of nucleotide. You can ask the judge for stopping me, because nucleotides have nothing to see with human hands. I will answer that the relation is due “human hands are made by genes of the DNA”. And I will put my two hands opened, face to face, side by side, in the way that the palm of left hand will be over the left sugar in the DNA’s strand, and the palm of the right will be the sugar at the right strand. Now I will show that each one of the eight minors fingers will be exactly upon the eight nitrogenous bases. And the two thumbs will be exactly over the two lateral DNA’s strands.
After doing this demonstration I will begin to tell the evolutionary history of human hands till arriving at the first cellular cylias. But I will not stop here. I will make the evolutionary digression passing on traces of magnetic field of ous stellar system showing the source of cylliar cells. Then I will go to the state of the Universe when the atoms nuclei was forming and will bring on the table the brilliant explanation of the Nobel prize Hideki Yukawa about the nuclear glue between protons and neutrons for showing the primitive traces of those magnetic “scyllias” at astronomical level. Finally I will arrive one minute after the Big Bang showing how two quantum vortex are joining to shape the first quarks and leptons and where is there the primitive force that developed in modern human hands.
Be free now for telling us the origins and development of the human hand since the Universe’s origins by yours “scientific world view”… I am waiting…
louismorelli,
It appears to me, that you totally misunderstood Nerd, when talking of Science vs. Nature. Maybe your misunderstanding was Nerd choosing his words un-carefully.
Let me rephrase that bolded phrase: “Those facts were identified by Science”. Meaning Science was the tool used to identify (synonym = determine) the facts under discussion. I am sure that is what Nerd intended, I’ve read Nerd’s comments frequently enough to be sure I am presenting his thoughts correctly [did I, Nerd?] Your point, “Those facts were determined by Nature” is just a different use of the word “determine”, than Nerd used. This point of: Nature being the CAUSE of a fact that Science is used to discover; you are both saying, simply using different phraseology.
Yep. Sorry, busy morning.
A product of evolution, and hox genes during development. I could dig up some citations, like this one. But then, I, unlike you, understand third party evidence.
Whereas all you have is your imaginary matrix, an equivalent to a deity, which magically does things, and you can’t cite the mechanism. You can’t prove the existence of your matrix. It only exists in your delusional mind, and comes out a gibberish.
Until you shut the fuck up, and start showing evidence from legitimate sources outside of yourself, you are a gibberish speaking crank/loon.
The crank here seems to be you due contradicting yourself. You said:
1)”Fact: generally a close agreement by competent observers who make a series of observations about the same phenomenon. (Can change when new methods of observing become available).
And:
2) Scientific theory: a synthesis of a large body of information that encompasses well-tested and verified hypothesis about certain aspects of the natural world.
Who saw a stellar formation that take billions of years and arrived to a close agreement? Which observers have seen the Big Bang and arrived to a close argument? Who reached such extension and time of the natural world were happened the Big Bang for proving that kind of big bangs really happens in the natural world? Who saw the amino acids got by Urey making the first proteins and first strands of the RNA-world and arrived to an agreement? Or what observer saw consciousness arising from the monkeys brain and everybody were satisfied?
Fact is not scientific theory, because a scientific theory that had predicted a fact and the fact was proved by all observers, is not anymore a scientific theory. There is no scientific theory about a fact and the fact itself at same time. Or one, or the other. So, go to the scholar text books and make the correction of every liar there, please. Or an issue, in those texts books, is a theory, or it is a fact. Those texts are saying that they are both, at same time.
Do you know something? It is not that the theory is wrong, and we are not seeing that it really can be good describing the fact. The problem is about the interpretation of the information that emerges from the theory, which is being used for composing the modern world view and inserted into the children brains. If you take cosmic radiation, galactic expansion, and lots of evidences, but mixing all them, and tracing new connections among them, you will get a total different interpretation with a total different world view, hence, a different human moral code.
I saw the first moment of the body of a human being coming to its origins in an event that I called “big bang”. It was the explosion of the spermatozoon membrane at the center of an ovule. I saw the next steps, forming the morula, the blastulae, and remembered the next steps of universes origins, getting the shape of mass nebulae, galaxies, etc. Everything the same scene. So, i went quickly to home and mixed all evidences that are the basis of Big Bang theory and I saw the event as an living and biological event. Totally different than the one described by Physics and Math.
Than, I am not an observer that arrived to a close agreement about those still theoretical facts. Are you saying that me, and lots of people that agree with me, are not competent observers? I am showing a real natural proved fact as parameter for foundation about my interpretation of the Big Bang. And no one observer that wrote the text schollar books brought any known fact here and now as foundation of there interpretation. Still are you saying that i am not a competent observer? If so, this is no more rationalization, something very serious and wrong is occurring inside the universities.
Yep, and you haven’t proven anybody argees with you, especially competent scientist. Your ego and mental wanking outran your ability to do anything constructive. All you have is gibberish.
louis, why are you unable to supply links to real evidence? If you can’t do that, the only rational conclusion is that you know you are a liar and bullshitter. So, as a proper skeptic, anything you say will be dismissed unless you present third party evidence. Your word is worthless gibberish.
What do you mean by “third party evidence”?
textual content closely approximates that produced in the site link provided me by chigau in #140;
textual style is rigidly invariant over time;
learned blockquote (see analysis by chigau #181), though imperfectly, i.e. formatting improves over time;
responses do not address the issues set forth in the stimuli;
superior self image;
evidenced condescension to inferior beings;
conclusion: rampant AI.
Louismorelli:
I think there is a form of language “obstruction” going on.
Correct, a fact is NOT a theory, but, listen, Facts are a very important part of a theory. Theories predict events that will occur given a specific set of preconditions. Experiments configure that set of preconditions and measure the effect, THEN compare the results to the prediction. All small deviations between the tow can be racked up to “noise”.
.
Sorry, but that blockquote up there indicates to me that you are using the layman’s definition of “theory”; which is pretty much: Wild A$$ Guess (aka: WAG). That is not how “theory” is used on this site. The Scientists’ definition of “theory” is much more formal than “WAG”, a set of equations that can be used to make predictions of various events. If results of the experiment are significantly/systematically different than the prediction, then the theory needs to be reformulated.
.
And final quibble. Facts do NOT prove a theory is absolutely TRUE. Facts can only SUPPORT a theory, by NOT disproving the theory.
No, no, no. You’ve got it all wrong. It’s not hands, it’s dogs. See,you place two dogs, so that their spines are aligned with the ribose backbones and the legs are pointing inwards, forming two pairs of two legs; front legs of the leftmost dog, meeting the hind legs of the rightmost dog, and vice versa; with their heads pointing in the opposite directions.
Not only does this illustrate the anti-parallel nature of the DNA strands, but also shows how the same DNA base pair can exist in two confirmations (front-back and back-front, equivalent of A-T and T-A). The two legs of each dog meeting show the two hydrogen bonds found in purine nucleotides. This is a key fact, since it shows how the purine nucleotides originate from the dog star, Sirius, while the pyrimidine nucleotides come from Sagittarius (which has six limbs; two sets of three).
This origin from disparate sources explain the volatile nature of human beings, our propensity for violence and our early start as hunting societies (both dogs and the bow-wielding centaur being closely associated with hunting and violence in general). Traces of this connection can be found all the way back in nature; predator relationships far predating the occurrence of humans.
The answer is therefore simple; we must incorporate a third base pair, which can balance out these dangerous influences. This third base pair can be found in the fourth-dimensional DNA strands, implanted by Jesus, but not yet activated. Only now, with the increasing cosmic vibrations coming from our penetration of the crystal sphere by the voyager probe, can these extra base pairs be fully incorporated by conscious decision on part of the individual.
Awaken your sleeping Christ DNA! Send now for a brochure to tell you how. All major credit cards accepted.
louismorelli @258:
Yukawa was brilliant, but 1934 was a long time ago. His model is now understood to be not fundamental, and the nuclear forces are just residual strong interactions between the constituents of different nucleons. What the hell are “scyllias”?
And what follows that sentence makes absolutely no sense at all.
vereverum #265
You may be onto something.
uh oh
first Saad, now LykeX
Are the bolded words different spellings of the same word? If so, what is the correct spelling? And more importantly, what is the meaning?
If not, what does each word even mean?
(Is it supposed to be “cilia”?)
(Or is it suppose to be “Scylla”, as in “and Charybdis”? Is this theory, which is his, approaching a dangerous rock near a whirlpool? And how do the cilia fit in? Something rocky-whirly-hairy? A silly Scylla with cilia?)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=a5_QV97eYqM
You’re shaking my confidence.
It’s not the speed of the swallow that counts, it’s the speed of the projectile vomit that follows.
louismorelli wwwwOOOOOOOrrrrddds!
Please cite these textbooks, because they don’t match any scientific texts I know of. I listed the definitions that science uses. Facts are what we observe. Hypotheses are guesses of how these observations came to be. Scientific theories are the result of the verification of hypotheses via testing. Much testing. Over a long while.
You do not have a theory. You have a hypothesis. Or possibly a lot of hypotheses, in all the word salad it is hard to tell. And you have not given any predictions that your hypotheses mean, nor any proof that they have been verified. Nor any indication that they are falsifiable (is there any way that your hypothesis could be proved wrong? If there is no way to test if it is right or wrong, then it is useless since there is no way to test for its wrongness). In fact what it appears to be is that you are suffering from apophenia, where you are seeing patterns that don’t actually exist.
You also seem to be arguing against assertions that people are not making. In what country are they teaching that there was an atom at the centre of the big bang? (there wasn’t).
You ask how we know about things that happened so long ago? We look. Because light travels at a limited speed then every light year further away we look from Earth we are looking a year further into the past. By looking far enough away we can measure what was happening then. We don’t just look in the range of frequencies that bound the visible light, we measure all throughout the electromagnetic spectrum, which as someone has already pointed out is not ‘7 frequencies’ but a continuum. For convenience we define certain ranges of frequencies under a particular title, radio, microwave, IR, visible, UV, X-ray, Gamma ray, but those are just labels for a whole heap of frequencies. (Similar to the way we describe various shades of red as ‘red’) And because different frequencies can interact differently with matter and are generated in different amounts and in various ways by different interstellar objects, we can gain information from that. Some of it in relatively simple ways. Some of it requires more complexity, and a fair bit of math. And because true scientists know that the model is not the reality, but a simplified form of it that allows us to test for various things without all the extraneous variables. We then take the data from the different models and tests and synthesise all of it into scientific theories which help us describe the world as it is.
We use the word consilience to describe how we form theories from many many sources of data and different ways of looking at it. Each experiment or observation or tested hypothesis independently points towards the theory. Each making it stronger. It’s not the consensus of people, but the consensus of the data, of the evidence, of the universe.
The jungle is no more special than the ocean, or the desert, or the bush, or the plains. It’s all full of complex life. Life that is formed from atoms. And those atoms were largely formed at the centre of exploding stars billions of years ago. And those stars were formed from hydrogen (and possibly bits from previous exploding stars) that was a product of the big bang. And that this life formed from all of this is great, but there isn’t any inevitability about it. There’s no purpose. We’re a lucky accident. And we have limited lifespans. And I’m not wasting any more of my lifespan on trying to explain science to someone who refuses to learn. I strongly suggest louismorelli that you find something more productive and reality based to do with your time.
Com’on Nerd, are you joking here? Is this yours “third part evidence”? Merely a reductionist description about what do some elements like Ddp, morphogen, proteins when the wing of fruit fly is forming? This is a great scientific job and thanks by the link because was reading papers like that all my life that the Matrix/DNA Theory was built. Of course you are seeing how the dancers moves, something about the orchestra ( signaling) but where is the “maestro”, the “compositor”? Or do you think that a bunch of atoms like molecules is seeing thousands of miles around them ( in that scale at microscopical level) for to control where to send a cell, or when is time for putting a gene on or off, etc?
I told you were is the “maestro”and who he is. I showed to you not only, but two times that a final product of biological evolution ( human hands) is written in a formula that is coming from the stars because it came from the beginnings of this Universe. The formula for building galaxies was nannotechnologized ( glup… is right this word?) and inserted into a lateral pair of nucleotides which has the exact shape of a lateral pair of human hands. I showed that Nature applies the mechanism of life’s cycle every time that is necessary a new system or a new accessory for composing it as system. You never had noticed that the shapes, sizes, and functions of yours fingers have the same meaning of yours total body during yours lifetime. I showed as evidence, nucleotides, DNA, life’s cycles, etc. These are my evidences: real and proved natural facts known by everybody, What else do you want? Are there evidences worth than the world you are seeing and touching?!
When a new shape of the universal system, like organisms in shape of biological systems, needs any new acessory for surviving, Nature give it, but nature have only one tool for doing it. It is a tool that can do all possibles and imaginables systems and acessories in this world, a simple formula. Then, the organism, the environment and the substances in that place, plus the type of work/function that the organism will need, will drive what will be doing with the formula. If the entire and complete formula will be the best solution, it will applied in full ( like happened with human hands, human face with eyes, nose, mouth which is another exactly copy of that formula), no matter how much time it will take, like here the evolution took millions or billions years, begining with cyliasin cells, passing thought reptiles, tigers, monkeys and arriving to the best shape that do the job in the best performance. If the formula is too much for the accessory that the organism need, lots of resources will be inhibited, others will be expressed several times, etc., because plasticity is the normal in this formula. Human hands were built by a formula called DNA which is merely the biological shape of a formula that is coming from the beginning of this Universe.
I am wating yours version, yours mention about were was the forces and elements at the whole History of 13,7 billions years and by evolution that finally arrived to this natural phenomena that you call “hands”. You brought a good paper telling 0,00000000000001% of this History, I am waiting what is missing. Or do you want another phenomena? Like, why and how Nature built the pump that you call “heart”?
This is getting sylliar and cylliar.
Maybe we need a sylli Cylon named Celia to figure this out.
Ariaflame, BSc, BF, PhD
#louismorelli
They are not scientific texts they are the books that teachers and students bought or earned from the government. Go to any high school and read those books carefully”
Com’on do you really think that yours post told something that I didn’t know? Several years I am following the data published by the space agencies and calculating what means each image or new discovered radiation and what was the interpretation of those astronomers? How could one doing a new theory about light waves and suggesting things that never were perceived before, if one does not know lots about what Science knows, which is my source of data?
For yours understanding:
Cosmological evolution is a theory that is following the same method of research we are doing with biological evolution. We are, for instance, searching for bone-fossils and composing the whole evolutionary biological history. In the sky we are getting everyday image and data of new bodies, which are our fossils for composing our theory. But it is missing lots more fossil from the space than we have here at Earth surface. The problem ( my problem) is that my methods of investigation for composing a theory were different from those used by those that made the Nebular Theory inside the Standard Theory and I got a different cosmological model. Now we are fighting for the fossils, they are the judge about what model is right. and not humans opinions and preferences. It happens that everyday I am watching the experts telling things like: “Oh, these image or data does not fit in the theory, we need changing it, while all those data are fitting very well into the model of matrix/DNA Theory. At my website there are lots of articles telling it. of course I don’t believe that matrix/DNA model is the right one, never could be. Astronomy is not my goal, I entered in this field because the investigation searching a system that drove the entire process of biogenesis pointed out that the system was in the sky, so, I lift my head to observe the sky and went running to libraries and all scientific books with informations about Astronomy. matrix/DNA cosmological model is not right, but it is the one that had predicted all fossils that we got from the space till now,,,, them, as you said to me ” I strongly suggest louismorelli that you find something more productive and reality based to do with your time.”, I will suggest to you: “if you are serious with yours scientific activity and want works with reality, go to matrix/DNA model because the model you are using is far away off the beam…
louismorelli@ 277
The human face is manifestly not the best solution. The best solution would not involve organisms being able to suffocate because food that was meant to go down the oesophagous went down the trachea instead.
(Seriously, evolution, one set of holes for air, one set of holes for food. It’s not that complicated!)
From my textbook that I’m using:
“Pseudoscience. The hallmark of a pseudoscience is that it lacks the key ingredients of evidence and having a test for wrongness. In the realm of pseudoscience, skepticism and tests for possible wrongness are down-played or flatly ignored.” (Conceptual Physics Fundamentals, Hewitt, 2008)
Since you are unprepared to give us any evidence, or test for wrongness of your hypothesis, I will firmly place your gibberish into the category ‘pseudoscience’. As a scientific hypothesis I predict that you will not be able to provide these things for your hypothesis. I await evidence confirming this, and do not expect to have to wait long. As a corollary I predict that you will attempt to either down-play this, or just ignore it.
PZ he’s getting boring now.
Sorry, busy times and although I am an American Citizen, English is not native language. It should be cilia, or flagella. But here is a good opportunity for you to learn how you can develop yours own world view, developing thesis or a good theory, and be creative, making a difference.
Do you want to know what the real natural object named by humans as cilia or flagella, really means? I did myself this question at my infant times: “Where Nature got this idea for developing cilias and all “posterior” evolutionary shapes, like wings, arms, legs, tails, etc… when its creation – opened systems as organisms – was asking autonomous self-movement? Which were the elements and forces existing before Nature developing life that Nature could using as mechanisms for creating feature? Because must have here the informations for doing it, since that Nature is not magics and can not create information from nothing, although the guru of modern universities, Lawrence Krauss, believe that nothing is an ex-maxine magician.
I look by scientific literature and did not find anything about. I look for my founder fathers, the Greek naturalists philosophers, and they also forgot to pay attention in this detail. Ok, if nobody did, I will try to do it…
It seems that flagella emerged at the first cells. If so, the information for developing cilia was already inside the cell or in the biofil of those first cells. Looking inside the cell, I noticed that the unique cellular superior-element moving around were the RNA’s. They go as RNA-m, RNA-t, etc., from ribosomes to DNA back to mitochondrias and so on… Sp, the mechanism were already existing inside a cell system. Next step? Of course, looking for the mother of the first cell, the information must be there. Who is the mother, the generator of the first cell system? Of course, this planet or the system it belongs to. But in planet alone I didn’t find something with autonomous self-movement. There are the wind, the oceans water moving, tectonic plates moving, but all them being moved by external forces. So, the mysterious mechanism must be beyond Earth, maybe at this solar system. Looking at it we see planets moving, the whole system moving around the galaxy, the invisibles magnetic fields, etc., but, again, all of them, moving due external forces. Wait! Here is something escaping from the rules! Comets! Meteorites. If you take the solar system in a photo getting a static ( paralyzed) system like a photo of a static cell system, you see the star as the nucleus, planets as organelles, and comets as… the moving RNA’s. My grand grand mother always was saying: “Such little fish, must be the big fish”. Or “if you know the son, you can have a good idea about the shape and character of the father”. And I was sure that the parents of the first cell systems were astronomicals systems. Everything else must be metaphysics. Comets obeys also external forces for moving, but, its movements are less controlled than the others bodies movements. It means that a primitive principle of freedom was emerging here. So, the mechanis used by Nature for developing flagellas could be hidden in the movement of comets. How is exactly these movements? What forces and elements are acting here?
The Official Academic Astronomy Department have a cosmological model that does not explain life here, as if our surrounding astronomical system have no all forces and elements that had evolved into life’s properties. They have broken the Universal Evolutionary History into two separated blocks without any evolutionary links between them: Cosmological Evolution and Biological Evolution. Their conclusion extracted from this model is rational: the Cosmos is not the father of life, so, life is product of chance… for not saying… magics. I could not accept this world view since my enfant times at High School. And I could not accept the other alternative around the school: that life was created by an invisible supernatural magician. So, my concentration was directly into the Cosmos, it is my grand grand grand father and mother.
Then I was obligated to develop my own cosmological model with my poor resources. I had the daughter at hands – the picture of the first real and complete living being, a cell system. I knew its internal anatomy, Its functioning. And I had the mechanisms of evolution given by that great hero, Mr. Darwin. I knew that almost all sciences were triggered by those with my own profession, the Greek naturalist philosophers, and their first method was “comparative anatomy”. And we have lots of information from the sky got by our scientific method. So, first thing to do is cleaning what is real facts separating them from humans interpretations, theories, because these interpretations were saying that the Cosmos is not my grand grand father/mother. Finally I got a new cosmological model that was the mirror of the cell system. Or another words: like cells are the building blocks of a human body, I got a theoretical model of the building blocks of the Cosmos as a body.
And here in this model, a complex game of magnetic spiral forces makes comets rolling inside chanels and producing those comet’s tails which sometimes makes that the comets does not obey the rules of the galaxy. They are begining to require freedom. The tail is registered at the level of magnetic field dimensions like any new mutation is registered into DNA.When the whole astronomical building block system was nannotechnologized by entropy and inserted inside a lateral pair of nucleotides, this registered information came there. And them, the organisms reinforced the requirement of comets for more freedom and what was a kind of hidden template was slowly but strongly being expressed at genetic level.
Further I was looking before the formation of astronomical systems were was sleeping the principles of this mechanisms. It must be there, inside the atoms. Again, the movement of electrons and other particles were most due external forces, but… there was an element mimicking the movement of comets and leaving a tail as we can see at CERN: the particle pion that links protons to neutrons. This mechanism was brilliant described by the great Nobel prize and Physicist called Hideki Yukawa. And from the lectures of his work the search for the original natural information for cilia and human hands were there, at quantum vortexes at the moment of the Big Bang. I am satisfied because I never try an step beyond the Universe;s last frontier. if we do so, we falls into metaphysics, our brain becomes confused and we prejudices all rationalization that really keeps fidel to the rationalization of Mother Nature.
Owlmirror, if you are a student, you must be crazy hunting all natural known proved facts, but, be cautious about our theoretical models. We are the old generation that made lots of mistakes and knew less than you can know. Like Matrix/DNA models, all them are not complete and must have lots of mistakes. But, you must be aware of something else: a simple discovery that including a simple formula from the cell to the Cosmos reveals a new world never imagined before, which had predicted lots of things that the most powerful models have not. it means that all jobs are here for be done. Do not believe in this people saying that we discovered everything, that we know what was the beginning of this world , etc. It is impossible for the little human brain with its poor sensors. R$emember that String theory, as matrix/DNA Theory, are suggesting that have at least eleven dimensions acting and influencing our lives just know, and we does not know half of them, but you can. You have lots of opportunity for be creative and making the difference. Make to yourself those questions again and again: “Where Nature got the idea for doing this and that?! The Universe is not a magician, it can not create information from nothing, so, the information for, must be here since the first moment. Where and how was it? ” Good look…
Even that you have a hidden oracle at your home, a magic mirror where appears a owl telling you all secrets of the world…
We won’t learn it from a mental wanker who has no solid evidence to offer. Not one link your fuckwittery. That which is asserted without evidence will be dismissed without evidence. Your idea is dismissed as crank/loonism.
See, I predicted he’d ignore my stuff and be unable to answer it, and lo! My hypothesis is supported by evidence!
Louis Morelli, the problem you have is that your idea (a fallacious idea), and your idea of evidence to back it up, is all under your control. Any skeptic will apply utter skepticism to your claims and alleged evidence, by requiring you to get outside of yourself into the realm of third party evidence, preferably from the peer reviewed scientific literature when making factual claims about science.
Now, you could help your cause if you publish outside of your website, and if you have something to say about how the cosmological constants came to be, publish it in a respected cosmological journal. You don’t do that, your claims are dismissed.
Same for biology, chemistry, and all other claims you make. Show us from third party sources, legitimate sources outside of yourself. For example, if your cosmological claims paper isn’t rejected outright as gibberish, you may be able to have scientists in the field consider your ideas.
But your paper will be rejected as gibberish, no matter what the field.
Why is anyone still bothering with this numpty? He has nothing worthwhile to say, but he seems harmless enough. Of course if you’re still finding it amusing, carry on.
It’s certainly a classic case of Dunning-Kruger in full gish gibberish gallop. With a fair bit of apophedia thrown in.
But I must admit after a while the repetitiveness within the word salad gets boring.
It is impossible to read that drivel. Brava to anyone who does.
I have a micro-SD card, with files on it. The only way to see that those files are there is to insert it into a proper socket, and access it with the right flavour of computer. Then, to access the information in the files, I need the right program and the right codecs, and a screen to view, or whatever each of the files are useful for. But you could grind up that chip, sift through it like breadcrumbs, and never find a damn thing.
The Matrix DNA movement is no longer serving the true word of our Light Wave Lord.
We must have a
schismsplice. Join me, brothers and sisters, in embarking on the true path to salvation: Matrix RNA.What is your native language? What other languages, if any, do you know?
Owlmirror
louismorelli’s website is in English and Portuguese.
<blockquote Snoof
louismorelli@ 277
If the entire and complete formula will be the best solution, it will applied in full ( like happened with human hands, human face with eyes, nose, mouth which is another exactly copy of that formula), no matter how much time it will take
You are right but why human face is not the best solution? 1) It is mimicking the anatomy of an ancestor thousands times less evolved than a bacteria, because this ancestor generated out biosphere and us inside it, so the his/its genetic expression by our DNA is still very strong; 2) The reproduction of this ancestor is diversified at our level in all sub-systems of ours bodies, like our face with its parts ( eyes, mouth, etc.). The reproduction process had suffered several mutations due we, as biological systems, have a different environment and materials in relation to formation of that astronomical system; 3) the human face, as humans themselves are not the last biological evolutionary product that is possible to get with all informations in the Matrix/DNA natural formula. It is possible that humans will transcend so we does not know what will come next…
The case where food can go down in the wrong way is a sample how nature works from cosmological to biological evolution. At our last astronomical ancestor, the body doing the function for mouth was merely a spiral cone, as you can see F1 in Matrix/Formula or here http://theuniversalmatrix.com/en-us/matrix.html ( the first blue picture).
So its was the most simple mouth, precursor of the all biological systems’ mouths. There is in the cone one “door” (the bottom of the cone) for entering several things ( the star’s dust, the packets of increasing energy, all informations about the whole system, etc.) and there was no “air” due respiration at that ancestor was very different from biological respiration. And only one door for leaving ( the top of the cone). When Nature gave the evolutionary jump towards biological organization of matter, the new biological systems were opened system ( our ancestor was a closed system, that’s where we inherited the selfish gene from,,,) and complexity increased, then, several tentatives, mutations, adaptations occurred and must still occurring. This is the reason of several things bad designed in human bodies…
Couldn’t you understanding/accepting this new version of evolution? Why? What’s the real fact against it? I will appreciate to know.
Because it is gibberish, meaningless drivel without one science citation to back it up. You have nothing to offer science, until you publish in peer reviewed scientific journals.
You know who tries to change science from web sites? CRANKS AND LOONS!
Perhaps louismorelli has translated the Voynich manuscript.
You have no pointed out any fact about which you want evidences and suggestions for scientific experiments testing it. You keep repeating yours ideological mantras that have nothing to see with real facts, here and now. I will copy below yours post here showing how vague is yours words, foing far away form facts as real natural phenomena, which is what interests here:
What’s is this words contributing to this discussion? No mention to any real facts, only yours theoretical and ideology? As I said before, and as it is write in “Introduction to my website”, this new world view has no scientific pretensions in the way humans understanding and is practicing sciences at this ages: only developing researches using the reductionist method and doing nothing about the other required half of a whole scientific enterprise, which is the systemic method. So, learn this: there is pseudoscience when there is science – as you understand it – involved in the issue. If there is no such kind of science, there is no its opposite, which should be fake science, or as you call it: pseudoscience.
No, Chigau… I have made the effort of translating the Nature’s manuscript about the creation of our biosphere and for doing so, I spent seven years in the heart of Amazon jungle because I thought that the virgin territory, never touched and changed by humans, still have there the witness that watched this creation. And trying to listening careful what that salvage primitive Nature have to say to us, I translated my understanding of nature’s description about its creator… this planet and the surrounding astronomical systems composed by olders ancestors like atoms systems that are still surrounding us. Maybe I got everything wrong, but it is not what is suggesting the followed 30 years testing these final results and seeing several predictions being confirmed. Still, all these evidences are not enough for clues that it is better world view than that from the Standard Theory. If you could help me continuing this job, would be very good but remember: this is a voluntary job in name of better days for our next generations, there are no personal rewards… What is the “Voynich manuscript”?! I will google it…
louismorelli
To say that the “Amazon jungle” is “never touched and changed by humans”
is a profoundly racist statement.
Does the brain store memory? Yes and no, the answer depends on the observer’s relative point of view. To explain let’s use an analogy: the body of a pregnant woman, stores information and memories that go directly into the body of the fetus she carries in? No, because this information will go with the embryo at birth; yes, because anyway, while the embryo is inside the mother’s body, this is a great deposit containing a smaller deposit. If a macro-observer looking at the mother’s body from the outside in, he would say “yes!”; if it is a micro-observer located within the fetus, looking from the inside out, will say “no!”. This is not merely an analogy, it is the waves of cosmological evolution. It is the universal process repeated every time that a new natural system emerges. So, in this new evolutionary jump, when Nature is producing a new natural system that we call “mind”, “consciousness”, etc., the brain represents the placenta/amnion, the skull is the egg, and the human mind or self-consciousness is still a fetus/embryo.
This utter gibberish is even more meaningless than the word-salad on those bottles of Dr. Brauner’s Pure Castile Soap. Just add “ALL ONE! ALL ONE!” here and there, and Dr. B. could sue you for copyright infringement.
Unfortunately, it’s nowhere near as cheerful as those God-Soap labels, so I won’t be bothering with it.
chigau: think “At Play in the Fields of the Lord.” That’s the vibe I’m getting from this guy.
Barring the effects of climate change, large parts of Antarctica (and possibly a couple of tiny, remote atolls here and there) have “never [been] touched and changed by humans”. Other than that, there ain’t no such place and hasn’t been for millenia.
Ah, only creationists use evidences. Nobody else does. Which explains your entire gibberish is a means to hide your imaginary deity as your mental matrix and make it control nature. It is a religious theory, full of gibberish and illogical fuckwittery. But then, that was exposed days ago, and you should have shut the fuck up when that happened.
You are afraid to publish in a scientific journal, like all creobots, as they know they aren’t scientific, but presuppositional.
Humans have been in the America’s for almost 30,000 years. The Amazon untouched by human hands? What are you smoking?
*cough*
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution:
The Scientific Case for Common Descent
As I see it, louismorelli’s use of English is so confused and peppered with misspellings and strange word choices that I doubt that his use of “evidences” is indicative of any sort of personal affiliation with (or even awareness of) the sort of devout Christian creationists who typically favor the use of that term.
As negative evidences, I note that louismorelli does not even mention the bible, jesus, or anything relating to religion. He may well be a kook, but he is a sui generis kook.
Owlmirror
Hardly. As I noted in my first response to him, this is only a mild variation on a pretty standard strain of New Age bullshit.
That’s all very well, but “New Age” (or “newage”, to rhyme with “sewage”), is a broad enough term that it covers many different possible ways of thinking about things without being doctrinal.
Just because he has weird ideas that bear some strange sense of deriving from “as above, so below” (as you noted) doesn’t mean that those ideas are not his own unique personal (re)inventions and variations on that concept.
As another example, consider this guy. The core idea — “randomness is God talking/how to get God to talk” — is very old. But his weird programmatic and software developmental take on that is completely personal and unique, and he would probably reject the comparison between what he is doing, and the historical precedent of shamans and priests tossing a bunch of sheep astragali, or reading entrails. or whatever.
I see Nerd has got there before me, but since I went to the trouble of finding a reference for louismorelli, I’ll post anyway. People have lived in and changed the heart of the Amazon for millennia. Denying their existence is a form of racism. Stop it.
I didn’t say the “Amazon jungle”. I said “the heart of Amazon jungle”, where I lived. It is called The Jamanxin Territory ( the middle of Tapajós River), but these indigenous (native people) lives 200 hundred kilometers away from there. There are no signals anywhere of any kind that humans walked through that place. But… Amazon is not our topic here, the mention is merely to remember that the salvage Nature suggests to us a different world view… of course.
The reason I came here is due my method of investigation and final results led me suggest a third alternative when Mr. Egnor uses the issue about brain and memory for advocating that must have a dimension of phenomena hidden to us where lays the soul and God, and Mr PZ Myers is advocating that human mind and consciousness are merely materialistic evolutionary product of human brains. There is at least a third alternative that makes sense.
As Einstein once time said: ‘One does not need to prove that his theory is right, it only have to explain how his theory makes sense”. Time will led us to discover something that will approve or debunk the theory. So, I need to convince you that this world view makes sense.
DNA is not a code. Never there was origins of life, neither origins of Universes. There is a an evolutionary link between Cosmological Evolution and Biological Evolution, which link drove the 3 billions years of evolution from non-organic matter to the first living being ( first complete cell system). There was no abiogenesis, but this 3 billion years occurred a process of astronomical embryogenesis at Earth’s surface with strong mutations. This Universe is an agglomerate of fossils ( or still living) from our ancestors species called galaxies, and we are like those bacterias living inside our body – we live inside these lost species. And in this Universe is occurring a process of genetic/computational reproduction of the ex-machine “NATURAL” system that fecundated this space at the event of the Big Bang. If here emerged consciousness it is due that “NATURAL” ex-machine system is also “conscious”. But the ex-machine creator does not know our existence here like any pregnant mother does not know what the genes working her embryo are doing. So, there are no communications between us and ours ex-machine parents. DNA is the biological shape that came under evolution and had the shapes of astronomical, atomic, electromagnetic, light wave and quantum-vortexes shapes till the ex-machine shape. DNA is how we human named the biological shape, but when you see it in all its shapes is better calling it as “The Matrix/DNA”. There is no such division as life and non-life because all life’s properties are present in reductive evolutionary states at astronomical, atomic system, and even, at a single light wave.
The link between Cosmic and Biological Evolution is LUCA – the Last Universal Common Ancestor – of all biological system and he/it lives in the sky in shape of building block of astronomical systems. Since that galaxies have millions informations less than the simplest bacteria, it is easy to put – with nanotechnology – a galaxy inside a lateral base-pair of nucleotides, the fundamental unit of information of DNA. This unit is a working complete system. So, life here is not product of chance neither creation neither panspermia. It is merely continuation of a long chain of causes and effects where the last top evolved system – the astronomical system had projected itself entirely into molecules called RNA/DNA.
So, Nature creates all systems applying a unique formula and we know the shape of this formula at its more highest level, a perfect complete closet system, the most perfect possible machine, and if we apply this formula we will solve all humans problem and will have the Universe at our hands.
The final moral code from this world view is: We, human beings, plus all councious creatures spreaded in this Universe, are “mentalized genes” working for to build the body of the ex-machine’s reproductive product. So, Every human being is a gene, a bit-information, necessary and non dispensable for making a health body which will be us. Every human being and any other councious creature is a message, unique, not transferable, with a mission to accomplish, If one unique gene does not do its work, we will born as handicapped. There is no best moral code than this one.
Every topic here is scientifically falsifiable. Now, if you think that this world view does not make sense, tell me…
It doesn’t. Please show me proof that ‘Nature’ is a conscious entity.
Also, do you mean to keep typing salvage, or did you mean savage, because those are two very different things. The first makes no sense. The second belies the idea of us being super speshul needed magical snowflakes.
Proof required for no humans having ever walked through that place before you. And even if that’s true…. good job spoiling the last bit of pristine rainforest with your human germs.
Proof required that DNA does not encode things… because I hobby breed corn snakes, and the morphs I work with are simple recessive and affect the genes that would control the pathways for erythrin production.
Proof required that life never had an origin, because… uhm… the fact that life kinda exists at all means it must have originated at some point… and then you go and contradict yourself… and then contradict that contradiction. wtf honestly.
Proof required that galaxies are living entities instead of clusters of stars, planets, and various debris.
Proof required that an entity ‘lives in the sky’ and is shaped like a building block. I’m now imagining a giant, looming lego.
Proof required that galaxies exist inside guanine.
I’m not perfect. I refuse to be part of some grand plan. Guess I’ve fucked up your magical galaxy body. Sorry, not sorry.
louismorelli
liar
I didn’t said that. I said: “If here emerged consciousness it is due that “NATURAL” ex-machine system is also “conscious”. Look to human embryogenesis. At 6 or 8 months when the brain is almost formed, the embryo shows signals of be conscious. But from his/her first day till 6 months, consciousness was a potential existent force hidden in the genes, because the embryo did not invented consciousness by the first time in this world and inside his little sack universe… consciousness was existing before and beyond, at his./her parents, beyond his little “universe”. If consciousness emerged here and now when the Universe is 13,7 billion years old, it means that instead 9 humans months, the embryo being developed in this Universe needs 13,7 billion years at astronomical scale for emerging. And what we watch here is signal that the ex-machine generator of universes is a natural and conscious system. And knowing that 6 human months is equal universal 13,7 years, we can calculates that this Universe will have an end and will be discarded as the placenta at about 17,5 billion years ( the 3 human’s months that is missing for the Big Birth). By the way you are a natural conscious thing, the poof that Nature can be conscious.
Sorry my language problems. I mean “wild”, “primitive”, and wrote “salvage” because in Portuguese wild is “selvagem”.
I am working after this proof, and all I need to proof is that Matrix/DNA cosmological model is right. Everyday NASA and several space agencies are capturing images of new galaxies, bodies, etc., and they are like bone-fossils for composing and testing this theoretical model of evolutionary cosmology, like geologists are getting fossils for composing the theoretical evolutionary biology.
DNA is not a code, it is merely a pile of diversified copies/shapes of a unique working system, called LUCA and you can see the face of LUCA at my avatar. DNA is like a direct branch of an evolutionary tree, which contains all previous ancestors species of biological systems. So, there was an initial system – the building block of astronomical systems, which is the evolutionary product of a building block for atoms systems, and so on back – very very simple, and like yours body was “nannotechnolized”, reduced, to fit inside a genome inside a spermatozoon, this astronomical system with much less informations can be reduced inside the head of a pin, or as a lateral base-pair of nucleotides. After the first lateral pair… which contains two lateral sugars, the phosphate bridge for forming the strands of RNA or DNA, ‘the Earth’s molecules continuing to be bombarded by informations from LUCA, building more one nucleotide system, which will contain some small little detail from the last one, and will register this detail, so, the new nucleotide will be a copy of the first but with a little bit difference. An so on, till the enormous DNA we have today. It is like a factory where work a fundamental system – a human being – but there are thousands of copies of human beings each one diversified making a specific function. So, there is no code, which is the source for all mystical, magical thinking involving DNA today. When we will prove that the cosmological model is right, that the mechanism for transference of building blocks to organic matter really works, we will prove that DNA is not a code. The morphs you works with are simple recessive and affect the genes – because every time you produce a new morph, all past diversified copies and any insertions, are recapitulated.
If you know how magical thinking prejudices human beings, you would join me to combat this word “origins”. It is perhaps the most strong concept and source for magical thinking. If something had an “origins” people understand it as an initial point when something that never existed before, began to exist. If there was such event, it should be caused by a force coming outside from the long natural chain of causes and effects that began with this Universe. So, it should be a supernatural and magical force. But, no human being never watched the “origin” of anything. Everything is product of transformations, evolution, where all forces and elements used in the new thing was existing here. Please, join me and let’s go never using this word, and inquiring any people that uses it.
If my… ( not mine, since the any world view like Matrix/DNA has no owners, no authors, but, have “discoverers by first time”) world view will prove be more correctly than those existing today ( and not the ultimate world view, because no human brain can do it, yet), every shape of natural systems in this world have in it, the properties of life. If a system was existing before Earth’s biosphere, it was expressing or hidden these properties. So we are discovering that the structure of the building block of astronomical system, which is the skeleton of that system, and was described by Physics plus Math, is covered by life’s properties executed under mechanistic rules. The surprising thing here is that these biological properties can be executed by a non biological machine, producing the same final results. For instance: you can see five or six bodies in shape of spheres ( but with internally differences) floating in space, plus a vortex made of dust, performing a system that is exactly the ancestor of human reproductive sexual process. Of course: sexual reproduction is an extraordinary engineering that could not be created first time in this Universe by the stupid matter of a lost planet! It is a product of a long cosmological and biological evolution.
So, the new cosmological model shows that make no sense dividing natural systems into living and non-living – or – animated and inanimate. An atom express the function of organs by a specific electronic wave plus the electrons occupying it. There are no inanimate natural systems. Again I am working to proof the existence of Matrix/DNA formula and cosmological model and need more fossils, more ancestors species and more data from space… since that everything at Earth’s surface are predicted by this model.
Then, you must tell to a galaxy containing merely clusters of stars, planets and various debris, that makes a complete working cell system here, facing my eyes, for proving yours cosmological model which does not contains the forces, elements in primitive state that developed into life’s properties. Astronomical systems have hidden natural variables that you don’t know, like the mechanisms that drove those thermodynamics systems and are still acting over biological evolution.
I didn’t said that galaxies are living entities, it should be non-rational. Astronomers today are doing a big mistake when building their theoretical models about galaxies and stars system formations. For explaining it I will bring on here a natural phenome produced by these galaxies: how is the mechanisms for cell’s systems formation. The history of cell’s system formation is shared into two stages: the first generations of cell systems used the process of symbioses after applying the process of ital cycles over a unique micro-organism. It was better described by Lynn Margullis. After the first generations, cells learned how to replicate themselves, so, the modern cells are made by the second mechanism. The formations of galaxies were some thing, two processes. When discovering a new galaxy we need first to calculate if it is old or new, if it is from the first or latter formations. But the cosmological model inserted into the Standard Model is considering only one process. Don’t say that galaxies are living entity because: 1) The words “life” and “living”, when related to all universal shapes of the unique natural system that began with the Big Bang and is coming developing by evolution till arriving the system called human being… makes no sense, if you says that one shapes is living and the other is not. There are no points of division, like it is impossible to fix a point of division between yours shape as tgeenager and yours shape as adult. It happens that the most shapes was not expressing all these life’s properties, despite that the information and potential for doing it was there, inserted into the Matrix/DNA of those systems. If they were not there,sepping, dreaming inside atoms and galaxies they were not existing here because neither Nature neither the Universe are magicians for creating new informations from Nothing. My theoretical models of atoms, astronomical systems are suggesting how were these “living” properties, executed at magnetic field level, mechanic or thermodynamic levels, etc.
I didn’t say “an entity”, you are saying it, as if you considers any ancestor, like a bacteria, an entity. I don’t. You know that Earth’s is planet located in the “sky”, as the cosmic space. And as any natural system, there are no division between living and non-living systems. That’s why I said “living in the sky”.
The first cell system was formed by symbioses among micro-organisms that became organelles, etc. These cell system – despite long time are no more produced by symbiosis – still are considered the building blocks of a human body. Like atoms are the building blocks of cells. So, the first astronomical system was also formed by symbiosis by a body ruled under the process of vital cycle, acquiring seven different shapes which became the parts of the first system. Like the human body, these first generation of astronomical system became the building block of all later systems. But, the first cell have been under transformations. Like, the first cell was hermaphodite, the first biological systems were hermaphrodite, the later are not. Same thing in the sky: the first astronomical system was hermaphrodite as you can see the picture at my website, The later are not, so, the difficult for us today in recognising the building block due we still have not calculated how was the transformation from the first generation to the later generations of galaxies and stars systems that we see today in the sky…But, as I said, I am working in it because this model can be scientifically falsifiable.
Who said that? Why do you keeping changing the words registered at my posts here?! Read it again: ” Since that galaxies have millions informations less than the simplest bacteria, it is easy to put – with nanotechnology – a galaxy inside a lateral base-pair of nucleotides, the fundamental unit of information of DNA.”
Guanine is not a lateral base-pair of nucleotides. Guanine is merely one part, one piece of this working system called “lateral base-pair of nucleotides” which is the entire and complete natural working opened system. Guanine is a bunch of atoms organized by bits-information coming from our ancestor and surrounding natural astronomical system for performing a systemic universal function. There are seven principals universal functions ( coming from the seven natural brute forces, as the weak, the strong, the nuclear glue forces, etc.) necessary for building a complete perfect natural system. I put them as the Fs in Matrix/DNA formula, as you can see at my website. We need now to identificate each piece of the nucleotide system for discovering which piece makes wich function. I have identified someones: one sugar is F1 and the other must be F2; uracil is F5. I don’t remember now where is the article in my website identifying more one or two nitrogenous base, thymine and cytosine.
There are proofs here facing our eyes that parents are put inside their new babies… parents are ancestors of their babies, babies bring on traits from ancient ancestors species, galaxies are species and our ancestors, they were the last ancestors of nucleotides, logics suggests it, nother any way around…
I didn’t said there are some big plan. What is the plan made by mother giraffe when genes inside her are building a baby giraffe? Some thing is our life, something is the relation between the ex-machine system existing before and beyond this universe and us, like genes. No plans, everything is merely the course of along natural chain of causes and effects. Mother giraffe does not applies intelligence or consciousness for driving the formation of her new baby, so, no Intelligent Design here. But, the new baby is not built by events under chance either, so, no Magical Nothing with hands moving under absolute randomness inside mother giraffe. There is a third alternative between the two dominants world view today, and I think that this third alternative makes more sense because here and now I have saw more evidenced for this world view than to the others two. But, as you said, you and me are not perfect. I am an errant and ignorant almost-monkey arriving from the jungle yesterday yet, I don’t know nothing. As says the most beautiful theorem – the Godel’s theorem – no one can knows and understanding a system, standing inside it. For discovering the best and last world view, we need going outside this Universe and looking to it from the above. By the way, the Matrix/DNA is suggesting that we are the genes building the cosmic baby, which will be our future shape, like the genes of our parents after building our bodies, they lifted up and went to constitute the neurons, and all neurons are a new entity. We will be one. I need that you do yours mission, because I don’t want a handicapped body, So, I will try to heol all humans and any other mentalized life-form in this Universe for getting better life’s conditions and then, being free for following the instincts , where is encrypted the ones mission. We need to get freedom for about 7 billions human-genes who have their brains stopped due working like slaves, we need help them to develop their brains. No prejudices There are no magics in the galaxies, nowhere, but, if we understand this universal moral code, we will be a force never saw before and we will do things that will seems like magics. By the way, I also have a dream and I like dreaming it. If you refuse to be part of some grand plan, you can not refuse matrix/DNA world view, due, as I explained, here there is no plan. Are genes obeying some big supernatural plan?
Hmmm… my grandmother always said: “Be careful about people that says there is evil where you know that there is no evil… because the evil is in their heart…”
Since I know that I didn’t any liars here, I will be advised about you and yours hearth…
No correlation shown by a link to third party evidence, you claim is dismissed as fuckwidttery. What part of you needing to show third party scientific evidence for every claim you make don’t you understand?
Your word has been proven with evidence to be lies and bullshit. Therefore, you must elevate your argument to third parties, who don’t give a shit about your lies and bullshit, namely the peer reviewed scientific literature.
You can’t do that.
Prima facie evidence you are nothing but a new age (rhymes with sewage) creationist without one iota of evidence.
Stop your lying and bullshitting to us, by either supplying links, or shutting the fuck up. Since only liars and bullshitters can’t put up, and won’t/can’t shut up, they show themselves to us with prima facie evidence. What is your choice cricket? I recommend shutting the fuck up.
Amazing how so many words have no relationship to reality. Pure gibberish, unless backed up by scientific evidence. *looks around, sees none*
You prove with your own words my claim of gibberish.
Shutting the fuck up is your only choice, if you have honesty and integrity
*snicker* you never heard of such an intellectual concept.
You, sir, give long-winded people a bad name.
In fact, that reminds me of the time when…
See my answer to Chingao, same question. I can’t be racist with those native people that sometimes were the guide in my several trips in the jungle and sometimes they saved my life. We had beautiful and mutually beneficial relations. But forget the jungle, it is not the topic here…
What a mother fucking lie. You can be a racist.
Right, the topic is your evidencless gibberish, meaningless mental wanking that is useless. You have nothing to offer to anybody outside or your delusions. Which need to be kept in check until you publish in the peer reviewed scientific literature (Science and Nature).
Your gibberish is unscientific, and stands no chance of being published, but it is the only way to show you aren’t a CRANK/LOON.
No mention to any natural real fact, phenomena or event! The same discourse repeated ad nauseum… Nerd, between me and “Nature” there are no thirds parts and this is the big problem of modern intellect today: they are studying theories at school, the representative and symbolic human translation about real Nature, they are applying this theoretical world for changing the environment and all human life’s aspect… and we are going towards a black hole with no return. Please, do what I did: go taking a shower of Nature in the jungle and then, come back talking to me… in a natural language.
Have we had enough of this yet?
No mention of peer reviewed scientific evidence AD NAUSEUM. Get it?
YOUR WORD IS LIES AND BULLSHIT.
I have:
And will be until you shut the fuck up and point to scientific evidence.
Your problem is that you are pretending to be scientific, but to do so, you must play by the rules of science. Which means peer reviewed scientific literature. As science is only refuted by more science.
If your idea is newage bullshit, call it as such, which is honesty and integrity. Which you lack.
Some people just can’t see the light wave, louismorelli. Leave them to the Matrix.
Bless you.
Gorillas and dinosaurs are bigger than humans, so, saying that human’s several traits are equal to gorilla’s traits is believing in those mystical ancient philosophy of “as above, as below”?!!! You and Dalai Lama keeps telling this things that I explained it is not the case. At the zoo is forbidden to look the head of a gorilla above you because you will see that it has eyes like you and you will tell everybody that “as above, as below”…
My friend, not the Earth alone, but the astronomical system to which Earth’s belong is “YOURS ANCESTOR”, like it or not. Stars, galaxies, are our ancestors, they are big ones, they are above us, and there is no way for a real scientific description of universal evolution if not mentioning the sameness of some traits from them that still are mimicked inside ours bodies. You think this is weird idea because in yours world view life came not from planets and stars, they emerged here by a magician called The Nothing. Oh,… my Almighty PinkUnicorn… save me from here, please…
No, Saad, it is worst. Humans can see light waves but can’t see the meanings expressed by light waves. Like these ones here: The Last Important Hypothesis of Matrix/DNA Theory: Natural Light has the Code for Creating Life! – See more at: http://theuniversalmatrix.com/en-us/articles/?p=202#sthash.JEFjBlnR.dpuf and a sample of extensions from here: The Cellular ATP Motor came from the Galaxies’ Rotational Motor?! – See more at: http://theuniversalmatrix.com/en-us/articles/#sthash.jtO6LqFa.dpuf
Insert Expressions of Bemusement and Bewilderment.
Insert References to the following items:
Time Cube
Chess With a Pigeon
Not Even Wrong
Word Salad
Insert Exasperated Insults and Mockery.
End Comment.
xxxx
Sorry, this link is better…
The Cellular ATP Motor came from the Galaxies’ Rotational Motor?! – See more at: http://theuniversalmatrix.com/en-us/articles/?p=15#sthash.EugUYehs.dpuf
Explained by evolution, try Nova Judgement, et. al, where ID was debunked in Federal court with IDiot using that fallacious argument.
Philosophy without evidence is sophistry. And you engage in sophistry, or false arguments. Why? You have presented no physical evidence (peer reviewed science papers) that would pass muster with scientists, magicians, and professional debunkers as being of divine (your mind/matrix), and not natural (scientifically explained), origin. Ergo, your argument is false.
Your mind/matrix is a stand-in for god.
Yeah, that uhmm… drawing to try to show the correlation between the two is such a giant stretch that it’s laughable.
Also, I’m sorry but your english is so peppered with utterly nonsensical phrases that I refuse to spend another hour wading through it trying to comprehend what you are attempting to say. Except for this one thing:
The link between Cosmic and Biological Evolution is LUCA – the Last Universal Common Ancestor – of all biological system and he/it lives in the sky in shape of building block of astronomical systems.
If it lives, it is an entity. The rocks on my mantle are not alive, they don’t live there except in the most colloquial of uses. You say that life does not come from non-life, then say that the ancestor of life is non-living, only it is living, and it lives in the sky. And now you say the sky is the universe, which really doesn’t work because saying sky and universe are not the same by any stretch of the imagination.
Thus, you constantly contradict yourself, and then contradict your contradictions. Your cosmology makes no sense, and you STILL haven’t explained how we can fit half a galaxy in guanine, since you say it takes a pair to fit a whole galaxy. Just how big a galaxy are we talking? Some are quite small, and some are large. Can you fit a single small galaxy in guanine?
You also still failed to provide any proof.
doh, html tag fail.
Brilliant article, louis. Light has the code for creating life, huh? What, so you arbitrarily broke human development down into parts of a spectrum, lined it up to the light spectrum, therefore TEH MATRIX? Bravo, you just discovered that a spectrum is similar to a spectrum. Discovered the sheer magic and unexplained wonder of parallel lines. Discovered the marvelous mysteries of categorizing shit. Great work! What a pioneer! Truly a Theory of Everything is in the works here. Once you put down bonus spectrums, in the form of arbitrarily an divided timeline for Earth’s geologic periods, a line plot of global temperature readings, and just a regular ol’ pH scale, then you will really be playing with some fire there, Prometheus.
So, repeating ad nauseam words that means nothing is yours strategy? And everyday finishing a debate you need be the last one to post here, the same discourse, for those arriving later getting yours sentence? No problem, enjoy it… Matrix/DNA will go very well,…
That means that our whole solar system could be, like one tiny atom in the fingernail of some other giant being…
That means one tiny atom in my fingernail could be … one little tiny universe.
…
What’s the next line?
what louismorelli actually says :
louismorelli translated:
It’s starting to come together more. Bits and pieces, inch by inch, cube by cube.
chigau:
“So, like, man, what if you clipped your fingernails full of universe atoms, and the universe atoms stayed there, but, like new universe atoms grew in your new fingernails. WHOOOOOOA, dude. WHOOOOOA. Do you have any more Doritos and Cocoa Puffs?”
Expcept your DNA/maxtrix, like a deity, doesn’t exist except in your delusional mind. If is does, show us how to measure it and interact with it…OR SHUT THE FUCK UP.
jeez, Nerd, chill
have some toad scrapings
Well! I never knew this was a biology primer!
Yes, you can. We all can, because we all grew up in societies pemeated by racism. Denying or minimising the agency of groups of people who live or lived in areas commonly perceived as “untouched” or “unaltered” by human hands is a pervasive form of racism. Stop it.
xDDDDDD
We are dealing with such a brilliant and enlightened mind here…
louismorelli, #322
Yes, they are blind to the meanings, for they care not about their souls.
They do not realize Matrix DNA is a matter of faith (which they lack). It has nothing to do with reason or evidence.
P.S. I would correct you on one point if you don’t mind: Some dinosaurs were bigger than humans. Many were smaller.
I didn’t say the “Amazon jungle”. I said “the heart of Amazon jungle”, where I lived. It is called The Jamanxin Territory ( the middle of Tapajós River), but these indigenous (native people) lives 200 hundred kilometers away from there.
If you lived there, then it’s not a place untouched or unchanged by humans. Unless of course you’re a dolphin or an extraterrestrial…?
As Einstein once time said: ‘One does not need to prove that his theory is right, it only have to explain how his theory makes sense”. Time will led us to discover something that will approve or debunk the theory. So, I need to convince you that this world view makes sense.
Well, none of your word-salad makes one lick of sense. So we’re done here.
I can’t be racist…
You may or may not be a racist; but anyone who says he/she CANNOT be racist is, at best, an idiot, and nothing he/she says is credible.
What, so you arbitrarily broke human development down into parts of a spectrum…
I read a graphic novel (Promethia to be exact) that broke the history of the Universe and Mankind into phases correlating to the Major Arcana of a standard Rider-Waite Tarot deck. That “history” made a lot more sense, and was far more relevant and useful, than louismorelli’s rubbish.
Well…then, we go. You with yours biased interpretation of each natural phenomena composing a whole world view (a doctrine taught in universities), as guide for yours decisions, me with my different ( and maybe biased also, I don’t know) but very different interpretation of each natural phenomena composing a whole different world view, as guide for my decisions. In between there are the mystical deists also with their specific interpretation and world view, taught at nowadays churches and every ancient universities. Since that we need to be respectful with the freedom of all human beings, and knowing that we are not the owners of the Thru, and yet, knowing that the little and limited human brain can not grasp neither half of the 11 dimensions affecting those phenomenons, already suggested by String or M- Theory and Matrix/DNA Theory, then, all and any world view must be non-complete and with lots of errors…I wish to you good the yours world view be better than mine and the best of the world for you ( we are mentalized genes and my future is dependable of yours success).
My humble divulgation of Matrix/DNA world view has the unique intention for telling that there is the Matrix/DNA alternative and the knowledge of this alternative by scientists and students can be very useful sometimes. It is a new and great source for inspiring new experiments and grasping details that are not being perceived.
You believe that only you and yours next biological relatives have DNA as a common denominator. Yours DNA – by tours interpretations – was “originated” at Earth’s surface, so, the others ancient natural systems like galaxies and atoms are not yours relatives and they can not have their common denominator, much less a common denominator between you and them. You believe that you are separated from those “stupid” and “non-living” ancient system… so, you must be “special”. Like any other doctrine. The notable thing is that is possible that yours interpretation is the right one, there are thousands of evidences suggesting it. Yours interpretation is very closed to Matrix/DNA than are any interpretation from mystical beliefs like creationism, esoterism, etc.
But, once time I had an idea: “If the first living being – that was the first generation of cells – was a working and complete system; and if I am seeing here and now that all natural systems are produced by prior and less evolutionary systems; then, must had a system prior cells that produced it. There were no others systems in the soup theorized by Oparin and experimented by Urey than atoms systems. But the evolutionary jump between an atom and a cell is the size of the Universe… it is almost impossible! Must have a system as hidden variable at the real soup. I will look for it. After 25 years looking for, going to the hell of virgin Nature hoping that it could still containing the mysterious system, I arrived to models where the terrestrial atoms took a shower of galactic complexity before producing life here. And the models suggests that I need to share my DNA with those mistakenly once time interpreted as non-living and inanimate systems in the sky, because me and them have a common denominator, which I called “Matrix/DNA”. This put down the whole world view learned at the universities. You follow yours way suggested by yours mind, I will follow mine, despite that I am alone in this very hard way. I will always following yours new discoveries and interpretations, because I need criticize, testing, and developing the gaps in my world view. Good luck to everybody here, sincerely…
I had a humble divulgation once, but thankfully the antibiotics worked a treat.
You with yours biased interpretation of each natural phenomena composing a whole world view (a doctrine taught in universities), as guide for yours decisions, me with my different ( and maybe biased also, I don’t know) but very different interpretation of each natural phenomena composing a whole different world view, as guide for my decisions.
Sorry, but no, you don’t get to pretend you opinions are equally valid because everyone is equally biased. Your statements here simply make no sense at all, and are objectively unsuitable to explain anything in the real world. The fact that we have biases does not make your nonsense any more valid, or even any more coherent.
Was that an exit?
Literally laughed out loud reading that.
chigau: it sounds like an exit, but so did his comment #321.
A delusional and incoherent philosophy, full of sound an fury meaning nothing, and explaining nothing. Not one iota of evidence for it.
Meaningless gibberish. And you can’t build a world view on gibberish, as the old GIGO rule applies.
louismorelli, #341
*falls out of chair*
After reading that, I think I might need to take a shower of galactic complexity myself. That’s if I can find the nebula towel and the cometic scrub brush.
Raging Bee:
It would explain so much.
Far more clever and requiring far more work as well.
ledasmom: as long as you know where your towel is, you’ll be OK. Just don’t use a falafel to scrub with…
Hm. If I am reading Scale2 correctly, a carbon atom is about 10^-9m, and a cell is about 10^-4m (human egg cell, the largest there is), so about 5 orders of magnitude, maybe 6. I’m not sure what “the size of the Universe” is supposed to be in proportion to — maybe a human? But 5 orders of magnitude larger than a human are . . . states and nations on Earth, an 6 orders of magnitude is continents and small moons. You have to go way, way more orders of magnitude to get to anywhere near the size of the universe.
And I suspect that louismorelli is unaware that the electrostatic forces that chemically bind atoms together (to eventually make cells and cellular organelles) operate strongly on those small scales, and are influenced by similar forces on those scales (e.g., hydrophobic and hydrophilic charges on various organic molecules, and so on), while the gravitational forces that shape galaxies operate much more weakly, albeit on larger scales.
And the models suggests that I need to share my DNA with those mistakenly once time interpreted as non-living
Meaning what? He needs to have sex with a woman he’d previously thought was an inflatable doll?
The model suggests that the hills are alive, with the sound of music.
Go ahead, Louis, go fuck the sun.
…Of course it does. You should learn some.
It’s called “neurobiology” or “neuroscience”, though. The term “neurology” is already occupied by the branch of medicine that applies the knowledge discovered by neuroscience.
That is breathtakingly obvious pareidolia. You should be ashamed.
Yes, seriously, I mean it: you should be ashamed that you’re trying to use your personal taste in vague superficial similarities as a scientific argument.
Almost every word of this is wrong.
Why have you, in those 30 years, never bothered to open a highschool-level biology textbook?
Monitor lizards (closely related to snakes and mosasaurs) have been observed to play. Does that count as a “mind or consciousness”?
None of our ancestors were lizards, though.
Green? Did someone bring you a shrubbery? :-)
Unfortunately I have to continue teaching you basic terminology: evolution = descent with heritable modification. Matter doesn’t reproduce, so it doesn’t descend or inherit, and that means there’s no such thing as an “evolutionary state of matter” (ancient or otherwise).
Also, there is no progress in evolution. There is no “last evolutionary shape”, unless extinction happens to follow.
…That’s still light. It’s not a state of matter or anything.
That…
That is sad.
It is really sad.
It doesn’t change at all while it is propagating – except for the various kinds of redshift (or blueshift) if it goes very, very far.
It’s sad enough that you have no idea what you’re talking about; but now that you build a whole system of thought on this lack of knowledge, I actually want to cry for you.
Life is a chemical reaction. Life is a particular kind of change.
Not all change, however, is life.
All women are humans. Not all humans are women.
That’s not an explanation, it’s a repetition!
Oh, thanks, that’s awesome! :-)
Wow, I tried to close an <a> tag with a <b> tag, and then I performed a blockuqote. :-( Let me try again (and catch up).
…Of course it does. You should learn some.
It’s called “neurobiology” or “neuroscience”, though. The term “neurology” is already occupied by the branch of medicine that applies the knowledge discovered by neuroscience.
That is breathtakingly obvious pareidolia. You should be ashamed.
Yes, seriously, I mean it: you should be ashamed that you’re trying to use your personal taste in vague superficial similarities as a scientific argument.
Almost every word of this is wrong.
Why have you, in those 30 years, never bothered to open a highschool-level biology textbook?
Monitor lizards (closely related to snakes and mosasaurs) have been observed to play. Does that count as a “mind or consciousness”?
None of our ancestors were lizards, though.
Green? Did someone bring you a shrubbery? :-)
Unfortunately I have to continue teaching you basic terminology: evolution = descent with heritable modification. Matter doesn’t reproduce, so it doesn’t descend or inherit, and that means there’s no such thing as an “evolutionary state of matter” (ancient or otherwise).
Also, there is no progress in evolution. There is no “last evolutionary shape”, unless extinction happens to follow.
…That’s still light. It’s not a state of matter or anything.
That…
That is sad.
It is really sad.
It doesn’t change at all while it is propagating – except for the various kinds of redshift (or blueshift) if it goes very, very far.
It’s sad enough that you have no idea what you’re talking about; but now that you build a whole system of thought on this lack of knowledge, I actually want to cry for you.
Life is a chemical reaction. Life is a particular kind of change.
Not all change, however, is life.
All women are humans. Not all humans are women.
That’s not an explanation, it’s a repetition!
Oh, thanks, that’s awesome! :-)
…This is nonsense. Photons are absorbed or reflected by electrons. Photons cannot get control of anything; upon contact with anything, they are reflected or destroyed!
Photons can destroy bonds between atoms, meaning they can destroy molecules, if they have enough energy ( = a short enough wavelength): this happens when they are absorbed ( = destroyed) by electrons which become, in the process, so hot that they move from a binding to an antibinding orbital (or indeed out of the molecule altogether, in extreme cases). There is no control here.
And then they lived happily ever after.
You’re making shit up. You’re telling us a fairytale!
I give up on the rest of comment 193; I could spend the rest of the day explaining why a third of it is empirically wrong and the rest doesn’t even mean anything.
Synapses with phosphorylated ion channels.
Thoughts are electric currents in the brain. Memories are established patterns of wiring.
No, that’s wrong twice over.
1) Where are you taking from???
2) Either “base pair” or “pair of nucleotides”; or indeed “pair of bases” or “nucleotide pair”. Trying to say both will only give you a job in the Department of Redundancy Department.
*sigh* No. It’s true that the pineal gland is descended from a light-sensitive organ that used to be exposed to light through a hole in the skull, and still is in tuatara; but the pineal gland has nothing to do with magnetic fields, the antennae of insects have nothing to do with either magnetic fields or pineal glands, and none of our ancestors were insects (or other animals with antennae)!
If it’s a formula, you can write it down in ordinary mathematical notation.
Do that, or stop calling it a formula, for fuck’s sake!
Even by the meaning of “formula” you quoted from a dictionary, a picture is not a formula.
…Are you nuts?
You’ve misunderstood both really badly.
Dawkins was using “selfish” in a metaphorical way. His point was that evolution does not “preserve the species”, does not work to the advantage of “the species” or the individual; genes are the unit of natural selection.
Hawking didn’t invent black holes, and he didn’t discover any through a telescope; other people did that. He contributed to our understanding of black holes; and he never did such a silly thing as calling them “evil”.
Once again, you’re talking about things you don’t understand – even though you could learn them very easily!
It divided into two new cells…?
It didn’t live next to us. It became us, for the largest possible value of “us”.
It’s a well-known fact that different egg-laying animals lay their eggs at different stages during the embryo’s development (or even before it in the case of external fertilization). You should google for “embryo retention”. It is further a well-known fact that laying eggs isn’t an either-or thing; there are plenty of species where a soft-shelled egg is produced but not laid at all, instead the young hatches inside the mother and is then born, and then the eggshell is expelled. There are also species where the shell is reduced or lost, and in the absence of a shell there’s a continuum from a fetus that lives off a yolk sac to a placenta.
Egg-laying appears to have been lost about a hundred times among lizards and snakes alone, and even regained several times. It is simply not a big deal.
Congratulations, you’ve been sleeping for the last few decades. Lemaître postulated a “primordial atom” which exploded in an existing space – modern cosmology has never done that. The universe itself is what was tiny and then expanded. Space itself becomes bigger.
Start here.
Yes.
Did you believe DNA is some kind of ghost? It’s a real substance that consists of real atoms (not the other way around, for crying out loud). The collection of every highschool should be able to show you some: it’s a white sludge.
And no, it’s not engineered at all. It’s a pretty chaotic affair. On top of that, it falls apart when it’s stored in water – living organisms spend a large part of their basic metabolism on constantly repairing it.
:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
LOL! No, PZ doesn’t get furious at topic drift so deep down a thread, and he only deletes comments by people who are already banned.
He’s clearly talking about the Enlightenment.
That’s not right. A hypothesis is mainly just smaller than a theory, but bigger and better tested than a speculation. A law is something quite different: it’s a mere generalization across a lot of facts, commonly expressable as a mathematical formula. Hypotheses don’t grow up to become laws – they explain laws.
No. A study published in 2001 already showed that the world population is going to peak at 9 billion or so, and will begin to decline before the end of the century – when it will likely already be lower than today.
So, there are five fingers, and you have managed to arbitrarily divide human development into five stages, and you think it’s really fascinating that 5 = 5.
Just for a moment now remember that we humans aren’t the only species of living beings. Consider the hand of a snake.
Oops.
Consider the hand of a horse: it has one finger. Do horses have a one-stage development? Not any more than humans do.
Consider the hand of a tyrannosaurid: it has two fingers. Did tyrannosaurids have a two-stage development? Oh no, they even had a very human-like growth spurt.
I conclude that there is no correlation between the number of fingers per hand and the number of ontogenetic stages.
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
But that’s it, man: there is no conductor and no compositor. There is no authority, no Creator, no Designer. There is only electrostatic attraction & repulsion, and Brownian motion.
Gene regulation has been understood (in its basics) for decades now. For example (and that’s the example that got Monod his Nobel prize), transcription of the lactose-cutting enzyme of Escherichia coli is switched on by lactose in the absence of glucose, and is switched off by glucose, in a really mechanical way. No decision, no planning, no oversight, no conscience is involved; it’s a machine.
Let that sink in.
And then let your shame sink in, the shame you ought to feel about not having opened a biology textbook in forty years. This is highschool stuff over here.
That has to be a direct reference to a creationist document. The entire rest of the page uses “evidence” exclusively as a mass noun, and “evidences” occurs nowhere except in the title.
“Evidences” was normal in English 100 years ago, but since then it has gradually retreated to apologetics. Other languages tend not to even have a comparable word: French has a word évidence, but that means “that which is evident”, not “evidence for an idea”; German basically has nothing – what I’ve seen used are the count nouns Beweis “proof”, Hinweis “hint”, Indiz “evidence in a strictly legal context”, and very recently attempts to coin a mass noun Evidenz on the English model, but those haven’t gone far yet and are clearly not widely understood.
BTW, English is unusual in using “evidence”, “information” and (almost exclusively nowadays) “data” as mass nouns; they tend to be count nouns elsewhere.
1) You’re saying there are humans there now. Obviously, then, humans have walked through that place.
2) Archeology has produced many surprising findings in the Amazon basin; has any been done in Jamanxin?
Most, actually, have been smaller. Especially, but not only, in the last 66 million years.
That, frankly, makes no sense.
@David Marjanović:
I know I’ve posted that link before where you could follow it. Click on the link “evidences”, where the author explains the word choice. Yes, most modern usage of the word is by creationists and theologians, but there are many examples, even in the scientific literature, of the word as it is.
In fact, clicking on the PubMed search link brings up 20 hits from the past few months (a couple are verb forms). Granted, those may not be by people whose first language is English, but the editorial decision was presumably made to let them stand.
(I admit that the title “Difficult situations managing diabetic foot. Evidences and personal views: is to operate on patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis old-fashioned?” makes me think that the editor of “Int J Low Extrem Wounds” may not know English well, if they let that pass unmodified)
That’s been louismorelli’s problem from the beginning. Is it poor language comprehension, poor language use, poor thinking, or poor scientific understanding, or all of the above?
I’ve been thinking, and Owlmirror is right in this case the word “evidences” isn’t a tell for a creationist due to language issues.
But I still hold LM is one anyway, even xe doesn’t think xe is. His whole model is that of a deist god, which comes to be (mental/matrix) prior to the formation of the universe, and after the Big Bang, it becomes the mental/matrix/DNA script LM so loved yapping about. Everything from the BB evolved from the deity (mental/matrix/DNA) and exists because of it. No need for normal evidence, it was obvious from the presuppositions.
The whole inane dialogs reminded me of the descriptions of the drug-induced “other ways of knowing” and/or initiation rights used by many indigenous people I read about during my anthropology days (social science distribution requirement). Those reporting the effects of datura, peyote, LSD, magic mushrooms, etc, reported similar insights to LM. He is derivative, not original.
Sorry to burst your originality bubble LM. You aren’t the first to think such thoughts. Check the literature before publishing drivel. that others have already made themselves fools about.
Yours “scholar academic modern worldview” made you blind to the most wonderful, beautiful aspects of Nature, Bee. This is one sample:
1) A little human baby has its body projected, expanding into time and space, and doing that, the body grows obeying a force ( which bring the dynamics of vital cycles), when its energy increases till the job done by the last gene, stands over a platform in equilibrium by a short time and suddenly begins to degenerate due entropy. The final result of this body is its fragmentation…
2) A little initial gamma-ray, has its “body-wave” projected, expanding, into space/time, and doing this it obeys a variation in its frequencies/vibrations that goes decreasing till degenerating and being fragmented into photons. Hmmm…
Ok, if a person was educated by any mystical world view, like deism, creationism, etc., his/her brain never will write 1 and 2 in this way. Never will perceive any pattern here, any correlation between humans and light waves, of course. And persons educated by the nihilist/materialist worldview will promptly be offended by any mention of this correlation. I don’t know how to explain it but the brain of another person considering the Matrix/DNA naturalist world view, when seeing and thinking about light, will immediately bring on from the memory the life’s history of a human body rolling under the process of vital cycles, like I did above. “The sequences of matter densities and energy are exactly equal?! Why? Is it merely coincidence or is there something else hidden here?”
Ok,
1) Light waves should be emitted by the Big Bang at the first moments of this Universe, there was a spatial substance, which were inertial, like the Higgs field, or the aether, etc..
2) Human bodies are “emitted” after a bigbang of a spermatozzon membrane at ther center of an ovule, where there was a spatial substance, like amnion, etc.
Is it still coincidences? Or it means that “the process for making human bodies is merely an advanced evolutionary stage of the process for making universes?!
1) These light waves was expanding throughout this inertial substance, and a short time after that – began to emerging the first naturals systems… as atoms.
2) These genetic forces were expanding throughout this inertial amnion, and a short time after that – began to emerging the first cells systems…
Still merely coincidences? Or that hypothesis is becoming stronger and stronger?
1) I have already saw that Nature can transform a lighter gaseous body into several shapes/functions and turning it into a complete perfect working system, only applying the vital cycle process over that body.
2) The first cell begins to differentiate into cells with specific functions…
The first shape of a human body is the morulae, which is the shape of atomic nebulas, next the shape will be blastulae, which seems agglomerates of galaxies…
Do you know? To the hell you and yours “coincidences”, to the hell those that condemned Haeckel… this hypothesis makes sense to me.
But… how, what’s the force that contains this process? Oh… it is here… light waves… a strong candidate?
I had also calculated that the unique way for explaining how the terrestrial atoms took a shower of galactic’s complexities is considering that photons from cosmic and solar radiations worked as “astronomical ancestors of genes”. Again, light was there…working silent… Let’s go investigating this hypothesis… It makes sense because first was the natural light waves, after that was bodies with vital cycles like those human beings, so, if original light waves are linked to humans by evolution, light is the ancestor and not the other way around. Also, light is million times more simplest than humans…
Ok, let’s go now search for all data collected by scientificism and empiricism about light, from Physics, Optics, electromagnetism, Einstein, Maxwell, etc., and etc. And searching ways for new experiments based on this hypothesis… Since that I will die before arriving to any proof that this hypothesis is right or wrong, at least I will have pleasure in my retirement times, having something that I like to do… Nobody will funding this “weird” idea, no problem, I will do it as possible…
So, I don’t keep Matrix/DNA Theory only because it is suggesting hundreds, thousands of scientific experiments never imagined before. I keep it also because the Matrix is continuously leading me to compose big pictures where an incredible rational natural “reason” is flowing through all universal natural history. Not a natural reason suggesting gods or intelligent supernatural influences, but a natural Reason just equal my own Reason… I know it because my reasoning is able to understanding the natural reasoning. So, I love Nature, because It is me, and I am It. What Nature did, the right and the wrong things, I did it… in my 13,7 billion years old… You, poor man, be you a creationist or a materialist/nihilist, you hadn’t learned to notice and admiring these details…The world view they teach to you was built with an wrong reasoning, far away off the beam…
Looks for any citation or anything beyond the word of proven liar and bullshitter (LM). Sees nothing tio support the lies, bullshit and gibberish. What a mother fucking loser who doesn’t understand nobody believes a word they say without third party evidence once they are caught with presuppositional gibberish. Ego run amok….
Nope.
And Peter Rabbit transgarbled my grandmother’s 1976.
Since I don’t have the faintest idea what (2) meant, it may indeed be coincidence. Or it may not. My initial guess, though, is that it’s mostly that stuff you generally find just to the south of a well-fed bull.
Human bodies do indeed appear to need a universe in order to exist. Quite what you think this proves is beyond me.
Until you provide peer reviewed papers, and not what the totally not-sentient-but-it-revealed-stuff-to-me-magically-just-like-a-god ‘Savage Nature’ told you, you are doing nothing other that having verbal diarrhea.
The idea of Eru Iluvatar directing a choir of Ainur to sing the universe and all of history into being makes just as much sense as all the drivel you’ve been typing.
Eä!
. . . facing north.
/pedantry.
I find louismorelli’s comments to be like a wall of word salad. I read until I reach the first infelicitous phrasing — usually in the first sentence or two — and then I just skim over the vast obscuring green leafy barrier with croûtons of malapropisms, occasionally pausing at the rare teasing gaps of coherence that hint at the confusion that seethes inside his mind.
too long; didn’t reach for the dressing.
@ David Marjanović
Remember this quote from louismorelli (comment #29) from
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/05/26/this-is-not-science/
??
No it doesn’t. Relating thoughts to larger synaptic manifestations captured by MRI, etc., is not knowing how a physical touchable and visible object like the brain produces another physical still abstract – not touchable and visible – object. And this phrase is not mine it comes from a neuroscientist.
You, before saying such thing, should see hundreds of articles/registration of data from neurobiology and neuroscience in my website. Brain, just now, is one of my latest object of research and supported by Matrix/DNA formula I am trying to do something never imagined before: composing the abstract mind as a working system. It is easy to understand. The brain was made as a system, having as template the universal formula for systems. Locating F1 as the hippocampus region we need beginning to trace the systemic circuit going to left H, to the first gland at left… it will be F2. And so on till we get the circular circuit doing a round trip going back to F1.
For making the map of the mind ( as Matrix/DNA was the parents, the brain is the son, the mind is the grand-son) we must go projecting each part of the brain/system in a mirror, till completing it).
But… half of neuro-scientists says that there is no mind, forget it, it is all about brain… and another half, the creationists, says that there is no mind, there is the “soul”… Then, Mr. Obama offering heavy funding for researching the brain, to these biased scientists, never will get his target… “Don’t worry my President! There is a half-monkey/half human in Amazon jungle doing the right thing…” hehehehe…
While Haeckel worked only at biological level and conclude: “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”, I am going further, linking Biological Evolution and Cosmological Evolution, composing the big picture where “biological ontogeny recapitulates cosmic phylogeny”.
Of course! Humans are being made by this Universe… this Universe is not a magician… this Universe can not creates new information from nothing… this Universe received billions of bits-information in shape of quantum-vortexes at the beginning and is using only those initial informations… this Universe only knows a method for doing things… this method is the method itself was made… That’s the cause that human ontogeny recapitulates cosmic phylogeny…
Microscopical quantum-vortexes were like genes coming from an ex-machine natural system and were the first ancestors of astronomical black holes. Black holes are spirals surrounded and formed by spiral magnetic lines. From black holes light can’t escape… while the black hole is “alive”. But… black holes also dies. And when they dies, the spiral magnetic lines are projected to outer space carrying on all light that were imprisoned. That’s why ours scientific instruments are capturing those jets of gamma-ray from galactic nucleus. Those instruments are grasping the jets of light only at the event horizon and surrounding space, that’s why we are not saying the jets propagating far away into space as waves of light. If we could get it we would discover that gamma-ray becomes X-ray, then ultra-violet and so on…
Black holes here are showing that quantum-vortexes can emit light waves. We are discovering that light waves are broken into slices, separating its different regions, aka, different frequencies/vibrations. When those light waves at the Big Bang penetrated dark matter, it broken dark matter into slices, each slice occupied by each specific frequency/vibration. So, although these slices can be in a infinite number, there are seven principals ( like when we trying to see the whole history of a human body, we separate it into seven categories: baby,child, teenager, etc.). It happens that when these slices are joined together in the same sequence of a light wave, they composes a working system. The first system were the atoms, the last ones – today and here – are human beings. So, human beings had as first ancestors, those quantum vortexes/bits information becoming light waves, etc.
Now, the last natural system emerging from human beings is “consciousness”. The continuous repetition of synapses as electrical circuits are being fixed as light in a specie of a mirror, like the light starks we see in a storm turns on the cloud luminous. We are becoming light. We were light,we came from light and we are going back to be light. Conscious light. That’s why human ontogeny recapitulates cosmic phylogeny…
Ok, everything written here is the metaphysical counterpart suggested by a materialistic worldview based on Matrix/DNA formula. Metaphysics is not my business just know,I am very busy searching practical applications by that formula. I will not debate metaphysics… it is black holes going nowhere…
Sorry, the word “size” here is merely metaphora. Evolutionary jump is about variation on complexity and makingcomparisonsbetween an atom and a cell we can see that this variation is too big. Then we need search a link, an evolutionary link but, keeping in mind that we are focusing systems, a simplest system and a more complex system. So, we need search this evolutionary link as a system, not a soup. And the unique existing systems that could be the link are the astronomical systems. They are more complex than atoms and less complex than cells. The Standard Model re-enforces this hypothesis when suggesting that atoms came first ( the lightest atoms), astronomical systems in the middle, and cells came later.
I choose a method for searching this intermediary misterious system: comparative anatomy between atoms and cells. Written in a long list the differences, and another long list, the sameness ( identical details). Then, the details that are equals will be the structure of the skeleton of this lost link. The details that are different requires that we apply the mechanisms of evolution ( Darwin plus thermodynamics) for calculating how a detail was in the half-way between an atom and a cell. Then I was projecting every detail into a big picture, finally getting the face of the criminal…, I mean, the face of the mysterious evolutionary link.
I never found any system with the face that I had at hands, while searching at Earth surface. But the Standard model was suggesting… it is in the sky, It must be an astronomical system. Then I arranged the seven kinds of astronomical bodies in a new connection’s system and got a cosmological model that fits very well the face got by the comparative method. Is it the mysterious link? Then, how some terrestrial atoms were re-engineered for getting the astronomical complexity?! Later I discovered that the biological genetic process applied at astronomical scales can do the job. Now, hands at work, testing the whole theory…
Daz at 363
Word!
When even a metaphor is off at a scale of 10 000 to 1, that should be a big hint that the whole underlying idea is bupkis.
Molecules. Look it up.
I think this is the most preposterous horseshit being spewed by a single organism i’ve ever heard since i last went to church.
Fucking hell Louis, you are so enamored of the meaningless, evidenceless drivel you produce that you can’t even see how utterly non-sensical and FACTUALLY wrong it is…You don’t know a fucking thing about what you are talking about (every time you say something biology related i die a little inside)….you operate only on the basis of metaphore and “well, it looks vaguely like that”. It’s pathetic….and your insistence that this fiction you’ve pulled out of your arse is in any way real is insulting to anyone who knows what science is. Bugger off already, nobody is interested in the meaningless crap you are selling. We can see it for what it is, we can smell it and we can even hear the flies buzzing around, you can’t sell that ridiculous shit to us, because we are not 6 years old.
You have no coherent theory. You have a situation of GIGO, garbage in-garbage out. Or gibberish in-gibberish out. You have no way to test your theory. There are no predictions. There is no science. Nothing but drug induced sophistry and bullshit.
Quit bothering us with your drivel. You have nothing but bullshit.
Talking about scale reminds me of fractal wrongness.
Although I think this needs something different: Fractal-not-even-wrongness.
“This is not only not right at every conceivable scale of resolution, this is not even wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution.”
I’m still waiting for Louis to explain four days in 24 hours.
Amphiox
3 January 2015 at 5:35 am
Molecules are not complete working systems. It is missing universal functions there. Nature took about 3 billion years for going from the last evolved system ( engineered terrestrial atoms by cosmic radiation, sun’s light, planet’s nuclear radiation, etc. ) till arriving to the next possible evolved system – a cell system. So, all molecules, be it proteins or the RNA-world, were the intermediary phase between two species allocated in the cosmological evolutionary tree. It is like the parents and their baby: there is an intermediary phase between them called “embryogenesis”.
That’s explain why the word “abiogenesis” is wrong. There was no abiogenesis. There was cosmological, astronomical “embryogenesis”.
An astronomical system was reduced into its smallest bits-information when attacked by entropy, and those bits, in shape of photons, invaded terrestrial atoms like virus invading a cell, when they take control of the machinery. The astronomical bits has the bias to reproduce the system where they came from, like any genes. So those terrestrial atoms became “organic” and were drove to new combinations never tried before at Earth. First were the amino acids, them, and in parallel, the proteins and nucleotides, till arriving to the best reproduction of that astronomical system described by Newtonian mechanics plus taking a shower of Einsteinian general relativity which produces the complexity for galactic systems.
The best possible reproduction of the building block for astronomical systems is a plant cell. That’s why plant cells makes photosynthesis, they still are linked to a star.
So, from the first amino acids till arriving to a plant cell took billion years, because it was driven by astronomy and things in astronomical scale are counted in million or billion years. There was no abiogenesis, the process that yours own body is made is not abiogenesis. nature always uses an unique process for creating things, the process that it knows to do. Toy was made by embryogenesis and the first living being also. Forget the word “abiogenesis”.
louismorelli,
By repeatedly refusing to provide any citations or evidence for any of your posts despite people asking you to, I think you’re violating #2 and #3. I think it’s gone on for too long.
You and yours gurus, Krauss, Hawking, Dawkins, are like the creationists, both have no coherent theories. Yours theory suggests that Genetics was an invention of the stupid matter of this lost planet. Com’on… how could you believing in such absurd claim? Genetics as we know it is the biological counterpart of a larger process coming from astronomical, atomic systems, and the first manifestation of it was there, somewhere, a second after the Big Bang. Can’ t you recognize a biological mechanism in its less evolutionary states, as mechanical process, electromagnetic mechanism. Of course not, because you was educated for believing that all life’s properties were created here and at biological time. Yours worldview needs a magician, no matter that you call it “randomness”or “the supreme nothing”. Go to see the Matrix/DNA models and see how was genetics before life’s origins… ( glup… there is no such thing like “origins”).
This implies an engineer making atoms (wrong), and that is creationist thinking. Also, it is gibberish, trying to put your addlepated mysticism onto a natural process that needed no such mysticism, or gives a shit about your bullshit. You are ignored by the universe.
To quote a Cathy cartoon “drivel drivel drivel!”.
Come on LM, without several third party sources you can link to that support your fuckwittery, you have nothing but personal views, not backed by evidence, and are therefore dismissed without evidence.
So, name your backers, or shut the fuck up….
You says it because you believe that biological phenomenon are random data since that – as suggests yours doctrine – the supreme rule is randomness. So, you refuse to see the evolutionary micro-cycles that composes a macro, cosmological evolutionary event of ordered process like is embryogenesis. Pareidolia is a mind so faithful in a worldview that searches evidences everywhere for to prove it. Let’s see if this is the case:
When a person has the suspicion that evolution works like “macro-waves broken into micro-waves of evolutionary steps”, then person will suppose that biological ontogeny recapitulates cosmological phylogeny. If it is right, every micro-cycle try to repeat a universal event pattern for “origins”. Then I put over the table the image of the origins of a cell, another image with the origins of a building block of the DNA, other image with the origins of a building block of astronomical system and above these images, the Matrix/DNA formula, because the formula shows the event of all origins. It happens that all images of all origins are exactly equal! A kind of a sphere being penetrated by a kind of cilia which contains the code. it is repetition of origins of micro-cycles. Again, every time a new human body is at its origins, the same pattern is there.
About 15 years later, I was arriving to a conclusion that the human brain is producing a new system, called consciousness. So, one way for testing this hypothesis is again, bringing on all those images over the table, plus the image of the brain. I couldn’t see the pattern encrypted into the human brain. It was missing the factor “spermatozoon”. About 2 or 3 years later, by accident, reading a book about the brain, there was an image of the brain plus the spinal medula. Lol…! That was what I had searching for… The same image was there, indicating that a new micro evolutionary wave is begining.
It was not the similarity of images from such different phenomena that I captured for reinforcing a mystical belief. The image was calculated and draw before I saw it. It was a right prediction. It is totally the opposite of pareidolia.
But you need notice that, if there is pareidolia, must have its “anti”. It is about persons that can not recognize similarities that indicates correlations. These persons can not work as police, investigators, because there are not able to connect facts that re-compose a crime. generally the mind of these people is chaotic so, they believe faithfully that everything is pure randomness. I think that this is yours problem and the problem of the modern mindset that produced the void between Cosmological and Biological Evolution.
You have anti-pareidolia. You should be ashamed.
Com’on… do you want that I write a high-school textbook and in scientific jargons every time that we need to express a single idea that can be resumed into two lines and in a language that other people not working yours profession can understand? Let’s try it: RNA-polymerase is the enzyme that uses the DNA as template for building a RNA messenger that goes to ribosome for synthesizing a protein by a process known as transcription. Then…
No way my friend… I don’t need to explain here that is not a real RNA sent to DNA but is an enzyme called RNA-poli… We are not in science class neither at yours lab. But you are right on something. I am using the Matrix/DNA language for communicating with people that are not trained to think by this worldview. So, I need sometimes be careful and translating it to yours worldview’s language.
Good question. I will google it because I don’t know this issue, But, a better example of “mind” should be the social organization of ants and bees. It seems very “intelligent”. That’s why I study carefully these systems and my surprise that it is the exactly copy of the anatomy and functionality of LUCA – the Last Universal Common Ancestor. It makes sense, now. There is no intelligence applied there, it is merely genetics on way projected into the biofilm.
Where did you get these words?! It is not my post. I even don’t know what “partaken” means…
And this is a great job, I am thankfully that you are spending yours time with me. Plasma is matter produced naturally in stars and stars were made before human’s origins. In Matrix/DNA world view, astronomical systems are ours ancestors, ancient ancestors, if the word “ancient” in English has the same meaning as “anciente” in Portuguese. Evolution is the movement from the initial singularity, the extreme “simplest” towards the increase of complexity, by Matrix/DNA definition. So, when any new complexity is added to the universal system that is coming under evolution since the Big Bang, there is progress if it fits in the universal genetic reproductive process. There is no progress and the system is condemned to extinction if the new information does not fit the genetic process. We can change basics terminology between our different world views.
This is a very complex issue that we merely can build hypothesis. There are several indications that “natural original light” is not visible by ours instruments and left hemisphere of the brain. What do you think, for instance, about that video and book of a neuroscientist called “A Stroke Insight”, I think? I forgot her name. Watching and listening natives in Amazon jungle that drink their hallucinogenic beverages I had several indications of this phenomena. Now I am research about holograms, maybe this is indicative of this new supposed state of matter… The natural original light is so strong that turns out our vision and we becomes blinds. What we see as light ( from stars) is a second generation, a re-transmission of the original light…
If you refers to ” a light wave is a living thing” you are right, the word “living” here is not right. But it is not my fault, it is yours: you created this word “life” and with this word you separated us from ours cosmological ancestors. I already said here that makes no sense separating working natural systems into “living” and “non-living”. This is a prejudice for students to understand what is really a natural system. Instead “living thing”I should say “it is a prototype of working system”.
You know, I think I finally got it.
atom → blob without bits sticking out
DNA → blob with lots of bits sticking out
Cell → blob with bits sticking out
sperm → blob with bit sticking out
brain → blob with bit sticking out
human → blob with several bits sticking out
Solar system → blob with bits sticking out
Galaxy → blob with bits sticking out
and so on.
It’s blobs with bits sticking out (or not) all the way down! And up!
*lightbulb* 💡 ← also a blob with a bit sticking out!
(drinking from a bottle, which is a blob with a bit sticking out)
Are lightwaves what connect the various blobs with their bits sticking out? Sort of like tinkertoys?
Sometimes, when I pick my nose, I get a blob with bits sticking out.
Try an English dictionary, not the NewAge Mysticism Dictionary of Hot Air you use, which is not standard usage of English.
You have no systems, no ideas, nothing you can make concrete. Just hot air, bullshit, drivel, gibberish, and you are so addled it makes sense to you. But you can’t make anybody else share in your delusional thinking. This is what pisses you off. The beautiful idea is only in your mind. When it comes out, gibberish no thinking individual can parse.
Mind = blown
You are forgetting another blob, very important: the building block of astronomical systems (BBAS). All blobs you mentioned here are opened systems to bits as input and output, but BBAS is the unique natural “closed” system: no inputs and outputs. The whole history of cosmological evolution is matter ( mass/energy) searching for thermodynamic equilibrium and got it when evolution arrived to BBAS. If you see this system pictured as the Matrix/DNA formula in its state as closed system, you will see that it is the most perfect system-machine to do in this world. It had the pretension to be a perpetuum motor, but, beyond BBAS there is the Universe who has the force for entropy, so, it is forbidden perpetuum motor here.
That’s why cosmological evolution multiplied galaxies to almost the infinite and stopped here. Galaxies are to cosmological evolution what dinosaurs were to biological evolution: a specie that went out of the trunk as a lost branch. Then, Evolution discarded galaxies and went back in time, choosing a smaller and not closed species ( a kind of stellar systems) for continuing through its BBAS, like here Evolution discarded dinosaurs and went back choosing the smaller cynodont for continuing through its DNA. ( BBAS and DNA are merely different shapes of a unique system, the universal Matrix).
Our problem is that our biosphere is the chaotic product of entropy attacking those perfect machines. There is the good BBAS and the bad BBAS, like there are the good cholesterol and the bad cholesterol. Both BBAS are encrypted into biological genetics, into our genetics, and I think that, we are product of chaos plus the product of the conflict between bad and good BBAS. The bad BBAS, as this galaxy, models our environment and pushes the whole biosphere for to be a copy, a reproduction of it. Ants and bees societies already failed into it, and we will fall also if we go towards the Huxleyan Admirable New World under the rules of the Orwellian Big Queen. The way that this modern generation are good in computers games and computers at all, is an indication we are falling in it, being merely another piece of an almost perfect machine.
A general theory can do lots of mistakes about smalls details, like its models for atoms, DNA, etc, because the most important factor of this theory is the existential meaning suggested for each thing and for our existence in this world. It is a guide for decisions about what way to follow. A bad theory is a bad guide, that is why an honesty Darwin took 30 years testing his theory and searching facts that could be as good evidences or a mortal fact that could kill the whole theory. That’s why I don’t believe in Matrix/DNA Theory and I am also about 30 years testing it against real proved natural facts and/or events.
From our closed system ancestor ( the extreme expression of selfishness) we inherited the selfish genes. This is a suicide destiny, reproducing here the celestial machine. But, thankfully, in the air there are free bits information coming from natural systems beyond galaxies, hierarchy superior,and its expression here we call “consciousness”. This is an opened door to a different destiny. We need to build here the Admirable New World for our bodies getting its perfect thermodynamic state, there is no other alternative. But… we need to know our enemy inside ourselves, encrypted into our genetics, for avoiding be caught by him. And Matrix/DNA Theory had got it… included we have the picture of his anatomy and face.
And Nerd of Redhead, when picking his tongue, gets blobs with lots of hateful and poisonous bits sticking out. But since that these sticking does not reaches me, my loved Almighty Lord, PinkUnicorn, said that loves him also and will give to him pink popcorn in the heaven for all eternity…
To David: Please, if you have interest in it, see here how works Matrix/DNA models:
The Rosetta Mission and a Comet’s Tale ( Paper: K. Altwegg, et al. 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, a Jupiter family comet with a high D/H ratio. Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1261952 (2014)
Results are starting to come in from the Rosetta mission, including a new article in Science on the composition of water on the comet 67P/C-G. The results support the idea that Earth’s water didn’t come from cometary bombardments.
The origin of Earth’s water has been a matter of some debate. The traditional view is that early Earth was too hot to retain its primordial water, so our planet was later wetted by cometary impacts during the late heavy bombardment period. It seems reasonable if you imagine comets as dusty snowballs. But as we now know, comets are more like snowy dustballs. And while asteroids are often thought of as dry rocks, they actually contain a great deal of water embedded in their minerals. So Earth could have gotten water from either meteor or comet impacts (or both).
We can actually determine the origin of Earth’s water by looking at trace isotopes within it. Typical water consists of two parts hydrogen to one part oxygen, hence H2O. But there are other variations such as D2O, which is two parts deuterium instead. The ratio of these two varieties of water (known as the D/H ratio) can tell us about the water’s origin. The D/H ratio found in water-rich meteorites is fairly consistent, and it is similar to the ratio of Earth’s water. That would indicate that our water came from asteroids, not comets.
In this new work, the authors measured the D/H ratio of water vented from 67P, and found it was nearly four times higher than Earth levels. This means that our water most definitely did not come from this kind of comet. Comet 67P is part of the Jupiter family of comets. Observations of cometary tails from other Jupiter family comets have given similar results, but this new result is much more accurate.
While this excludes one family of comet, it is possible that other comets might have contributed to Earth’s water. But since periodic comets such as 67P once originated from the same Oort cloud as other comets, that doesn’t seem likely.
Matrix/DNA Theory: “It is an absurd that expertises in our modern scientific field “Astronomy” keeps searching external sources for explaining Earth’s water only because Earth’s water does not fits into the modern cosmological theoretical model. These people loose the control of their mind accepting weird ideas like “this water came from bombardments of comets and meteorites…!!!” There is no force that can wake up them for noticing that “it is the model that is wrong”.
There are others cosmological models, outside the institutional Academy. Like the model from Matrix/DNA THeory, to which the Earth’s water is no problem, it is solved inside the model. For seeing it, go to http://theuniversalmatrix.com/pt-br/matriz.html and see the first picture, in blue. Each new astronomical body is formed by a central spiral vortex ( F1). Emitted to outside the nucleus, the body is a sphere of hot energetic magma and it falls in akind of event horizon formed by stellar dust. This “germ” goes away from the nucleous passing throught out the clouds od dust and the dust are aggregated to it, creating what will be “geological layers”. The differentiation among several layers is due the temperature of the dust, which freezes with distance form the hot central nucleus. So, the last geological layer will be pure ice and when falling into the orbit of a star, the warm from the starm transforms the ice into water. The shape of this new body is called in this phase as “planet”.
Ok, so, it is dependable of the pathway that a planet goes out of the nucleus, orbiting or not orbiting stars, if it will have water or not. Now, we have a problem. We described here how was the formation of the first generations of astronomical systems, which was a symbiotic process. After the first generation, these astronomical systems did same thing that the first generation of cells did here: they learned how to reproduces themselves. The transition between the first and the second process is not clear for us yet, so, we don’t have a good model for how modern generations are being formed. We have lots of data for composing theoretical models, but that’s what they are: theoretical models, object for changes when getting new data that does not fit the model.
The current academic model, called Nebular Theory, built for to fit the General Standard Model, where planets should be formed by clusters of dust surrounding the formation of a star makes no sense if we look to how cells found its way for self-reprodution. And the self-reproduction of astronomical systems were the ancestor mechanism of cell’s self-reproduction. Then a better model must observe what is made here for calculating what is made there. Cells does not self-reproduce creating spontaneous organelles in clusters among the cytoplasm. This scene is what the academic theory is suggesting for planetary formation. It is an absurd! I had no time yet for calculating this transition, Astronomy is not the priority of Matrix/DNA Theory just now, ans meanwhile, I am obligated to watch the refuse of accepting that Earth’s water was produced at the formation of the planet. But it did not came from outside. This idea makes no sense at all. Why not be humble and searching to adapt the theoretical model to those real data we have?
Meteorites are the RNA-transporters of water inside the Milk Way… Are you kidding me?! How we will stop them, when the water will fulfill the whole atmosphere?… Creationists will like this idea: “Oh, the Bible said it when mentioned the Noah’s Arch… it were meteorites that cause it…”
To build a blob of mucus from scratch, you must first invent the universe.
— something Carl Sagan never said
Wow, this thread has been active. o_O I’ll come back later.
louismorelli
Why don’t you allow commenting on your website?
Blown lightbulbs, Batman.
louismorelli #399:
When quoting other people, and especially when quoting from sources other than this thread, please remember to use blockquotes.
<blockquote>Pasted text goes here</blockquote>
Produces:
This aids people in discerning which parts of your comment are quotes and which are your own words.
Enters stage left.
Sees walls o’ text.
Briefly skims the ensuing bafflegab.
Laughter alternating with weeping.
Exit stage left.
anteprepro
I think you should have exited stage right.
There is more opportunity for Drama® as you traverse.
…pursued by a blob.
Checking Portuguese Wikipedia shows that “Brave New World” is “Admirável Mundo Novo”, so I can see how that could be back-translated to “Admirable”. Translating “Grande Irmão” as “Big Queen” presumably reflects how the government is going to take over reproduction, no doubt because the building blob of astronomical systems has a bit that is sticking out and undergoing thermodynamic transfer by lightwaves.
Or something like that.
yeah
that makes Sense™.
Owlmirror #391
See, this is what I mean; the Law of Similarity is another one of those near-universals in magical traditions. There’s virtually nothing here that you couldn’t find in Castaneda or Gardner, although they were both much better writers.
No, Dalillama. Nature has no “laws” because if had it, would means that a supernatural agent created and are controlling Nature. “Laws are human concepts describing how initial tribal behaviors are organized when forming social systems, and since that natural systems formed by initial brute forces acquires a new entity – the entity of a system – which by feed-back acts over all parts, the human “laws” for its social systems mimics this natural property for its systems.
The similarities pointed out By Matrix/DNA Theory are the similarities observed in what we call “genetic flow”, which shows for instance, similarities between whales and mammal humans. Repetitions produced by the flowing of the long chain of causes effects since the Big Bang must have similarities between Cosmic Systems and Biological systems because all these systems are parts of the Universe as a genetic/computational reproductive process of universes… or other unknown ex-machine thing.
We can not exaggerate seeing similarities where they does no exist, but also does not be blind where they exist. If we did it since the earliest days of sciences, Mendell etc., we never could notice that there is “genetics”.
Can’t ever get your head out of your ass. Nature has laws due to it behaving in a regular fashion. No matrix or imaginary deity required for that to happen. More lies, bullshit, and gibberish.
Who is this “we” you talk of. Your own word is YOU. We implies there are those who back your gibberish. Name names, or shut the fuck up.
You have no idea how science is done. Word to the gibberish speaker, you are doing it WRONG. Your model precedes data/evidence. There is no evidence for your model that isn’t explained by science. Hence, you were never able to convince us you speak anything other than gibberish.
#384 through #390 are all louismorelli.
Jesus.
Brilliant deduction. I knew that the name in English is “Brave”, but due I am very busy and have no time for remembering the right things, the Portuguese version came to mind first and I was rolled by it. Sorry.
Orwell did not a research in Nature for to see what Nature has produced. He thought that the future should be guided by humans free-will, which would produce a Big Brother. But Matrix/DNA Theory has identified that the bees and ants social systems are exactly reproduction of Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems in its state when forming the building block for astronomical systems. Everything that ants and bees does when organizing its systems is automation guided by their genetics which was produced by that astronomical system. But,,, in the ancestor system, the government is occupied by the systemic Function number 1, which performs the functions of the systemic female counterpart. In the sky there is the Big Queen, at ants and bees there is the Big Queen, and if we, humans, does not uses our intellect opened to consciousness, we will be driven by the same genetics, and will arrive to the same organizational social system, but under a Big Queen. When the female function is the driver, the system is closed in itself, when the male is the driver, the system is opened to relations and adventure with the external world. You see this as the basic foundations of humans’women psychology today.
Is it right saying that the building blob of human system has a bit that is sticking out and undergoing genetic transfer by lightwaves? Of course not. So, if not is the case for human self-reproduction, it is not the case also for the universal system that is evolving since the Big Bang. The building block of astronomical systems was reproduced biologically here in the shape of plants cells due its fragmentation by entropy into bits-information, which are carried by photons emitted by stellar radiation. They works as non-living primordial genes. Pure genetics.
If louismorelli ever starts shouting “Studsy said you was on the level so be on the level!!!” that would totally make my day…
louismorelli
Why don’t you allow commenting on your website??
And this is the “today” article showing how Matrix/DNA works and why it is very useful:
http://theuniversalmatrix.com/pt-br/artigos/?p=8686
It is about the article published by The WallStreetHedge called: Bad luck to be blamed for two-thirds of cancers in adults: Study
Sorry that my article is Portuguese and any machine-translation will change the meaning of those concepts because they are not usual and very complex. if someone here is interested, tell it here that I will translate it tonight… Good afternoon for everybody and The Loved Almighty Lord PinkUnicorn blesses all…
Yawn, the gibberish won’t stop.
Looks at gibberish (any post by LM).
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAA
You are being laughed at LM.
louismorelli’s bulldada is a classic example of an ignorant crank substituting sheer quantity of words for actual quality of discourse. Address one utterly meaningless claim, and all you get is more meaningless claims. Which, again, makes his bulldada less pleasant than God-Soap labels, which at least have an actual end.
louismorelli
Why don’t you permit commenting on your website?
Sorry that my article is Portuguese and any machine-translation will change the meaning of those concepts because they are not usual and very complex.
Oh yes, that’s the same standard-issue excuse every crank and religious cult leader uses: “No one will ever see the truth in my disjointed ravings because my ideas are too complex and unique for either people or the Internet to ever truly comprehend.”
Oh, great.
Et tu, Matrix DNA theorists?
Sorry, you are right. Really the Matrix/DNA Theory is not complex for those trained how to think by its logics and by the systemic approach ( instead the reductionist approach), but it is totally novelty for those that foes not know it, which seems “very complex” to them. Again, in a hurry due I am busy, I wrote it without explaining the details. Sorry…
It was permitted but the host suspended the website complaining that hackers were using it and entering through “comments”. I paid a technician for fix it and he said the unique way is taking out the comments and adding “disquss”. But now I don’t know how access “disquss” and the comments as administrator. I only understand about the content and almost nothing about computation, sorry…
Louismorelli,
Got any testable predictions?
[crickets chirping]
Fixed that for you. There is no logic, just gibberish to be laughed at.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
louismorelli, #397
LOL… almost infinite.
Is that a lot, Dr. Morelli?
It was permitted but the host suspended the website complaining that hackers were using it and entering through “comments”. I paid a technician for fix it and he said the unique way is taking out the comments and adding “disquss”. But now I don’t know how access “disquss” and the comments as administrator. I only understand about the content and almost nothing about computation, sorry…
Excuse me for being rude, but HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW HAW! How does a hacker access one blog through the comments while leaving every other blog known to the population untouched? If your host’s systems are REALLY that much more vulnerable than the rest, then you need to find a more competent host.
And you paid a technician to give you no better solution than getting rid of comments altogether? You’re either a liar and a coward, or an idiot and a sucker. Your lame excuse is just a bad punchline to a joke that’s gone on too long.
Got any testable predictions?
His first-born son will poop sparkling rainbows of matrix DNA all over the galaxy, after his mother’s memories are transferred to his body. This is SCIENCE, folks, you heard it here first!
Raging Bee, I have no time now for translating these e-mails but I think you will understand. And if will not be satisfied there are others e-mails comunicating the suspension.
—–
Steve Nagy (Hosting Machine)
Mensagem 770576, sábado 18/01/14 12:04
Detectamos nesta hospedagem a query abaixo que está causando sobrecarga do nosso equipamento de hospedagem. Para garantir a disponibilidade e performance dos serviços para os demais usuários deste servidor e para evitar a suspensão preventiva e temporária de sua hospedagem, solicitamos, em carater de urgência, a revisão e otimização ou a eliminação na forma atual desta query. Você pode utilizar o comando “EXPLAIN” do MySQL para verificar a eficâcia da query.
Base de dados: theunive_artuser
Query: SELECT comment_ID FROM wp_enus_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = ‘111’ AND comment_parent = ‘0’ AND comment_approved != ‘trash’ AND ( comment_author = ‘Goklotks’ OR comment_author_email = ‘ou.tfe.i.ti.an.c.l@gmail.com’ ) AND comment_content = ‘http://www.lotrans.si/air/?p=76 – エアジョー&at
ilde;ƒ€ãƒ³ オリジナル æ³æœ«ãƒãƒ¼ã‚²&atil
de;ƒ³ http://www.lotrans.si/air/?p=481 – エアジョー&at
ilde;ƒ€ãƒ³ ショップ メンズ 通販 http://www.lotrans.si/air/?p=1324 – エアジョー&at
ilde;ƒ€ãƒ³ レディース 通販 セール ãƒãƒƒã‚° 通販 http://www.lotrans.si/air/?p=492 – エアジョー&at
ilde;ƒ€ãƒ³ ショップ 激安 店舗 http://www.lotrans.si/air/?p=898 – エアジョー&at
ilde;ƒ€ãƒ³ ヒール セール 楽天 http://www.lotrans.si/air/?p=1352 – エアジョー&at
ilde;ƒ€ãƒ³ レディã….
etc. and etc….
xxxxx
And a few days following it they suspended ( if you understand something here… and the website was 3 or 5 months out ( a month before was reaching 400.000 hits a month)
Thiago Bernardi (Hosting Machine)
Mensagem 785626, quarta 26/03/14 15:48 (cerca 10 meses atrás)
Luiz, boa noite.
Devido ao problema a sua hospedagem teve de ser suspensa. ( Due the problem yours “website” was suspended)
A atualização do seu WordPress deve ocorrer de forma local para evitar demais transtornos a usuários que compartilham esse servidor.
Como você pode observar pela query que indicamos, os comentários do seu WordPress podem estar sendo explorados por terceiros. ( The comments at yours wordpress are being explored by third part… A techinician said about hackers from Eastern Europe)
Podemos fornecer um backup do diretório public_html e reativar a sua hospedagem com esse diretório limpo. Todos os outros dados como base de dados, mensagens de e-mail e etc permanecerão intactos.
Aguardamos seu retorno.
Atenciosamente,
Thiago Bernardi
xxxx
Yes. This was the first e-mail from the technician to Hosting Machine:
Mensagem 821923, segunda 15/09/14 07:39 (cerca 4 meses atrás)
Bom dia Thiago,
Verifiquei os logs do banco e vou desabilitar todos os comentários do WordPress até que esses spams, foco dos ataques, sejam removidos completamente. Por favor, gostaria que concedesse novamente acesso ao portal por 48h para que eu possa tomar as medidas necessárias.
Obrigado
xxxx
As you see, there is no liar or coward here, but, by the way, thanks for that… As I said when I am travelling to Brasil and the jungle I can’t neither reading my e-mails, and I don’t understand this technical computer problems. I am a man fighting alone and paying alone about U$ 300.000,00 in 30 years developing this theory, never got one dollar doing it and I don’t need because I am hard working all my life. And if Matrix/DNA will be proved wrong, it will go to garbage and I will pay all work/time/bills alone. Don’t worry there is no bad intentions here; if I can’t help, I will not prejudice nobody… Cheers…
More gibberish from the gibberish master.
Points at LM.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA.
You are being laughed at.
Is he still here spouting his apophedia?
He’s paid ten grand a year on this Theory? Wut? Worst. Investment. Ever.
so, there’s a graduate program in “Matrix/DNA Theory” now?
maybe it would make more sense if we could speak with one of your many students….
So… kin selection doesn’t explain eusocial behavior then, even though it does?
I found it! Behold, the Matrix Biscuit. With Knobs On.
all the way back up at 93….
holy crap! He’s the Portuguese version of John Davison!
I would eat that.
so long as I had an ice cold hoppy beer to wash it down with.
Well, it’s certainly more than…
*counts fingers*
ten.
Oh gawd. MatrixBot returns.
Who gives a damn about the logic? I could come up with a perfectly logical cosmology based on the premise that the stars are made of the breath of dragons.
GIGO
humans can self reproduce?
why doesn’t anyone tell me these things!
*looks at girlfriend*
I don’t need you any more. make sure you leave the beer on your way out.
What if it turns out that you don’t get along with you?
*bites nails*
*belches*
unpossible.
Ichthyic:
Hey, that’s actually a great comparison. I was trying to think of what other prolific internet cranks were comparable.
only took reading the first paragraph of his website, and it seemed obvious to me.
very similar.
btw, I thought the name sounded familiar.
this is not the first time we have been “graced” with Morelli’s presence….
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/05/26/this-is-not-science/#comment-835073
it goes back further than that as well.
I suspect from my little web search that Morelli spams the comments of every blog about DNA.
much like Davison used to do in every thread that had the word “evolution” in it.
check out David M arguing with him in that old thread.
If this keeps up, we’re going to go to page 2.
Is it worth it?
no. morelli has already said what he came here to say.
and he’s said it before as well.
in fact, numerous times.
it was gibberish then, it’s gibberish now.
poor guy needs help, not debate.
I am sorry for your sunk costs.
louismorelli,
But in that thread Ichthyic linked in #446, you said it’s a non-scientific theory (whatever that is):
You sure have been using a lot of science-y words in talking about it…
I am a man fighting alone and paying alone about U$ 300.000,00 in 30 years developing this theory, never got one dollar doing it…
Wow, what a total unmitigated waste of time and money. I don’t want to bash a victim here, but it’s pretty clear this louismorelli guy is both ignorant and delusional; and his delusions are leading him to make bad and possibly self-destructive decisions.
Is it worth it?
No. We’re arguing with someone who flat-out refuses to address anyone else’s responses in any meaningful way, and who may not even allow himself to understand any objections to his “theory,” which is his, and in which he’s invested way too much of himself to ever allow himself to see how it might be less than perfect.
LM stated his “case” in his first few posts. Nothing new since then, same old gibberish. I’ll vote to close this thread to further comments.
All that money, time, and effort for basically nothing. It’s a hobby.
I’d vote with Nerd on this one, it seems to’ve reached the end o’ the line.
Just to confirm — that’s US$ 300,000? Is it common to add cents to a round figure estimate in Brazil?
I’m curious as to what all that money has been spent on, over all that time. The website appears to have only been up since 2008, for example.
@ Owlmirror #457
If’n I was obsessed with a hobby on which I spent all my income, it would include all living expenses if I were living in the Amazon, travel expenses to and from (in the thread with DM I think he said he was in NY), office supplies, etc. Essentially everything I spent could be counted as an expenditure on “developing [my] theory”. I know people who fritter away 10k a year on videos, shoes, phone apps, hamburgers, etc. The recent website could be considered taking advantage of new technology. Or not, quis scit.
I don’t believe you are serious saying such thing, Daz! The breath of dragons can not pass through the next step in a logical think. A complete world view needs to obey a logical line from the beginning to the end. If any natural real fact does not fit in the line, or the entire world view must go to the garbage, or the author will find at that point a different direction from which the initial logics can advance.
There is an infallible method for building a world view, which the modern theorists ( and all humans before them) are not obeying: every conclusion from two or more prior premises need be checked facing the real world. And when developing Matrix/DNA world view I obeyed this first commandment of rational thinking. The theorist needs to find at least one real natural proved fact or event – here and now – that fits with the (predicted) conclusion. If he/she does not find it, must stops at the point and reveal all prior development. For instance:
1) There are two or three real facts that can be premises suggesting a conclusion: this Universe began with a Big Bang.
2) Are there some real proved known fact or event where something begins with such Big Bang?
If I don’t find any, the theory is temporary suspended. I will try to connect the premises ( the expansion observed from galaxies movements, the cosmic radiation back ground, the red shift, etc.) in different ways searching if there is no other alternative than the Big Bang.
But then… I observed that any human body have their first moment, their original point, due a “bigbang”. It is when the spermatozoon membrane inside an ovule is suddenly opened and the male genome joins with the female… etc. Ok, we have here and now a real fact that fits as parameter for basing ( as foundations) the theoretical conclusion at cosmological level. The Big Bang Theory is consistent. That’s why Matrix/DNA Theory inserted it into the Universal Natural History.
But, doing it, I went by a different way in relation to those cosmologists, physicists and Mathematicians that are working the Big Bang Theory. Their following sequences were built by Math’s logics, and mine, by biological/genetics logics. I think that Math’s is a human construction that is good for translating one or two waves of evolution cycles, but it make errors about the other five waves. And I think that biology/genetics can be reduced from living beings till the Big Bang.
Ok, the biological approach can be not the right one. But it is a good try, and is useful for testing the Physics/Math approach.
Looking for parameters for self-criticism of yours reasoning is the best method for keeping you synchronized with Nature, which makes that yours breath of dragons does not resit to the first steps of a logical line. Of all mystics, creationists, etc., obeyed this rational rule, we would have no religions. But… people like Krauss, Hawking, etc., are not obeying this rule also. For instance, where is any real natural phenomena here and now that fits as parameter for the Hawking’s’ theory about black holes? I never found one, so, this theory is suspect. Than, I bought the books from Hawking for studying how he arrived to his conclusions. I don’t know those complex mathematical calculus involved but I pot in the paper the initial causes considered by Hawking and the final results, for seeing any logics there. And doing that, I stopped when the theory suggests that for getting a black hole, the star needs to reach the point of singularity. Never Nature reached this point, never nature went back to this point that happened only at the first moment following the BIg bang. It is impossible, if Nature could going back to singularity, the Universe had not evolved to the next evolutionary step. So, Matrix/DNA theorized another kind of astronomical body/phenomena for fitting inside the galaxies nucleus that makes sense with the general astronomical context.
The Hawking singularity is yours breath of dragons. No way. And for yours knowledge, Matrix/DNA world view is a unique straight logical line from Alpha to Omega.
You are right, Vereverum ( if I understood the final meaning due my problem with English). My life is shared in 8 hours day ( 84 hours a week) working hard at any job ( construction, taxis driver, cleaning airports, etc.) for paying my bills and travelling; and 84 hours/week with my unique hobby ( searching in scientific literature, the new published papers, etc.,) new data for testing, developing Matrix/DNA Theory). But I don’t think this is an insane hobby… I will explain:
When a kid I read all rationalist philosophers, From Socrates to Kant, Comte, Descartes, etc. Then, at High School, the principal was a creationist, and when we have a class about the general theories of Big Bang, abiogenesis, etc., he came to our classroom and told about the Bible’s theory. I went to home thinking about the two different world views and arrived to a conclusion:
The first living being here at Earth was the first complete cell’s system. Every known cell is product of an existing prior cell’s system. Then, the first living being was a “system”, it must be made by another system. So, in the Oparin/Trey reduced atmosphere, in the theorized ocean deep soup, was missing one ingredient: the mysterious creator system. It must be there, if don’t, nothing else makes rational sense. I will be a scientist and I will search this system in Nature.”
But, I was a poor guy in a third world country, and never could studying a field in University that takes more than four/five hours a day, because I need work for paying the University. Then I went to University at night, doing first philosophy, and business administration, which I could afford. But at my free time I kept reading university’s books about Biology, Physics, Then arrived Internet, and information became easier to get. At about 27/30 years old I suspected that the virgin nature of a jungle could drive me to find the mysterious system. Then I found the theoretical formula of Matrix/DNA and it suggest the system that fits the gap. The hobby continues until a unique real natural fact could debunk the whole building of the theory. I don’t think it is an insane hobby and I think that with this hobby I can make the difference and be useful for Humanity evolution. So, I will continue to spent all my saved money in it… only my money, because I am a mental-blind man that does not know the thru and I will not drive another persons to follow my way, if I – as a blind man – will broken my head ahead, I will pay the price alone. I call this behavior as “responsibility” and it is a moral code, another production from the naturalist Matrix/DNA world view.
Points at LM’s gibberish that is incomprehensible.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Your idea is being laughed at here LM. Fade into the bandwidth.
Y’don’t say‽ Well spotted, old chap.
Well, if we presuppose that the stars are indeed the breath of dragons, then space-dwelling dragons must exist. Furthermore, since no stars appear elongated as they would do if seen side-on, all the dragons must be breathing directly toward Earth. Therefore, contrary to all prevailing theories, it turns out we are at the centre of the universe. Furthermore, we no longer need dark matter to explain ‘anomalous’ gravitational effects, since dragons are capable of moving under their own power, rather than only being passively acted upon. I can play this game all day.
What part of Garbage In Garbage Out did you fail to understand? I was pointing out that it makes no difference whether we follow your logic or not, or how easy that logic is to follow. If your initial premises are crap, you will merely produce possibly entertaining but ultimately useless, internally-consistent crap.
Yes, you have a good question that made me to think about. It is U$ 300.000. In Brasil is used to say – for instance – R$ 4,00, which means “four reals”. The “,00” is to substitute the cents, like in R$ 4,50 which means “four reals and fifty cents”. As an American citizen I never had noticed this different behavior betwen two countries. Thanks by that…
Not in Matrix/DNA formal logics. If any calculations about real natural facts here suggests that space-dwelling dragons must exist, the next step is searching in Nature, here and now, at Earth’s surface, terrestrial-dwelling dragons really exists, or at least, some evolutionary product coming from past dwelling dragons. And for sure, the researcher will not find it, then, he will back in the calculations.
The comparative anatomy among living and non-living natural systems suggests – as a final result – that the common denominator among all living systems ( DNA and/or RNA) must have its astronomical and atomic counterpart – a common denominator among all those systems. This astronomical/atomic common denominator must be the ancestral of DNA/RNA. Then we can make a theoretical model of this unknown atomic/astronomic common denominator. I got a model, but it was not corresponding to then current standard astronomical model. Who is wrong? Of course, I am the wrong one, I am not expert in Astronomy and atomic Physics.
But… the standard model does not explains universal evolution and can not explain life here. The final product ( life) could not be produced by the Standard Model.And the Standard Model does not considers necessary the rationally obligatory common denominator. Then, I have reasons when suspecting the Standard Model and I must search a model that can explaining the final products we are seeing here and now. The comparative anatomy among living and non-living systems can help you trying different connections between the astronomical elements for getting a better model. Things becomes surprising when you discover that a new model is just the common denominator. There is no “DNA” inside the system: the whole system is the “DNA”. It makes sense because the astronomical system is the builder of this biosphere, all details/information from the astronomical systems had converged here, and the final product – biological DNA – must survive in this environment. Then, the astronomical systems becomes a “formula” that models the environment ( biosphere) and at same time, be inside the final product ( the first living system).
Unifying the biological DNA with its ancestors – which have the astronomical, atomic, electromagnetic, etc., shapes), you get a universal “DNA”. But… then you can not call it “DNA” because this is merely the terrestrial-biological shape of a universal thing. That’s why I choose the name “Matrix/DNA”.
If you call as “the breath of dragons” the basic foundation of Matrix/DNA world view you are doing a big mistake, Because dragons does not exists at Earth’s surface and DNA yes, it exists here. This is a inevitable requirement for a logical theory.
Furthermore, since no stars appear elongated as they would do if seen side-on, all the dragons must be breathing directly toward Earth. Therefore, contrary to all prevailing theories, it turns out we are at the centre of the universe. Furthermore, we no longer need dark matter to explain ‘anomalous’ gravitational effects, since dragons are capable of moving under their own power, rather than only being passively acted upon. I can play this game all day.
What part of Garbage In Garbage Out did you fail to understand? I was pointing out that it makes no difference whether we follow your logic or not, or how easy that logic is to follow. If your initial premises are crap, you will merely produce possibly entertaining but ultimately useless, internally-consistent crap.
Looks at LM’s latest gibberish
BWHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Your gibberish is being laughed at LM, and NOBODY is taking your bullshit seriously, except to laugh at it.
Why can’t you fade into the bandwidth, like anybody with a clue would do?
It is not in this way that works rational thinking ( neither the scientific method applied to theories, I think). It works in this way:
1) Brings on the table the two theories;
2) Each author describes the logics of his/her theory:
3) The judge ( or third parts) points out several real proved natural phenomena and asks to the two authors how the theory’s logistic explain the existence of that phenomena;
4) The third part makes the judgement which logistic is more rational, and not the authors.
If the whole logical line of a theory can explain any existent natural fact since its first causes – forces and elements from the first seconds after the Big Bang – till arriving to that natural phenomena, it is a good theory.
So, we can begin here to make this exercise. My theory is on the table, now you pick yours ( I think it is the Standard model, right?) and bring it on the table. The third part can make the first question as: How yours theory explains the existence of the first cell system here at Earth?
If you are faithful to yours theory you will beginning with something like that:
“Life is the harnessing of chemical energy in such a way that the energy-harnessing device makes a copy of itself.” As begins the paper here: http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/368/1622/20130088
And this affirmation, this initial premise, makes no sense accordingly to the logics of Matrix/DNA Theory. We will fight…
1st: Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
2nd: No. It doesn’t work that way. You’re talking about rhetoric, not science.
1st: Bwahahahahahahahahahaha
2nd: So, the germ theory of disease proves some god created the universe because the germ theory of disease doesn’t account for any and all phenomena since the beginning of the universe?
Yeah.
Right.
louismorelli,
Hahaha, what exactly did you spend $300000 on? You just made a website with words and pictures on it. You didn’t do any research with expensive equipment and employing scientists.
You forgot the part where you need to explain an observation which already extent theories cannot. So far my self-propelled dragons seem to be holding up better than your, erm, whatever-the-fuck-it-is, on that score. ‘course, I still need to provide evidence that they might even actually exist, but hey, that little detail doesn’t appear to be slowing you down any, so why should I bother?
I don’t believe you are serious saying such thing, Daz!
You, of all people, are in no position to question anyone else’s seriousness.
The breath of dragons can not pass through the next step in a logical think.
Tell that to the dragons when they’re breathing in your face.
If any calculations about real natural facts here suggests that space-dwelling dragons must exist, the next step is searching in Nature, here and now, at Earth’s surface, terrestrial-dwelling dragons really exists…
Actually, no, if stars are formed from the breath of dragons, then such dragons would be found in space, not on the surface of any planet. You really have no clue what you’re talking about, do you?
Also, by not publishing in journals, where such things are peer reviewed, then you are not willing to put your ‘theory’ (which frankly is no better than a hypothesis) to such evaluation by third parties.
Basically, put up or shut up.
I have one question that I predict you will ignore, (and my success rate is fairly high now). Do you know what Apophenia is? Have you considered that your hypothesis may be no more than that?
A good scientist does not look just for things that are right with their hypotheses. They look for ways in which they could be proved wrong, and test those ways. Because when you are invested in an idea, then you are the easiest person to fool, because you don’t look at ways it could be wrong. Especially when you have already wasted so much money on it. But beware the sunk costs fallacy. Just because you’ve put so much time and money and effort into it, you are reluctant to admit that it might not be worth it. Unfortunately for you, that still doesn’t make it worth anything.
The initial premise of “yours” abiogenesis theory is a crap. Bring on here a soup and get from the soup a entire working natural system composed with proteins, RNA, etc.
The initial premise of Matrix/DNA is a “soup” also. But it is a soup very, very complex than yours soup. And it is scientifically falsifiable… Which does not means that the theory is the final thru. It is merely a “theory”… yet.
There was a dragon in my garage, Mr Sagan, honest. It just, umm, flew off into space. Look! A supernova!
Y’know, I think I may be onto something here…
Are you saying that an actual demonstration of the process of abiogenesis would definitively prove your theory false?
You’re only about half a century behind scientific work on abiogenesis, then.
Dragons urinate and excrete, obviously.
Next question.
Your drivel isn’t even a theory. A scientific theory is at least backed by a body of scientific evidence. You sophistry has no scientific evidence to back it up. More sophistry isn’t and never will be that evidence to back it up. You need to go outside of your own words.
So *points at LM’s drivel*
Bwahahaahahqahahaha.
That makes no sense. Fertilization has no similarity to cosmological expansion. This is like saying the moon is made out of cheese.
Also, how does asexual reproduction fit in at all? There are a few animal species that reproduce asexually, but more importantly, there are uncountable numbers of prokaryotes that reproduce asexually. No “bigbang” at all. You can’t even invoke your confused “bad BBAS”, because you wrote that the “bad BBAS” has some weird connection to social insects, but social insects do reproduce sexually.
(I suspect louismorelli will conjure up a “badder BBAS”)
louismorelli, #472
Louis… louis… listen to yourself, man…
Not only that, it’s been falsified! Congratulations! Your claim is that light “in shape of photons, invaded terrestrial atoms like virus invading a cell, when they take control of the machinery.” is known to be false. We know experimentally what light does when it encounters an atom (it is absorbed, raising an electron from one energy level to another, or it is reflected), and it is nothing whatsoever like “a virus invading a cell, when they take control of the machinery”. If the photon is absorbed, it will later be re-emitted, restoring the atom to its former state; no “machinery” is taken control of.
Nick Gotts@475:
He actually quotes from a recent paper @#466 — but I don’t think he has the chemistry background to even offer a comprehensive criticism; he just says it “makes no sense accordingly to the logics of Matrix/DNA Theory.” I don’t think he can even explain why it makes no sense. . .
You’re still going on about this? This is SOOOOOO last year? All the cool kids have moved on long ago. It’s all ball bearing nowadays.
And somebody get me some Quaker State Oil and a pair of novelty teeth. I’ve got work to do!
No, Nick, we don’t know experimentally everything what photons do when it encounters atoms. From Matrix/DNA models it is suggested that photons were the first natural element where information can be recorded. And when interacting with matter ( or mass), the information is “imprinted” into matter. Ok, this is very theoretical even for Matrix/DNA, but it was not found any other element emitted by stars that could be the transporter of informations from the ancestral astronomical system to Earth’s non-organic matter and beginning abiogenesis. ( it was not abiogenesis… it was astronomical embryogenese with severe mutation).
If so, there is no photon identical to any other, like there is no human identical to another. Each one is a unique and specific bit-information. each photon recapitulates in itself the entire wave of light to who it has belonged, so, each photon has gamma-ray, X-ray, etc.
And it is not the observation of what a unique photon does inside an atom that will tell you the change produced in the atomic anatomy/configuration. The invasion of a unique terrestrial atom was by lots of atoms from star’s radiation and Earth’s nuclear emission that reaches the surface through volcanoes, ocean vents, etc.
But, as I said hundred times here, some aspects of Matrix/DNA Theory is debatable. I calculated what mechanism could be the responsible by transference of a whole astronomical system reduced as a life’s seed that created and modelled the first complete cell’s system, I encountered this mechanism which is pure genetic process realized in mechanical fashion as would requires the Newtonian mechanics plus the complexity added by General Relativity. And the final results makes more sense than a obscure soup being touched by accidental sparks of energy… In my results there are place for the ancestors of genetics and living cells; yours theoretical model has not.
By the way,… if you want to believe that the scene we are watching here, when a natural phenomena called virus, invade another natural phenomena called cells, and assumes their machinery, is a scene created and invented by the stupid matter of a lost planet, by the first time in this Universe… you are free for believing what you want… don’t follow me because I don’t know nothing… I think that this scene that I see here is result of a long evolution that accounts about 13,7 billion years. The rational reaction is testing all possible hypotheses and the Matrix/DNA suggestion in this aspect is scientifically falsifiable.
Ok, you ask for it, I will play yours game (I am going in wrong way again, but… you asked for it)
Matrix/DNA has discovered the most surprising “first cause” of all religions. When the chinese philosopher launched the foundations for their religion, he was sleeping and saw a dragon coming to the water’s surface making movements and he draw them creating the symbol of I Ching. I happens that the symbol is exactly the Matrix/DNA formula when it was in the evolutionary state as astronomical systems before life’s origins.
At the Helena Blavatisc “Secret Doctrine”we read that an ancient “hebrew”, living a thousand year before the Bible, and called “Schimeon Ben Jochai” ( if I remember it right) had a vision which is described containing black holes etc., and which was the foundation for the seven symbols used by Bible’s authors describing Adam and Eve in the Paradise ( the serpent, the apple, etc). It happens again, that all those symbols are clearly seen in the same Matrix/DNA model for the astronomical state of the world before life’s origins. Why this surprising coincidence?
The check-mate came when I was watching a native Amazon xaman “under the influence of their spiritus” – but really, he had drinking those natives hallucinogenous beverages – and narrated the same picture narrated by the chinese philosopher in Asia and about 4.000 years ago, which is the same narration of “Genesis”. I will resume the conclusion:
The building blocks of astronomical systems like this galaxy that spreads the life’s seeds is inserted inside a lateral base-pair of nucleotides, the building block of DNA. DNA is in the nucleus of neurons, which are in the brain. When a human mind is altered due torture or hallucinogenous, quickly flashes emitted by neurons and expressing their images in the cortex are “saw” by the man. Since that neurons/DNA are the same image of our astronomical creator, and those ancient men did not know anything about DNA and galaxies, they interpret those images as divine things… beginning a mytho, a religion. It happened to I Chin, to Ben Jochai and is happening now to our friend Daz that also is seeing dragons in his garage… poor man!
*expects something interesting!*
*gravely dissapointed look*
sweet plastic Jesus, give it up already Morelli, you’ve been selling the same plastic hair gel for YEARS now.
NOBODY IS BUYING, m’kay?
run along and go ring someone else’s doorbell.
LOL
I think he’s reached peak observational power there though. you might break him if you go a step further.
uh, break him more I mean.
Wrong LM. Here’s what you have evidenced:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*crickets chirring*
Take your opinion and ego out of you idea, and show other folks agree with you. Or all you have is your delusions and ego. One part delusion to a google parts ego. You need to learn that what you think isn’t important, but what other people think of your gibberish.
Yes we do.
The Laws Underlying The Physics of Everyday Life Are Completely Understood
I can’t understand how you make such mistakes. I never said that. And is enough that you remember how works embryogenesis for reading what I wrote and understanding it. Of course, fertilization is an act, expansion is another. There is similarity for two microbes: one ‘like men – watching the universe’s expansion and the other – living inside the mother’s womb – and watching the fetus expansion. Of course the similarity are in the process, which is the same process causing expansion… Or do you thing that this Universe is a magician that creates from nothing new processes?! Nope: the Universe only knows how to do things by the same way that itself was made.
Here are the properties a photon of light has:
Energy
Momentum (including a direction it is moving in)
frequency
wavelength
polarity
That’s it. And those can sometimes change in certain circumstances involving very high gravitational fields.
It doesn’t contain magic information. We can get information from a *lot* of photons coming from the same place, and analysing them statistically, but an individual photon is very very simple.
louismorelli
Truest thing he’s said yet.
So you noticed that humans on drugs, across times and cultures, report similar hallucinations.
You then jump to the conclusion that these hallucinations are an accurate description of reality because they span times and cultures.
Like most things in life, you seem to miss the obvious: the hallucinations are similar because, despite differering times and cultures, the human brain in which these hallucinations were taking place are more or less the same, thus would experience similar hallucinations.
Humans didn’t know shit about how this universe opperates until we realized that:
1) the human mind makes a shitty measuring instrument, therefore we should build measuring instruments that don’t rely on the human mind to opperate.
2) human language makes for a shitty way to communicate facts about the universe, therefore we should use math to describe reality if we really want to understand it.
Where are your instruments to measure this DNA/Matrix thing you talk a whole bunch about, yet never define?
Where is the math that defines this DNA/Matrix thingy outside of human language?
Until you provide those items, your theory isn’t a theory: it is a hallucination that should be laughed at like all the other hallucinations of history.
What you write, and what embrygogensis is two different things. You write gibberish. You confuse yourself since you are so vague. Science has to be precise. That’s why science progresses knowledge, and you just run yourself in masturbatory mental circles.
Not only do you not understand science, you don’t even understand what you yourself are writing.
Microbes don’t have eyes, and so cannot watch anything, and they didn’t and couldn’t exist when the universe started expanding.
The process does not cause the expansion, because the expansion is the process.
Physical processes are not “created”; they are the result of the laws of physics acting on matter and energy in space and over time.
*eagerly awaits the Microbe Youtube Chanel*
pretty much what Carl Jung made a living out of.
only his books were actually more lucid than Morelli’s writings.
Perhaps if Morelli was the first person to notice the similarity between human halucinations, his life’s work might be worth something.
But his is traveling down a well worn path that has been trod by not only Jung, but every college student that has been exposed to shrooms and esoteric religions for the first time.
It is fucking pathetic that he has spent so much time and money on this endevor. It is even more pathetic that he thinks that he has something novel to offer.
I will try to explain in a few words why Matrix/DNA Theory is suggesting that Sean Carrol is “far away off the beam”in this link/article:
Human Sciences are divided in almost 50 fields but Physics and Math has long ago walked alone forwards while the others are left behind. The final product of this non balanced development of Sciences can be described by an analogy:
Imagine a tiny intelligent particle living inside a proton inside an atom inside a cell that composes the human skeleton. This microbe believe that had learned the basic natural laws governing his little world which last frontiers is the human skin. He will create marvellous technology guided by his knowledge, technology that will be useful for his life inside a bone skeleton. All technology will be based upon the mechanical level of matter organization and will fits its necessity because his environment is merely mechanical. Th will be successful applying Mathematics, because math correlates with Physics. And will believe that discovered the whole world and the language of Nature.
But, we are out of the human body, seeing it from above. We know that beyond the skeleton, there is the soft meat, where the skeleton complexity is multiplied by thousands. The microbe is not seeing that the soft meat exists and acts every minute over the skeleton, so, over his own life. We know that beyond the soft meat there is the human thoughts, mind, consciousness, about which the microbe knows nothing. It is the mind that acts over the soft meat which acts moving, feeding the skeleton, but the microbe makes no idea about that. Still, he believes that knows the natural laws, that his science and technology are very advanced… Poor microbe, Poor Sean Carrol. This world is same way, our Science has moving inside the galaxies as the Universe’s skeleton, it is missing almost everything, and the most complex things for to know, yet.
Matrix/DNA Theory has discovered that beyond the building block for astronomical systems, there is a coverture of primordial biological organization of matter. The connections between a nuclear central vortex, plus a pulsar, plus comets, makes the exactly things that the connection between a human female, plus a human male, plus spermatozoons, produces their self-reproduction, And so on…
My friend, Physics understand about skeletons. Math speaks the language limited to skeleton’s mechanics. But a world that produces a human being composed by soft meat, the complexity of organs, human mind and consciousness… could not be a world made off only with galactic skeletons. Wake up, man… Saying what Sean is saying works as a science-stopper. And we does not have the knowledge for solving 10% of all humans being problems today. We are going against Nature guided by this insane mechanistic technology that is not a technology for mentalized human beings to travel and conquers the Cosmos. Please, don’t do that…
To Sean, we need remember only a thing:
1) It is not possible that the world had a beginning. It is not rational. From nothing can not have beginings.
2) It is not possible that the world had no beginning. It is not rational.
3) Our little brains can not grasp a third alternative.
So, when we will put our head outside this Universe at first time… all ours laws will not exist, because these laws can not explain the world’s existence and meanings. We will forget what we know… when facing the causes that we can not understand now.
It is very admirable what human beings did in the last centuries. But we are still like microbes inside the skeleton…
Why?
None of this contradicts Sean Carroll’s basic point. The laws underlying the physics of everyday life — including how photons interact with atoms — are completely understood. There is no way for quarks to be intelligent, and there is no way for photons to magically convey more information than they already do.
No, it’s a nonsense-stopper and a science-promoter. As in, stop with your nonsense and learn science.
Sean is not saying that we know everything about everyday life; there is lots and lots to learn. It’s just that the physical laws underlying everyday life are understood.
So there is no BBAS, and no “primordial biological organization of matter”, and no reason to think that there could be.
I didn’t see an answer to the question of whether a demonstration of abiogenesis would prove the Matrix/DNA theory wrong.