GENIUS FORUMS

Kevin Solway wrote:This may stem from your idea that we're all going to die at some point no matter what we do, so there's no real point in thinking about the future.

No, Kevin, I never said, thought, or implied that one shouldn't consider the future. You cannot possibly think that is my point of view.

Rather, that future, the comet thing, is the one that there is no point in thinking about. No point in you thinking about it, specifically.

The reason for considering the real possibility that the planet could be wiped-out in the near future, is that this should inform your mistaken notion that evolution has a direction.

Evolution has a direction the way a rosebud does as it blossoms, one of unfolding.

brokenhead wrote:

The reason for considering the real possibility that the planet could be wiped-out in the near future, is that this should inform your mistaken notion that evolution has a direction.

Evolution has a direction the way a rosebud does as it blossoms, one of unfolding.

The kind of direction a rosebud has before it's blasted to smithereens.

The idea of a direction is value-laden. Discerning a direction in evolution entirely depends on what criteria we decide to adopt.

When the dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago - possibly, as theorized by many scientists, from the impact of a comet - only rodent-like mammals were left behind, along with insects, a few species of reptiles, plant-life, etc. If we look at this period and judge it in terms of the physical size of animals and their world-wide domination, then it is plain that a major case of "de-evolution" occurred.

Likewise, we nowadays see that species are becoming extinct every day and that the bio-diversity of the planet is steadily declining. If we look at this process in terms of bio-diversity, then, once again, what we observe is a major case of "de-evolution".

-

Kevin Solway wrote:

brokenhead wrote:

The reason for considering the real possibility that the planet could be wiped-out in the near future, is that this should inform your mistaken notion that evolution has a direction.

Evolution has a direction the way a rosebud does as it blossoms, one of unfolding.

The kind of direction a rosebud has before it's blasted to smithereens.

Kevin, I am merely saying that this planet has never been blown to smithereens. Not only that, but there is no evidence that any planet - let alone one with life - ever has been.

But you say that unless people wish to be frogs like me, they should pay attention to the fact that the planet could be wiped out in the very near future by a massive collision with an incoming comet.

So you can sleep better:

Today's Traffic: There are no objects known to be within ten lunar distances (LD)1 of Earth today, August 9th. One object is known to be approaching in the near future. 2003 WT153 will come inside ten LD on August 31st.

The above is from this website.


But I also found this on the web, which seems to echo your view:

The Deep Impact Mission was funded at about $300 million. So it seems that for a few billion $ NASA could develop an asteroid defense spacecraft with a nuclear weapon. You want to have several of the interceptor spacecraft, not just one, since the survival of earth is at stake. So I encourage everyone to contact their elected representatives on building an asteroid defense for earth; NASA could develop this spacecraft if they were funded to do it. What is also needed is a worldwide network of telescopes searching for and catalogueing the NEO (Near Earth Objects) asteroids and comets. Larger telescopes are needed than are presently used, and you need to have telescopes in the Southern Hemisphere as well as the Northern Hemisphere. NASA would also be the best organization to run this program. We need to detect, track, and predict the orbits of these NEO objects before they get near earth. A major worldwide effort is needed, with larger telescopes around the world, to find these large and small comets and asteroids. The present effort needs more funding, needs larger telescopes, and is mainly in the Northern Hemisphere... So the earth is now a "sitting duck" for an asteroid headed for earth, it probably would not be noticed until a few days before it hit earth.

Of course, if you go on read the article in its entirety, further down it says:

Therefore, if collisions with earth are not truly random, but are related to a satanic influence, then that could be a problem for us. Its even possible that a collision with earth could occur soon (within a few years), that is a hologram related to the rise to power of the antichrist. It is my opinion that there is another asteroid or comet headed for earth, that could hit earth in 2008-2010. Revelation 8 may be saying that more asteroids are passing by earth now and one may hit soon, and that is why there have been so many near-miss asteroids passing by earth in 2002. If this is the case then earth could be hit soon by a killer doomsday asteroid.

Kevin, this is nonsense. No comet, or more correctly, asteroid, is getting ready to wipe us out.

But let's say there was such an approaching asteroid. If you visit the first link, it reports there may be something in 2019 that will miss us a bit more closely. Let's say it changes course somehow and heads right for the earth. In the meantime, all the non-frogs (what the heck, let's even include the French) band together and devise a means of diverting the deadly projectile. Wouldn't you then have have clear-cut evidence of a "direction" for evolution? Or would you insist that it was sheer chance that just as man was first able to pull off a feat of this magnitude that the earth-demolishing asteroid first appeared?

brokenhead wrote:

Kevin Solway wrote:The kind of direction a rosebud has before it's blasted to smithereens.

Kevin, I am merely saying that this planet has never been blown to smithereens.

The rosebud had never been blown to smithereens either, prior to being blown to smithereens.

Not only that, but there is no evidence that any planet - let alone one with life - ever has been.

Haven't you ever heard of supernovas? When a star explodes it wipes out everything in the vicinity, and many things very far away as well.

Today's Traffic: There are no objects known to be within ten lunar distances (LD)1 of Earth today

Firstly, we don't know that we can even see all the nearby objects. And we don't know if there are large objects approaching us at very high speed. How fast do you think matter is flung away from a supernova?

Kevin, this is nonsense. No comet, or more correctly, asteroid, is getting ready to wipe us out.

There is no way you could know this. You simply have your head in the sand.

Also, you have already admitted that there is a chance that the world could be destroyed in the near future, so that knowledge alone should be sufficient to correct your belief about a direction to evolution.

Kevin Solway wrote:Also, you have already admitted that there is a chance that the world could be destroyed in the near future, so that knowledge alone should be sufficient to correct your belief about a direction to evolution.

But you have given a scenario by which man has evolved far enough to construct the means to have at least a sample of his progeny escape such an event, so that belief alone should be sufficient to correct your idea about a lack of direction to evolution.

Kevin wrote:

brokenhead wrote:Kevin, this is nonsense. No comet, or more correctly, asteroid, is getting ready to wipe us out.

There is no way you could know this. You simply have your head in the sand.

Perhaps. Yet I seem to be able to cope with what I'd like to think of as "real-life" situations just fine. How do you account for that?

Haven't you ever heard of supernovas? When a star explodes it wipes out everything in the vicinity, and many things very far away as well.

Yes, of course I have heard of them. Physicists believe our own sun is billions of years away from such a fate. If any star nearby were to go supernova, there is not a thing you, I, or anyone else could do about it. We can in no measure prepare for such an occurrence and hope to survive it. That would constitute a rational point of view. If it can be called having one's head in the sand, perhaps it is preferable to having one's head in the clouds?

brokenhead wrote:

Kevin Solway wrote:Also, you have already admitted that there is a chance that the world could be destroyed in the near future, so that knowledge alone should be sufficient to correct your belief about a direction to evolution.

But you have given a scenario by which man has evolved far enough to construct the means to have at least a sample of his progeny escape such an event

No, not if the world is blasted into a million pieces before we can do anything.

Or, we might escape in a single spacecraft, and all die of disease. There are many possible ways that will spell the end of all life as we know it.

Kevin wrote:

brokenhead wrote:Kevin, this is nonsense. No comet, or more correctly, asteroid, is getting ready to wipe us out.

There is no way you could know this. You simply have your head in the sand.

Perhaps. Yet I seem to be able to cope with what I'd like to think of as "real-life" situations just fine. How do you account for that?

Self-delusion.

If any star nearby were to go supernova, there is not a thing you, I, or anyone else could do about it. We can in no measure prepare for such an occurrence and hope to survive it.

How long have you spent trying to think of a way we could survive such a thing, or move to a safe distance before it happens? I am not so fast to say that there is nothing we can do. Intelligent human beings are resourceful, and you never know what they might come up with.

There may be debris from a supernova that happened long ago, still on its path towards earth. There are more things in heaven and earth, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

We talk here as if we know that man exists on this planet only. Or, we say 'life as we know it', another extremely limited view. We hang around the cyber office cooler and talk of saving a species or preserving wisdom, without knowing whether or not this a dream or whether we exist on multiple planes simultaneously. And yet we must do what we must do. Kevin sees evolution biologically and linearly; I, as it happens, do not. Do Kevin's concerns yield him or humanity any fruit?

Carl G wrote:We talk here as if we know that man exists on this planet only.

That assumption hasn't been made - not by me anyway.

Or, we say 'life as we know it', another extremely limited view.

Life as we know it, is just life as we know it, no more.

No doubt there is plenty of life of which we know nothing.

We hang around the cyber office cooler and talk of saving a species or preserving wisdom, without knowing whether or not this a dream or whether we exist on multiple planes simultaneously.

We have to work with what we've got. And it certainly seems that some behaviours are better for our survival than others.

Kevin sees evolution biologically and linearly

What do you mean by "linearly". I certainly don't think that evolution has a direction.

By linearly I meant from simple to complex in an ever-lengthening straight line.

Carl, although evolution can produce complex organisms, that is not a rule. Bacteria remain quite simple. Their niche still exists, and allows for simple organisms to thrive.

Evolution is more commonly and accurately compared to a tree than a line.

No, not if the world is blasted into a million pieces before we can do anything.

Or, we might escape in a single spacecraft, and all die of disease. There are many possible ways that will spell the end of all life as we know it.

You're quite right. If the world is blasted into a million pieces before we can do anything, then what logical actions should we be taking? You see how this is logically impossible, don't you? If the world is blasted into a million pieces before we can do anything, logically that means we are not doing anything when it happens. It's in our premise.

brokenhead: Perhaps. Yet I seem to be able to cope with what I'd like to think of as "real-life" situations just fine. How do you account for that?

Kevin: Self-delusion.

I am deluding myself into believing there will be a tomorrow. But since this "delusion" enables me to , say, make plans for tomorrow, shouldn't I want to hold on to it?

How long have you spent trying to think of a way we could survive such a thing, or move to a safe distance before it happens? I am not so fast to say that there is nothing we can do. Intelligent human beings are resourceful, and you never know what they might come up with.

Not very long, I'll grant you. It must be somewhere near the bottom of my list of priorities, but maybe that's just me. Since you just said that we'll be blasted into a million pieces before we can do anything,

There may be debris from a supernova that happened long ago, still on its path towards earth. There are more things in heaven and earth, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Yes, well, I'm not the philosopher here.

"Can you ever be certain that you are reasoning correctly?

We have a brain to think with, the creator of our human brain is intelligent, when you think of how intelligent humans are. They created us to be intelligent not confused or uncertain.

We can be certain of one thing, that if our intuitive thinking proves us wrong,
then we are uncertain and confused.

Great thinkers contradict themselves, I think because we have ability to view a subject from more than one angle, the insight to see things from several different perspectives.

I believe the 'Alien' who took me with them are our human creators.

Oh, incidently, Thomas ole chap, I'm not in the least bit crazy.

Oh, incidently, Thomas ole chap, I'm not in the least bit crazy.Foresta Gump

It's Tomas.

brokenhead wrote:If the world is blasted into a million pieces before we can do anything, then what logical actions should we be taking?

You're missing the point. The point being, that when seen from the larger perspective, evolution has no direction.

B: Perhaps. Yet I seem to be able to cope with what I'd like to think of as "real-life" situations just fine. How do you account for that?
K: Self-delusion.

I am deluding myself into believing there will be a tomorrow.

This and a great many other delusions.

But since this "delusion" enables me to , say, make plans for tomorrow, shouldn't I want to hold on to it?

No doubt.

Suicide bombers have the delusion that when they die they will be going to heaven, and that helps them to plan their suicide.

There may be debris from a supernova that happened long ago, still on its path towards earth. There are more things in heaven and earth, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Yes, well, I'm not the philosopher here.

That is precisely your philosophy.

brokenhead wrote:

Kevin Solway wrote:If you put a frog in a jar of water, and slowly heat the water up, the frog will not know the water is heating up, and will just stay there and boil to death.

At any point in time before its death, "countless moments", as you say, have passed.

You are just like that frog.

How so?

I'm going out on a limb here... but.



If an untrained child needs to take a poop, but is uncomfortable with that idea, he goes to a corner and turns has ass to the walls available and does just that... poops.

The out come is sloppy, easily avoidable, but still the child chooses to poop in the corner and not in your toilet.

Is that fear? Laziness? What is that?

Given, at one point there was likely a frog that didn't jump, he didn't get out of the hot water...

But in some distant aspect, how is that different than a child knowing the solution is to go sit on a toilet? How is a frog knowing when to jump out of the hot water any different than a child knowing that "standing in the corner only creates a mess."

And you need to jump away from that reality before it becomes true.

Most children learn after the first or fourth time.

Perhaps frogs have evolved... Just like children learn the lesson, and evolve as well.

I guess my point is, old wives tales dont just come about, most exist for a reason...

We can challenge the logic, or we can take a moment to see where it stemmed from...

The frog didn't jump because it simply didn't know better, and when it finely did, it couldn't handle the truth.

Everybody poops.... hahahhahah..

David,

This response is conspicuous by its lack of substance.

Amazing to think that in 2008 the theory of evolution by natural selection still continues to threaten people.

I am sure the theory did threaten Christians at first, but you must understand that scads of people now disagree with it, many of them having first accepted it, because there just doesn't seem to be good evidence for it. The evidence that it is a bankrupt and faith-based theory is mounting.

This alone makes the theory of evolution so compelling. I personally regard it as the greatest achievement produced by science so far - nor only for its simplicity and elegance and tremendous explanatory power, but because it so effectively challenges people's cherished views of themselves.

There is nothing of substance here, except ad hominem and assumptions, and emotion.

Indeed, it is interesting how some people are so loving and excited by this theory.
I am baffled that it could be considered a great achievement. It has brought no practical value. There are many more achievements by science that I would not want to give up.

Let's see, my computer or the thrill of knowing that evolution is purposeless?
Hot running water or the thrill of knowing evolution is purposeless?
A blood transfusion and safe sterile sutures in an accident or the thrill of knowing evolution is purposeless?
A course on cell biology, fascinating beyond all getout and provable, or the waxing of profound emotion upon the theory that evolution is purposeless?
Laser surgery or the thrill of knowing evolution is purposeless?
Air travel and the ability for ordinary people to see the world or the thrill of knowing evolution is purposeless?

which speaks of a living intelligent Universe, a hierarchy of forces, and a purpose to which man can ascend?
...such conceptions only serve to divert people's attention away from more critical issues, such as becoming aware of the fundamental nature of causality.

Well, I'm curious. How is it more important to know about causality than to know if our universe is a living, intelligent One?


kevin said,

For example, we might be excavating a prehistoric archaeological site and find an actual written plan, written in some kind of alien language, on a material never seen before, and which we somehow manage to decipher. This written plan explains in detail what parts of our past where consciously designed, and details what conscious actions were made, and what their intent was, and those details match with what we have discovered elsewhere.

Or, better still, if an alien actually arrived here on earth, and explained that he had created us, and showed us exactly how he did it, and we are able to verify his claims. I would consider that fairly good evidence.

This basically exists. It is the Sumerian texts which have been found and deciphered.

My story of how a seed can be eaten by an ant, and become the tissue of a completely different kind of plant, was a demonstration of how God's will is a far greater determining force than any information in any seed.

I say that the difference between a living thing and a nonliving thing, is will. How can you use such a phrase as "God's will" that a particular seed gets eaten, when you deny to your God consciousness, and therefore, will?

The concept of Trinity or Triunity follows from your last sentence. In the beginning was Consciousness. Only Consciousness. To further speculate on its infinitude is therefore not logical. It required Other and brought the Eternal Son into Being, thus relinquishing and delegating of itself. Before this, the logic to which you relentlessly appeal simply did not exist and therefore could not apply. The Spirit between them, between the Father and the Son, came into being as the third part of the Triunity as it, the resulting Godhead, brought Creation into being, filling it with its mighty Creator Sons as an enormous first tier of created corps of spirit beings through which, in turn, the rest of the Universe as we know it was made manifest.

Pure Catholicism.

Tomorrow!

Iolaus wrote:This basically exists. It is the Sumerian texts which have been found and deciphered.

To my knowledge, we have not found any detailed description of how to create a planet, or a solar system, or intelligent life.

My story of how a seed can be eaten by an ant, and become the tissue of a completely different kind of plant, was a demonstration of how God's will is a far greater determining force than any information in any seed.

I say that the difference between a living thing and a nonliving thing, is will. How can you use such a phrase as "God's will" that a particular seed gets eaten, when you deny to your God consciousness, and therefore, will?

Our "will" is ultimately nothing other than what we are caused to do. In that sense, our will is the same as God's.

Iolaus wrote:Pure Catholicism.

Then you don't know Catholicism.

I have a belly button....

Mwahahahahaha!!!!


Stick in the mud says "what the fu-?"


Cheers:)
pro

Kevin,

To my knowledge, we have not found any detailed description of how to create a planet, or a solar system, or intelligent life.

But that's not what you said. You said,

Or, better still, if an alien actually arrived here on earth, and explained that he had created us, and showed us exactly how he did it, and we are able to verify his claims. I would consider that fairly good evidence.

That is the sort of thing which has been found. Pictures and descriptions of spaceships, and guys in helmets and spacesuits, describing the solar system accurately, numbering the planets from the outside in, describing the making of humans, bequeathing to the human race civilization.

Not that it has anything to do with God, or even explains the existence of life and animals. But it probably does explain the strangeness of humans and their sudden appearance, and the domesticated animals and plants as well.

I say that the difference between a living thing and a nonliving thing, is will. How can you use such a phrase as "God's will" that a particular seed gets eaten, when you deny to your God consciousness, and therefore, will?

Our "will" is ultimately nothing other than what we are caused to do. In that sense, our will is the same as God's.

Your use of the word will is meaningless. It is all well and good to use words your own way, so long as you are clear about it. Such as your use of the word genius. But in this case, you are talking about a mindless process of ongoing chemical reactions and calling it will. It is not God and not the will of God. Your God does not exist, and it certainly has no will.

Brokenhead,

Then you don't know Catholicism.

Not the whole quote, but the bit about reducing the Holy Spirit to an effect of the relationship of the Father and Son, reducing the significance of the Holy Spirit and making it subsidiary. That is the problem with Catholicism. Catholicism cannot tolerate the truth of the Holy Spirit so it has marginalized it.

This sloppy question is devoid of sense. The adverb 'ever' is otiose or meaningless. If one wants 'certitude' in reasoning, which means 'correctness', appeal to a truth table.

There is some emotional content behind reasoning. Self-conscious Reason is merely the capacity to entertain in the mind polarity and analogy. The French-Latin term 'Reason' comes from the Latin term 'ratio, rationis' which is a mathematical geometrical intuition of proportionality. When you classify, separate, organize or tabulate data gathering---you are reasoning!

So what is the big deal with this question? Do not forget that different concepts admit of degrees of generality out of a mass of particularities or moieties. When we talk about "bits and atoms" we use a sharpened form of reasoning which we do not use when we are talking about love, beauty, courage or tenderness (to use these four nebulous concepts as examples).

Respectfully,

John E.D.P. Malin,
Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer
Informatica Corporation
Executive Division
P.O. Drawer 460
Cecilia, Louisiana 70521-0460

Contact Information: Informatica@go.com

--

No!