NoName
Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013
|
Gary, you've been pointed towards Deacon before.
And you've been corrected repeatedly on your egregiously false claim to having actually explained anything. You haven't, ever.
Amongst other flaws, flaws distinctly not present in Deacon's work, you completely ignore energy effects. This alone disqualifies your work from any serious consideration for insight into biology, consciousness, or intelligence.
But across the board, you have been shown to be flat-out embarrassingly wrong about everything.
407 pages into this thread and you haven't even explained your "theory" nor its putative relationship to your absurd software.
|
