RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (622) < ... 489 490 491 492 493 [494] 495 496 497 498 499 ... >   
  Topic: A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin, As big as the poop that does not look< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,08:53   

It's not so much a 'Gish gallop' as it is the 'Gaulin  Gavotte'.
The contortions, the wild leaps, one can only shrink in horror at what the music must sound like.
Of course, given that this is Gary, the music probably sounds like 'the aroma of a yellow-ish shade of green trapezoids'.

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,09:55   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 03 2015,01:00)
That's why I mentioned this year's article by Andre Fenton, which by the way also has a preview page where in the large illustration I can fuzzily see what I would expect for activity.

Hahahahahahaha.  Gary has revolutionized science by squinting at a picture in an article he didn't bother to read.  

Imagine how much faster science would progress if all learning was by abstract and fuzzy preview pictures.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
KevinB



Posts: 525
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,11:08   

Quote (NoName @ Aug. 03 2015,08:53)
It's not so much a 'Gish gallop' as it is the 'Gaulin  Gavotte'.
The contortions, the wild leaps, one can only shrink in horror at what the music must sound like.
Of course, given that this is Gary, the music probably sounds like 'the aroma of a yellow-ish shade of green trapezoids'.

The "wild leaps" aren't consistent with a gavotte.  ThouTube dance tutor

'Gaulin Gigue' might be more precise.

What would happen if we were to describe KF's contortions as the "Gay Gordons"?

  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,11:36   

Quote (KevinB @ Aug. 03 2015,12:08)
Quote (NoName @ Aug. 03 2015,08:53)
It's not so much a 'Gish gallop' as it is the 'Gaulin  Gavotte'.
The contortions, the wild leaps, one can only shrink in horror at what the music must sound like.
Of course, given that this is Gary, the music probably sounds like 'the aroma of a yellow-ish shade of green trapezoids'.

The "wild leaps" aren't consistent with a gavotte.  ThouTube dance tutor

'Gaulin Gigue' might be more precise.

What would happen if we were to describe KF's contortions as the "Gay Gordons"?

Now that's a phrase worthy of becoming a meme!
Spread it around ;-)

  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,11:39   

Quote (Texas Teach @ Aug. 03 2015,10:55)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 03 2015,01:00)
That's why I mentioned this year's article by Andre Fenton, which by the way also has a preview page where in the large illustration I can fuzzily see what I would expect for activity.

Hahahahahahaha.  Gary has revolutionized science by squinting at a picture in an article he didn't bother to read.  

Imagine how much faster science would progress if all learning was by abstract and fuzzy preview pictures.

I think the issue is that, well, you know how some people move their lips when they read (silently)?  Gary moves his lips when he looks at pictures.
Therefore, looking at pictures counts as 'thinking', even counts as 'comprehending'.
This validates his "theory" because after all, 'intelligence' requires muscle control systems to be active.  How could there be thinking if there were no muscles involved?

roflmao

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,11:58   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 03 2015,01:00)
Quote (NoName @ Aug. 02 2015,06:48)
As has been shown repeatedly, your usage requires a radical redefinition from standard usage and especially the standard usage in Cognitive  Science.

As I have been repeatedly showing the problem is primarily from others not being up to date on what's now happening in cognitive science, where a unifying model able to establish standard usage of terms between its subfields (AI, neuroscience, psychology, etc) does not even exist yet.  That's why I mentioned this year's article by Andre Fenton, which by the way also has a preview page where in the large illustration I can fuzzily see what I would expect for activity. The challenge for neuroscience was described as "By identifying positioning components like place, direction, distance, borders and the like, the field is given the opportunity to have a shot at piecing together how these components are integrated into the synthetic positioning sense."

http://www.readcube.com/article....o.22451

The only thing for sure is that cognitive science has only just begun to establish standard terminology for all fields. Many of the AI models that were once thought to produce intelligence are being antiquated by what other fields of cognitive science are discovering. The model I program is also more specifically an AI (not neuroscience) program that includes the "positioning components like place, direction, distance, borders and the like" that are now of interest to neuroscientists. So with all said this makes AI useful again to other fields of cognitive science, as opposed to the whole field of AI being antiquated by the model neuroscience is now after. Neuroscientists must include neurological detail of circuits an AI model only has to reduce down to a simple as possible math function or network behavior without losing any of the performance the real thing has. There are two models possible. Each complements and compliments each other.

Where there is nothing new from AI programmers to help neuroscientists along with their model it's expected that to them AI is a ho-hum branch of science that ran out of steam at the turn of the last century. My work helps to avoid that from happening.

With an AI model like this not being overly complicated staying in contact with neuroscience only requires emailing important findings to Andre and occasionally others like Edvard, who only need that to work from and rather not have a pile of papers going into detail they already know. I best I can explain what may apply to the model they are working on that establishes the proper scientific terminology for neuroscience. I only have to get as close as I can then wait for what happens next with the model Andre has in the incubator.

Terminology that fell into place like "molecular (level) intelligence" is required in theory that predicts its existence by ahead of time explaining how intelligence at that level works. In this case it's scientifically impossible to remove something like that from the logical construct of the theory that needs it that way to stay coherent everywhere else. It's now your responsibility to get used to it being that way in theory that goes everywhere else neuroscience is going using a more AI approach that makes it useful, instead of being in competition.

It may seem weird but times change and Salvador Cordova possibly others in the ID movement are now working on the "molecular neuroscience" level where as he explained: at the genetic level of these cells is a "RAM" that gets "addressed" to figure out. Just as well they look for treasure in what others call "junk DNA" than none even try that way. In any event ID is as expected coming of age with an approach that needs the word "RAM" for DNA too for us to be specific, which is something else you have to get used to because the only thing that matters is that we understand each other. What you and others think is irrelevant.

All areas of science have a unique lingo for understanding each other. The emerging niche that Sal and others in the ID movement found themselves pioneering requires another lingo that is doing just fine establishing what is required for an AI type approach where the systematics of "Intelligence" is detected by their being a "RAM" hooked up a certain way. Where he or other finds something useful neuroscientists will find it worth the read, wherever it's said and in whatever scientific lingo is required to make sense in such an "Intelligence" centered paradigm that looks for what causes what in all of biology not just brains. Being able to explain things differently is a good thing. Where the result is a RAM based computer model that puts it all in code that alone can best speak for it, anyway. It's in another language in addition to explaining it in words but for the logic of the system.

All existing areas of cognitive science go on with whatever terminology already works for them. There is no scientific issue in any of the fields of science. What is needed for the niche we are working on to communicate is left up to us to decide, while what other niches need is up to them to decide. In that regard Sal's helping to establish the required DNA=RAM based thinking was a big help in an emerging area of AI science that neuroscience only needs something useful from. Neuroscientists do not even want to get involved in details like that. That's not their area and they have more important things to think about. Which is why the only ones who do are more like trolls just yanking my chain not neuroscientists and other science experts protesting like you are. In the real science all are too busy for what is going on outside their fields to even care about what you claim there is an issue with. Whatever floats our boat is just fine by them, while your issue with it is just plain nuts.

Let's stipulate that cognitive neuroscience lacks a grand unifying theory and thus needs one.  If you could provide one, that would be great.  

A common route would be to provide one using standard nomenclature, but you aren't doing that.  That's okay: often, new theories require new language, changes in concepts, and different ways of thinking, and if to get to that point you have to redefine old terminology or coin new terms that's fine too.  However, there are some caveats to this.  First, on the whole you want to keep new terminology to a minimum.  Second, for new terms or redefined old terms, you have to provide clear and detailed definitions, and demonstrate that the new terms or redefinitions are necessary and do something that the old terms don't do.  Thirdly, you have to provide some evidence that the new terms and the new concepts are in fact real, logical, and worthwhile.  So far, you haven't done any of that.

Note that Einstein did not say: "I've got this fantastic new theory.  I'm going to call it special evolution and it explains everything.  It relies on a whole new concept of evolution where it covers the whole universe, but I'll maybe explain all that later. I'm sure you'll follow along anyway because it's all proven by my computer simulation of a foraging bug avoiding a shock zone.  It's going to be something like, something = something squared, or maybe cubed, but it's fractally emergent, so it's now up to the scientific community to figure out the remaining details, but for now it's K-12 simple real-science and should be taught in school, except that snobbish academics are punishing me."

I would guess that "Andre and Edvard" are not finding any value whatsoever in your stuff.  Both of them are going to need operational definitions and some supporting evidence.  However, feel free to DOCUMENT evidence to the contrary and prove me wrong and yourself right.

  
Tony M Nyphot



Posts: 492
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,14:24   

Quote (KevinB @ Aug. 03 2015,10:08)
 
Quote (NoName @ Aug. 03 2015,08:53)
It's not so much a 'Gish gallop' as it is the 'Gaulin  Gavotte'.
The contortions, the wild leaps, one can only shrink in horror at what the music must sound like.
Of course, given that this is Gary, the music probably sounds like 'the aroma of a yellow-ish shade of green trapezoids'.

The "wild leaps" aren't consistent with a gavotte.  ThouTube dance tutor

'Gaulin Gigue' might be more precise.

What would happen if we were to describe KF's contortions as the "Gay Gordons"?

Hmmm...I've tried to think of an appropriate word to append to 'Gaulin' in the mode of 'Gish Gallop' for some time now. I have yet to come up with one beginning with 'G'. Neither Gavotte nor Gigue really distill the essence of Gary's huff and fluff for me.

The word "Strut" defined as "1. to walk with a vain, pompous bearing, as with head erect and chest thrown out, as if expecting to impress observers." captures the spirit of Gary's cocksure inanity for me.

Too bad 'Gaulin Strut' doesn't have that catchy rhythm for a proper meme.

--------------
"I, OTOH, am an underachiever...I either pee my pants or faint dead away..." FTK

"You could always wrap fresh fish in the paper you publish it on, though, and sell that." - Field Man on how to find value in Gary Gaulin's real-science "theory"

  
Jim_Wynne



Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,15:14   

Gaulin Gambol

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

  
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,15:45   

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Aug. 03 2015,13:14)
Gaulin Gambol

Gaulin Appallin'

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Tony M Nyphot



Posts: 492
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,15:49   

Quote (JohnW @ Aug. 03 2015,14:45)
 
Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Aug. 03 2015,13:14)
Gaulin Gambol

Gaulin Appallin'

Gaulin Gall-Blabber

[edited to revise Blather as in "noun: long-winded talk with no substance" --> Blabber as in "noun: foolish, mindless, or excessive talk"]

--------------
"I, OTOH, am an underachiever...I either pee my pants or faint dead away..." FTK

"You could always wrap fresh fish in the paper you publish it on, though, and sell that." - Field Man on how to find value in Gary Gaulin's real-science "theory"

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,17:00   

The Gaulin Reel - the Jig is up.  (Yeh, no leading G's)

Or possibly this young lady is doing an interpretive rendition of Gary's Not-A-Theory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....uaAR15o
except she's good at what she does.

  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,17:13   

Quote (N.Wells @ Aug. 03 2015,18:00)
The Gaulin Reel - the Jig is up.  (Yeh, no leading G's)

Or possibly this young lady is doing an interpretive rendition of Gary's Not-A-Theory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....uaAR15o
except she's good at what she does.

Yes, but compared to Gary, anybody is great at everything.

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,21:11   

How about the Gaulin Gyre? ID performance art at its most breathless inanity.

A combination of the speed and self awareness from the old fashioned Gavotte and the passion and religious fervor of a Whirling Dervish. The technique demands putting your fingers into your ears, speaking (or writing) in tongues then very slowly spinning about in the same spot while in a trance like state to commune with the trinitic designer(s). As with the great ocean gyre's Coriolis effect the dance gathers in all the flotsam and jetsam ID waste of the innernets into an attic located in a very cheap suburb, namely Gary's computer room.

The dance does not require a partner  and the performance lasts years since very little energy is used except the little used while typing.  During the performance the dancer is unable to respond to any criticism or to correct any mis-steps, trips or falls. Progress in any direction is prevented by the requirement to....erm not actually go anywhere but remain in the same temporal mystical space.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Henry J



Posts: 5787
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,22:31   

But those temporal mechanics can be tricky; just ask Chief O'brien.

  
fnxtr



Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2015,22:38   

Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 03 2015,19:11)
How about the the Gaulin Gyre? ID performance art at its most breathless inanity.

A combination of the speed and self awareness from the old fashioned Gavotte and the passion and religious fervor of a Whirling Dervish. The technique demands putting your fingers into your ears, speaking (or writing) in tongues then very slowly spinning about in the same spot while in a trance like state to commune with the trinitic designer(s). As with the great ocean gyre's Coriolis effect the dance gathers in all the flotsam and jetsam ID waste of the innernets into an attic located in a very cheap suburb, namely Gary's computer room.

The dance does not require a partner  and the performance lasts years since very little energy is used except the little used while typing.  During the performance the dancer is unable to respond to any criticism or to correct any mis-steps, trips or falls. Progress in any direction is prevented by the requirement to....erm not actually go anywhere but remain in the same temporal mystical space.

Only at brillig.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,01:59   

Gary, I make an exception, hope you'll appreciate what I try to do for you:

Before you properly can understand and expand on the well established and researched scientific theory, "Theoretical Physics", I suggest you acquaint yourself with the current standing of that theory.

You think you are smarter than most scientific physicists, but you may perhaps acknowledge that a guy like Nobel Price winner Robert B. Lauglin have some clue about the subject he's chosen for his time on our planet.

I therefore urge you to obtain a copy and read - read very attentively and doing your best to understand what Robert says in "A different Universe" (Reinventing Physics  From the Bottom Down).

How do your excentric theroy of intelligent molecules stand in relation to real scienctific investigation of the behavior and the question of what makes atoms and molecules do what they do without thinking, with no will of their own, just doing what they do because there's nothing else they can do at the bottom of the pyramid when you turn it upside down?

I can write almost but not quite like you do...

You need help.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,02:06   

Quote (Quack @ Aug. 04 2015,01:59)
Gary, I make an exception, hope you'll appreciate what I try to do for you:

Before you properly can understand and expand on the well established and researched scientific theory, "Theoretical Physics", I suggest you acquaint yourself with the current standing of that theory.

You think you are smarter than most scientific physicists, but you may perhaps acknowledge that a guy like Nobel Price winner Robert B. Lauglin have some clue about the subject he's chosen for his time on our planet.

I therefore urge you to obtain a copy and read - read very attentively and doing your best to understand what Robert says in "A different Universe" (Reinventing Physics  From the Bottom Down).

How do your excentric theroy of intelligent molecules stand in relation to real scienctific investigation of the behavior and the question of what makes atoms and molecules do what they do without thinking, with no will of their own, just doing what they do because there's nothing else they can do at the bottom of the pyramid when you turn it upside down?

I can write almost but not quite like you do...

You need help.

You need to also throw insults at molecular neuroscientists for teaching that molecules have tiny brains. It will help make it more obvious that you're just another nutcase misrepresenting my work.

--------------
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.

   
KevinB



Posts: 525
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,05:44   

Quote (N.Wells @ Aug. 03 2015,17:00)
The Gaulin Reel - the Jig is up.  (Yeh, no leading G's)

Or possibly this young lady is doing an interpretive rendition of Gary's Not-A-Theory
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....uaAR15o
except she's good at what she does.

Gyration?

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,06:00   

Won't touch that misanthropic crackpot ever again.

Edit: Response withdrawn.

Edited by Quack on Aug. 04 2015,08:22

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,06:36   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 04 2015,03:06)
Quote (Quack @ Aug. 04 2015,01:59)
Gary, I make an exception, hope you'll appreciate what I try to do for you:

Before you properly can understand and expand on the well established and researched scientific theory, "Theoretical Physics", I suggest you acquaint yourself with the current standing of that theory.

You think you are smarter than most scientific physicists, but you may perhaps acknowledge that a guy like Nobel Price winner Robert B. Lauglin have some clue about the subject he's chosen for his time on our planet.

I therefore urge you to obtain a copy and read - read very attentively and doing your best to understand what Robert says in "A different Universe" (Reinventing Physics  From the Bottom Down).

How do your excentric theroy of intelligent molecules stand in relation to real scienctific investigation of the behavior and the question of what makes atoms and molecules do what they do without thinking, with no will of their own, just doing what they do because there's nothing else they can do at the bottom of the pyramid when you turn it upside down?

I can write almost but not quite like you do...

You need help.

You need to also throw insults at molecular neuroscientists for teaching that molecules have tiny brains. It will help make it more obvious that you're just another nutcase misrepresenting my work.

You're the one insisting that molecules, as such, possess 'intelligence'.  That implies, to normally intelligent persons, that you believe that they either have brains, or have something that serves as a brain.
You insist that molecules 'learn' their behavior.
How exactly does that work?  What's the learning curve look like?  How does practice impact repeated performance?  What extinction of learning occurs?

So much for your alleged "explanations".

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,08:20   

Quote (fnxtr @ Aug. 04 2015,06:38)
Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 03 2015,19:11)
How about the the Gaulin Gyre? ID performance art at its most breathless inanity.

A combination of the speed and self awareness from the old fashioned Gavotte and the passion and religious fervor of a Whirling Dervish. The technique demands putting your fingers into your ears, speaking (or writing) in tongues then very slowly spinning about in the same spot while in a trance like state to commune with the trinitic designer(s). As with the great ocean gyre's Coriolis effect the dance gathers in all the flotsam and jetsam ID waste of the innernets into an attic located in a very cheap suburb, namely Gary's computer room.

The dance does not require a partner  and the performance lasts years since very little energy is used except the little used while typing.  During the performance the dancer is unable to respond to any criticism or to correct any mis-steps, trips or falls. Progress in any direction is prevented by the requirement to....erm not actually go anywhere but remain in the same temporal mystical space.

Only at brillig.

Haha.
Gary I fear is more Jack with Jill than frumious Bandersnatch!
He went up the hill to fetch knowledge, money, power or whatever then fell down and broke his head (possible hypomania). An old tale. Sadly for Gary the market for village idiots has dried up.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,08:23   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 04 2015,10:06)
Quote (Quack @ Aug. 04 2015,01:59)
Gary, I make an exception, hope you'll appreciate what I try to do for you:

Before you properly can understand and expand on the well established and researched scientific theory, "Theoretical Physics", I suggest you acquaint yourself with the current standing of that theory.

You think you are smarter than most scientific physicists, but you may perhaps acknowledge that a guy like Nobel Price winner Robert B. Lauglin have some clue about the subject he's chosen for his time on our planet.

I therefore urge you to obtain a copy and read - read very attentively and doing your best to understand what Robert says in "A different Universe" (Reinventing Physics  From the Bottom Down).

How do your excentric theroy of intelligent molecules stand in relation to real scienctific investigation of the behavior and the question of what makes atoms and molecules do what they do without thinking, with no will of their own, just doing what they do because there's nothing else they can do at the bottom of the pyramid when you turn it upside down?

I can write almost but not quite like you do...

You need help.

You need to also throw insults at molecular neuroscientists for teaching that molecules have tiny brains. It will help make it more obvious that you're just another nutcase misrepresenting my work.

Yawn. Evidence please FOOL.

<sounds of crickets chirping>

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,08:26   

Quote (Quack @ Aug. 04 2015,14:00)
Won't touch that misanthropic crackpot ever again.

Edit: Response withdrawn.

The only help Gary needs is dressing himself in a straight jacket and getting a long rest away from prying eyes and drugs for his condition.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
fnxtr



Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,08:36   

Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 04 2015,06:26)
...

   
Quote
The only help Gary needs is dressing himself in a straight jacket and getting a long rest [,] away from prying eyes and [away from] drugs, for his condition.


ftfy.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,11:21   

oops, wrong thread...

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
ChemiCat



Posts: 532
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,16:41   

So enlighten us, oh Great Gary, fount of all science knowledge.

If molecules "learn" with their little brains, have you investigated reaction energies within chemical reactions to see if they decrease as they learn. A paper on this would not only support your "theory" but blow every objection to it out of the water.

You would then be top of the science tree and feted by all.

That is what you want isn't it?

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,17:10   

Quote (ChemiCat @ Aug. 04 2015,16:41)
So enlighten us, oh Great Gary, fount of all science knowledge.

If molecules "learn" with their little brains, have you investigated reaction energies within chemical reactions to see if they decrease as they learn. A paper on this would not only support your "theory" but blow every objection to it out of the water.

You would then be top of the science tree and feted by all.

That is what you want isn't it?

Seeing how you must be an expert in "molecular evolution" please provide evidence that shows the transitional stages between the element Boron that according to your (hahahah!) "theory" evolved into Carbon?

--------------
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.

   
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,17:14   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 04 2015,18:10)
Quote (ChemiCat @ Aug. 04 2015,16:41)
So enlighten us, oh Great Gary, fount of all science knowledge.

If molecules "learn" with their little brains, have you investigated reaction energies within chemical reactions to see if they decrease as they learn. A paper on this would not only support your "theory" but blow every objection to it out of the water.

You would then be top of the science tree and feted by all.

That is what you want isn't it?

Seeing how you must be an expert in "molecular evolution" please provide evidence that shows the transitional stages between the element Boron that according to your (hahahah!) "theory" evolved into Carbon?

Stellar spectra, nova and supernova spectra, and all of nuclear physics.

What's your evidence that any form of learning is involved in the formation of carbon?

  
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,17:27   

Quote (NoName @ Aug. 04 2015,15:14)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 04 2015,18:10)
 
Quote (ChemiCat @ Aug. 04 2015,16:41)
So enlighten us, oh Great Gary, fount of all science knowledge.

If molecules "learn" with their little brains, have you investigated reaction energies within chemical reactions to see if they decrease as they learn. A paper on this would not only support your "theory" but blow every objection to it out of the water.

You would then be top of the science tree and feted by all.

That is what you want isn't it?

Seeing how you must be an expert in "molecular evolution" please provide evidence that shows the transitional stages between the element Boron that according to your (hahahah!) "theory" evolved into Carbon?

Stellar spectra, nova and supernova spectra, and all of nuclear physics.

What's your evidence that any form of learning is involved in the formation of carbon?

Not to mention two category errors: nucleosynthesis is not a molecular process, and is not evolution (as the term is usually defined).

eta:  I'd forgotten this - it's not produced from boron anyway.  It's produced (mostly) from helium.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Henry J



Posts: 5787
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2015,20:31   

Re "eta:  I'd forgotten this - it's not produced from boron anyway.  It's produced (mostly) from helium."

Maybe with a beryllium intermediate, I'd guess? That's unless three-alpha collisions would be frequent enough to matter.

(Not that this question has anything whatever to do with either evolution or intelligence; it doesn't.)

  
  18634 replies since Oct. 31 2012,02:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (622) < ... 489 490 491 492 493 [494] 495 496 497 498 499 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]