Joined: Oct. 2012
|Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Nov. 02 2012,13:00)|
|Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 02 2012,12:48)|
|Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Nov. 02 2012,12:31)|
|Quote (GaryGaulin @ Nov. 02 2012,12:21)|
|If you followed the link that was found in the UD thread to my long ago W I Don't Know experiment that left me well misunderstood, very afraid for the future, but I attended the Connecticut School of Broadcasting and got to know some in the "industry". Then Radio Pirates were hip in radio and the Grunge movement needed scientific input so there I was writing what I could into that network, that was through fax machine due to PC's and internet not being around yet. Years later, it's the same thing but all are older and wiser and the theory I was talking about with molecular intelligence, cellular intelligence, and so forth, is coming of age thanks to the ID controversy. |
Aside from the fact that you're an obvious crank, this bit from you demonstrates why no one knows what the hell you're talking about. It makes no sense on any level. It's an incoherent mess. Until you can learn how to start at the beginning and work your way to the end by way of the middle, you're just throwing dung and wondering why no one smells the roses.
Quick question then.
Off the top of your head, what are the four requirements for a system to qualify as "intelligent" and two sources for more info on the cognitive model(s) it came from?
Now I have no idea what your questions have to do with my observations, except perhaps to demonstrate that the problem is your apparent inability to maintain a linear discussion.
You did not study the theory, correct?
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.