Bill Nye The Science Guy Debate.......

Well this is all supposed to exist as one big grand thing, past, present, and future. So evidently they are as real as the now and not just concerns of ours, but physical entities. Why does the mind seem to travel through them from past to future?

 

Meaning we share our thoughts.

 

No such entities can be produced in this moment, why are they believed to exist?

 

Shits about to get real in this thread....

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-u1aaltiq4"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-u1aaltiq4

They say it in these physics shows I watch all the time.

 

I say mind is product of the brain. My gut tells me that other systems can influence consciousness as well because some also contain neurotransmitters and chemical messengers which can influence our perceptions and experience. The brain ultimately attempts to organize and make sense of our human experience and thoughts though.

 

I think the mind more an effect of bonding than production in the brain. The brain to me a communication center developed through common bonds.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

"The Miller–Urey experiment (or Urey–Miller experiment) was an experiment that simulated the conditions thought at the time to be present on the early Earth, and tested for the occurrence of chemical origins of life. ... scientists examining sealed vials preserved from the original experiments were able to show that there were actually well over 20 different amino acids produced in Miller's original experiments."

They're working on the later part as we speak. We have created synthetic life, now we just have to learn to set the right conditions to make organics create life by itself.

http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/

http://www.carnegiemuseums.org/cmag/bk_issue/2000/marapr/feat7.html

http://www.agiweb.org/news/evolution/examplesofevolution.html

 

It appears they suggest the illusion of time exists in the spontaneity of the present, real time.

 

Planets and stars are simply conglomerations of matter brought together by gravity. The resultant structures and process' would appear to make it "more complex", which it is to a degree, temporarily, but it is still succumbing to the law of entropy.

The really interesting shit that goes counter to entropy is life.

 

Yes we experience the illusion of time in the spontaneity of the present. In actuality we are these fantastic structures that exist independently of our perception of personhood. So I guess we should hug people a lot in order to create more intricate patterns.

 

Wow, some of those experiments took place in the '50s and '60s so why isn't this more commonly known about?

 

i am sure. the science i do each day is rigorous testing of hypotheses. seeing if results are reproducible and reliable. testing models or theories. some theories are accepted as fact. like the theory of gravity. the theory of evolution may have some gaps, but it is a hell of a lot more reasonable and rational that the story of creation (if taken in a literal sense, which is how Ken Ham presented it).

yes. that is part of the problem. most people in this country don't understand science. they are too busy thumping bibles.

the debate last night has to do with whether or not creation should be taught in public schools. PUBLIC schools that run on tax payer money...in a country that was founded on a few principles which these days we run into the fucking ground like they are nothing - one of which is separation of church and state!!!!!1@11`1!!!

save the creation story for church and let kids learn about evolution in science class. if we go back to teaching kids creation in the class room, that is like going back in time. we should be advancing, teaching our youth to be innovative. or china and india are going to finish taking over the world. nothing against them, i'm not a big nationalist or anything. but i happen to live in america, so i think it'd be good if we didn't deteriorate into stagnation because religious people are too threatened to let their kids hear about evolution.

then the theory of evolution should be taught more extensively. not thrown away.

yes. and do you know what is not very probable? the world in all its complexity to have been created literally in 6 days. for a flood to have covered the earth and every land plant for a year (is it a year? not exactly sure.), while thousands of "kinds" of animals went aboard a wooden ship.

maybe. but that's not Ken Ham's nor the christian viewpoint is it? at least for Ham, he was arguing that the story of genesis is LITERAL. that's how it happened. because God said so.

so if god decided to let the whole shebang happen and let natural selection play out....that would be an acceptable hypothesis for scientists to test out. but they wouldn't be looking for the christian God. it would be a different god, or more likely a type of force or phenomenon...which would hopefully get us closer to the actual truth.

not working in absolutes, no. not like the Book that was written by corrupt and controlling men, and was translated a large handful of times, which people like to refer to as ultimate proof.

they don't have to be. but they kinda have to be when one side wants to take the story of genesis 100% literally.

 

about the entropy thing. maybe the fact that all life relies on the energy of the sun, allows the system as a whole to increase in entropy. if we call the "system" our solar system, right now it is highly organized, energy mostly in the sun. it spews this energy out at us, and life basically just converts energy to different forms.

ok, i'm about to shut up.

just to be picky, it's thought that humans and modern apes (monkeys that exist today) all evolved from a common ancestor. so we didn't come from monkeys. monkeys and us came from something that was ape-like.

 

It's so much fun ruffling feathers and getting blasted at for things I never said.
LOL

got a little riled up, eh Pork?
Ya see, that is the flip side of the coin in this dilemma.
Look at all the things put forth in Pork's post that I NEVER MENTIONED, yet somehow I am being put in the hot seat as a proponent of such beliefs.
It's friggin priceless, I tell ya.
Makes me laugh every time, and it is soooooo predictable as well.

So even our own resident Master of the Science of Bio-Chem, falls into the old trap of "let's just lump 'em all together and credit people with ludicrous things they never claimed".

I do hope you can see the complete folly and error in that extreme as well, Porky my boy .




p.s. I generally agree with you on most of your points Pork and as a scientist, you know damn well that there is a lot of junk science out there being taught as fact, as well as theories generally accepted as fact, but are little more than myth and conjecture framed in scientific jargon and prose.

 

you posted in the bill nye debate thread. he debated a man who was claiming the story of genesis as fact.

i read your post and wanted to reply. i'm not attacking you. i quoted the relevant points and then responded to them.



where did i put words in your mouth? i realize that you may not take the 6 days of creation as literal fact. but i was pointing out that Ham does...and that was what the debate is about.

 

Then I guess I misunderstood your quoting me.:mickey:

 

i quoted you. i took words that you typed, and then responded to them.


then you said, and i quote "Look at all the things put forth in Pork's post that I NEVER MENTIONED, yet somehow I am being put in the hot seat as a proponent of such beliefs."


but thanks to the quotes, one can see exactly what you did mention. some of the things i wrote were in direct response to the quotes. and then, yeah, i elaborated. you sparked some discussion. on a discussion forum.

 

Thank you. Yes I know we don't come from monkeys, but that's what people usually say. I guess it's easier than saying some apelike ancestor.

 

You're way off base here, I don't really see how you're taking this away from his post at all.