NoName
Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013
|
| Quote (GaryGaulin @ July 04 2014,03:02) | | In case you didn't already know I made it known that (for scientific reasons) I briefly made it known that I am a loyal follower of the sinister cult of the Singularity, and am not ashamed of myself, either: |
Irrelevant to this discussion, your software, and your "theory".
Also typical redundant nonsense -- "I made it known that ... I briefly made it known". C'mon Gary, grade school kids write better English than this.
| Quote |
And we made significant scientific progress towards an ID future, by apparently finding an open source ID Lab for the human brain that needs the right "noise" added to the circuit: |
I sincerely doubt that you are in any way entitled to include yourself in that handy pronoun 'we'.
| Quote |
I cannot say whether that is 100% the way biology works but where the goal is to generate superhuman intelligence the more super the better.
|
Well, that's certainly true, and across a far broader swath of science than you suppose. You quite literally can't say that much of anything is 'the way biology works' because you are clueless about most biology and entirely wrong-headed about the rest.
Yet somehow that doesn't suggest to you that you should shut up and spend some time learning before pontificating on these subjects, let alone dishonestly claim to have 'modeled' aspects of biology or, more precisely, biological entities.
| Quote | | There is ample evidence the theory works, just by making some sense of what Animekitty was talking about and helping to provide useful direction where many want to go. |
Rather unfortunate ambiguity in your use of the phrase 'the theory'. If you are speaking of your own effluent, no, there is no evidence whatsoever that it works, but there are mountains of evidence that it does not.
If you mean Kurzweil's stuff, that's irrelevant here, as we can be quite sure that your work neither derives from his (nor vice versa) nor bears any particular resemblance to it in any of the crucial details.
If you disagree, do the scientifically responsible thing -- draw out and show the relationships, cross-impacts, points of agreement, and especially, points of divergence and/or disagreement. Be specific and provide references. Present possible determinative or discriminative evidence that could be obtained to clarify the relative correctness of one or the other notion. Etc.
You know, science.
| Quote | | For me it's like being weirdly drawn into the cult of Singularity because of the ID theory having the same thing in it, in the form of a model to infer visionary wisdom needed to have great science fun getting there without humanity self-destructing along the way. |
Now you're just emulating the crazy guy on the corner -- infer visionary wisdom? Who writes this stuff for you?
| Quote | | The cult article helped show that the area of science investigating intelligence already has a more positive outlook on religion than evolutionary biology has on average, which makes it lake a whole other world religiously that the ID movement can be OK with. It's not the Atheistic destroy religion the Wedge was created to combat, it's more like ID coming of age in science to make the rank and file of the ID movement proud, that becomes even more fascinating with time. |
All of which is uninteresting, largely if not entirely incorrect, and entirely irrelevant to the focus of this thread -- you and your "theory", it's evidence or lack thereof, etc.
It's not like there aren't countless open questions and countless specific issues and counters raised here that you have failed to address. You don't need to go haring off on somebody else's quest in a mad effort to pretend to have something of significance.
Oh, wait. You do -- that's the only way you can continue to evade, avoid, distract, and deflect from all the evidence that shows your "theory" to be a waste of space and materials, a waste of human effort, and a never-ending LOL generator for the rest of humanity.
Man up Gary. Address the issues that arise directly from your "theory" and the challenges raised against your claims.
You won't because you can't. And we all know it.
|
