N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 03 2016,17:38) | | Quote (N.Wells @ Sep. 03 2016,17:11) | | You are still screwing around modelling something that does not exist (hippocampi in insects), using meaningless variables rather than generating anything significant from first principles. You have yet to show that you have anything of interest or value, and all indications so far are that you don't. |
As I already explained to you: the operative phrase is "Navigation Network" and IN HUMANS involves what is called "hippocampi".
|
You have described your program as modelling a bug, specifically hippocampi in bugs. You have yet to demonstrate that bugs navigate in this manner, and bugs do not have hippocampi. You use your model to draw conclusions about natural selection, the origin of intelligence, the Cambrian explosion, ubiquitous parental love and devotion (as supposedly typified in crocodilians and salmon, two groups with notably low levels of parental care), and all manner of other stuff. Your definition of intelligence clearly does not apply to humans. You have insisted all along that your ideas are not restricted to human intelligence. It's a little late to shift the goal posts to hippocampi "in HUMANS". Bugs do not seem to navigate the way you propose. There may be some useful comparisons to be made, but you'd need some actual ground-truthing because you don't know yet what actually happens.
According to my observations, you are perceived across the internet to be lacking intelligence, to be acting in a self-defeating and significantly counterproductive way. You are clearly not good at learning from suggestions and past failures. You are clearly uneducated with respect to the aspects of biology that you are attempting to criticize, and your not-a-theory is to science as http://images.mentalfloss.com/sites......_45.png is to useful buildings, except that the latter is charming and fun.
|
