Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The $5,000,000 ID Research Challenge
tesla
Member (Idle past 1592 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 76 of 285 (679938)
11-16-2012 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Taq
11-15-2012 5:48 PM


Re: Human brain part of the world we live in? of course it is silly.
We have the evolving species right here on Earth, so why can't we use them to test this question?
We can. Let’s figure out the physics of consciousness. Let’s figure out what a dream is exactly, down to each neuron fire, each communication transfer, and every chemical exchange.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Taq, posted 11-15-2012 5:48 PM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 77 of 285 (679943)
11-16-2012 3:29 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by tesla
11-16-2012 2:19 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
You think just because you cannot run a 'test' on God that there is no possible way to do research on whether or not God is reality.
God? I was speaking of the designer which doesn't need to be a deity.
You want to ignore the path that is necessary in I.D. research before you can "Run Experiments" on the desired object. Do you think you can run an experiment on moon rock without first obtaining the moon rock?
Did they have to run experiments on higher beings and consciousness before doing experiments on moon rocks or building rockets? No. Did they have ideas of what experiments they would do on those moon rocks once they had them? Yep, they sure did. If I had made this same challenge for moon rocks in the 1950's I would have received responses with extremely specific experiments that people would want to run, including radiometric dating, hydrogen isotope composition, and magnetic testing to test for a paleomagnetic field on the moon. They didn't need the technology to reach the moon in order to know what types of specific experiments they would use to test hypotheses.
Algorithms are necessary sometimes, and the study of so called I.D science requires a certain methodology of answered questions before you can answer the final question.
So what are those questions and how do you scientifically test them?
YOU say: You cannot run an experiment on planet (X), but if you show me how you could conduct scientific research on planet (X) I'll give you 5 million dollars.
No, I am saying that you can do experiments on Earth because we have Earth right here. What experiments do you want to run on the Earth? Life is right here. It is not a million light years away. It is RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF US.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by tesla, posted 11-16-2012 2:19 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by tesla, posted 11-16-2012 11:21 PM Taq has replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1592 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 78 of 285 (679980)
11-16-2012 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Taq
11-16-2012 3:29 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
No, I am saying that you can do experiments on Earth because we have Earth right here. What experiments do you want to run on the Earth? Life is right here. It is not a million light years away. It is RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF US.
Yeah, but whats outside that box Taq? WHATS OUTSIDE THE BOX.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Taq, posted 11-16-2012 3:29 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Taq, posted 11-19-2012 11:58 AM tesla has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 79 of 285 (680382)
11-19-2012 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by tesla
11-16-2012 11:21 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
Yeah, but whats outside that box Taq? WHATS OUTSIDE THE BOX.
Life on Earth is outside the box. Either ID can explain it or it can't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by tesla, posted 11-16-2012 11:21 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by tesla, posted 11-21-2012 12:20 PM Taq has replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1592 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 80 of 285 (680825)
11-21-2012 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Taq
11-19-2012 11:58 AM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
Life on Earth is outside the box. Either ID can explain it or it can't.
I.D. is not a science to explain life on earth. It's about understanding why life is.
Those answers so far have not been answered. Science believes that it is impossible to research that question. That makes scientists, in my opinion, just as igtnorant as religious zealots who believe their religious text explain the answer to that question.
I think it's an important question. Life is the ability of mass to preserve a form despite the interactive laws of the elements. It is in denying elements the ability to interact with each other so that a structure of elements is preserved. And then, the structure also supplies maps (DNA) for replication, and a method to make decisions of the total life-form, in the pursuit of preserving the arrangements.
So, a part of knowing where we are going--which is extremely important to know in order to make decisions today--is to understand how and why we got to where we are. and one highly probable potential is that a designer set the wheel in motion. but...what kind of designer? a 'god'? an alien species? a greater life-form? nothing?
You want to say 'nothing'. But you cannot prove that. But you want to research that. Well fine, then rule-out the possibilities scientifically. Don’t just 'decide'; "oh, I don't like the concept of 'God' because I can't wrap my brain around what that looks like, so I'll teach to ignore the potential"
You would do better, and so would science, to accept the challenge of the potential, explore the possibilities and rule them out and further science. Scientifically, as I’ve already outlined: through understanding nature’s way of recording and using data through consciousness of biological algorithms, and through understanding what’s outside the earth life wise.
I’m well aware we lack the necessary capabilities to truly do that yet, but if we do not begin researching and gaining those capabilities, the longer it will take, if ever, to bring science far enough to be able to legitimately answer the question of life and existing.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Taq, posted 11-19-2012 11:58 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Panda, posted 11-21-2012 12:34 PM tesla has replied
 Message 83 by Taq, posted 11-21-2012 2:44 PM tesla has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 81 of 285 (680832)
11-21-2012 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by tesla
11-21-2012 12:20 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
tesla writes:
You want to say 'nothing'. But you cannot prove that. But you want to research that. Well fine, then rule-out the possibilities scientifically. Don’t just 'decide'; "oh, I don't like the concept of 'God' because I can't wrap my brain around what that looks like, so I'll teach to ignore the potential"
Yeah.
All those christian/muslim/jewish/etc. scientists who don't like the concept of god.
Oh....wait!

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by tesla, posted 11-21-2012 12:20 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by tesla, posted 11-21-2012 12:44 PM Panda has not replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1592 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 82 of 285 (680838)
11-21-2012 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Panda
11-21-2012 12:34 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
Yeah.
All those christian/muslim/jewish/etc. scientists who don't like the concept of god.
Oh....wait!
It's not that scientists are not religious. But the people who decide what is scientific to research do not include I.D. science, in which the same science is conducted, but to the end to explore potentials of greater being. Namely, the acceptance that Intelligent Design is a possibility and that there is a scientific route to take in pursuit of that assumption to answer the question: Was the universe, or life, the result of a design of greater being(s)?
This would not be a topic if science was teaching in textbooks: yes, I.D. is a potential, scientists are exploring the potential through space exploration for the understanding of life forms outside our planet that are potentially greater than our species, and through scientific research on consciousness via learning how brains record and send data.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Panda, posted 11-21-2012 12:34 PM Panda has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 83 of 285 (680867)
11-21-2012 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by tesla
11-21-2012 12:20 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
I.D. is not a science to explain life on earth.
Then the challenge is not for you.
[Intelligent Design is] about understanding why life is.
I will fully agree that ID is primarily a religious or creator oriented philosophy. That is not what the challenge is about, though. There are those who do claim that ID is science, and those people are my intended audience. I want them to explain how they would do the actual science as it relates to testing their ID claims.
I think it's an important question. Life is the ability of mass to preserve a form despite the interactive laws of the elements. It is in denying elements the ability to interact with each other so that a structure of elements is preserved. And then, the structure also supplies maps (DNA) for replication, and a method to make decisions of the total life-form, in the pursuit of preserving the arrangements.
IMO, that is a really bad description of life. Some of those same descriptions can be used to describe minerals and rocks. Personally, I think the emergent properties of life can be best described as feedback loops. In fact, that is how we often model the inner workings of the cell. Once that cycle starts it builds on itself, sort of like a tone resonating in a chamber.
So, a part of knowing where we are going--which is extremely important to know in order to make decisions today--is to understand how and why we got to where we are.
It appears we do view the world through very different eyes. Our history does not limit our future. If we were planted here by aliens or came about through entirely natural means, I really don't see how it should change where we want to go with society. We should choose a path that is the best for us regardless of what our history is. If a person was born a slave and expected to be a slave, should they be a slave? I say no.
and one highly probable potential is that a designer set the wheel in motion.
Where did you demonstrate that?
You want to say 'nothing'. But you cannot prove that. But you want to research that.
I want people to back their claims with evidence. If you say that we were created, then I want to see the evidence.
Well fine, then rule-out the possibilities scientifically. Don’t just 'decide'; "oh, I don't like the concept of 'God' because I can't wrap my brain around what that looks like, so I'll teach to ignore the potential"
I can wrap my brain aroud the idea that people can invent fantasies that don't exist. I don't see why I need to falsify these fantasies when no one can offer evidence for them to start with. In the words of Christopher Hitchens, that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Is it really that hard for you to wrap your head around the idea that evidence is important?
You would do better, and so would science, to accept the challenge of the potential, explore the possibilities and rule them out and further science.
That is what this thread is asking YOU to do. Show us how it is falsifiable. What experiments can we run to determine if it is true or not?
Scientifically, as I’ve already outlined: through understanding nature’s way of recording and using data through consciousness of biological algorithms, and through understanding what’s outside the earth life wise.
That doesn't mean anything. It haven't shown how it relates to the question at hand.
I’m well aware we lack the necessary capabilities to truly do that yet, but if we do not begin researching and gaining those capabilities, the longer it will take, if ever, to bring science far enough to be able to legitimately answer the question of life and existing.
From where I sit, we do have the necessary capabilities, but you just don't like the answers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by tesla, posted 11-21-2012 12:20 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by tesla, posted 11-26-2012 2:31 PM Taq has replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1592 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 84 of 285 (681576)
11-26-2012 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Taq
11-21-2012 2:44 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
From where I sit, we do have the necessary capabilities, but you just don't like the answers.
Oh you do you? Show me. (Capability to prove how and why life and existing is possible)
Where did you demonstrate that?
Do you deny the probability? Should I use statistics to show the chances that a singularity of energy and it changing/evolving without outside variables to institute change? Do you deny unlimited possibilities?
If we were planted here by aliens or came about through entirely natural means, I really don't see how it should change where we want to go with society.
Ok. Let’s just for second make an assumption of sorts. I'm going to compare God to our own bodies.
Our body is God, and Bacteria represent humans.
In human bodies: when bacteria levels reach a certain amount, the bacteria attack in unison. If the attack is a negative result on the human body, we react by taking medicine or in the event of extreme infection; cut off a limb.
In my scenario given here, I'm going to say the body (God) is the universe; known and unknown, people are the bacteria. Now, if human kind becomes a problem to that body, how does that body (In this scenario it has an inconceivable awareness) deal with a problem within is construct?
That would be a game changer in how we make decisions. So far, the only communication we know (with our universe) is reactions, and our behaviors exploring it are governed by them.
Of course if humans are that insignificant to the main body, it's unlikely that we will evolve to be much more a part of the main body than the glimpse of existing we will be next to a billion years as our planet will eventually cease to exist.
But then...What if?
‘If’ is so little a word to be so big.
My argument is that researching the brain and space exploration, potentially connecting with further along evolved species would be a benefit to our scientific goals of understanding. What I don't understand is why you reject that as I.D. science. The science includes the acceptance that we could exist inside of a body that was designed by greater being. Your version of science rejects that possibility. If that’s the only difference, why are you still arguing, and why have you not accepted my research plan, and why is accepting I.D. in science so evil in your eyes? People have accepted string theory. And nobody can even agree how to interpret why the mathematical curiosity is actually working.
Dark matter. Need I say more? or how about a simple anomaly of energy could have been a fart in an electron and who would be the wiser? if the genius’s say it’s the God particle then oh well guess it is.
You’re going to win this conversation in your own eyes. But you lost. I.D. is a possibility. There is a scientific path to explore the potential. You will never accept that truth.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Taq, posted 11-21-2012 2:44 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Taq, posted 11-26-2012 2:54 PM tesla has replied
 Message 87 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2012 2:35 AM tesla has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 85 of 285 (681579)
11-26-2012 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by tesla
11-26-2012 2:31 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
Oh you do you? Show me.
We have the genomes of living species. This allows us to infer the history of changes in their genomes. We can also observe those mechanisms in action.
Do you deny the probability? Should I use statistics to show the chances that a singularity of energy and it changing/evolving without outside variables to institute change? Do you deny unlimited possibilities?
You are shifting the burden of proof. These are things YOU need to show through scientific research. It is not enough to dream up fantasies, and require everyone else to falsify them. That is not how science works.
Our body is God, and Bacteria represent humans.
In human bodies: when bacteria levels reach a certain amount, the bacteria attack in unison. If the attack is a negative result on the human body, we react by taking medicine or in the event of extreme infection; cut off a limb.
When has the threat of God's Wrath every really improved society? From what I have seen, it has never gone well. The history of the Catholic church is full of priests using the threat of eternal damnation to beat their followers into submission, even burning people at the stake. If anything, we should run away from your proposed beliefs like the plague. They have poisoned society in the past, they are poisoning societies now (e.g. Sharia law), and I see no place for them in society's future. I think it is time to ignore the type of superstition that you are pushing.
But even more, we are drifting away from the topic.
My argument is that researching the brain and space exploration, potentially connecting with further along evolved species would be a benefit to our scientific goals of understanding.
What is wrong with the data we have now?
What I don't understand is why you reject that as I.D. science.
Because it is not researching intelligent design. What you describe could be used as a description for any type of fantasy you can dream up. Leprechauns? Could be a possibility, all we need to do is research the brain and space capabilities so we can find an advanced race that can help us research Leprechauns. Flying Spaghetti Monster? Same thing. It is not an ID research program.
The science includes the acceptance that we could exist inside of a body that was designed by greater being.
No, it doesn't. Science doesn't include concepts that have no evidence to support them. Assertions made without evidence are dismissed without evidence, as Christopher Hitchens once quipped.
You keep making these grand assertions, but there is ZERO science behind it. This is why ID "science" is ignored by other scientists.
Dark matter. Need I say more?
I think you do. There are currently research programs and experiments that are looking directly at dark matter. They have devised experiments that can rule out different types of dark matter, and they continue to map the presence of dark matter in the universe.
But you lost. I.D. is a possibility.
We aren't talking about possibilities. We are talking about science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by tesla, posted 11-26-2012 2:31 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by tesla, posted 11-27-2012 2:28 AM Taq has replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1592 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 86 of 285 (681634)
11-27-2012 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Taq
11-26-2012 2:54 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
We aren't talking about possibilities. We are talking about science.
Science is about exploring possibilities.
Genomes do not explain where the universe came from, or if there is greater species and beings.
You bring up church when referring to potentials of I.D. I did not bring religion into this.
What is wrong with the data we have now?
It leaves a lot of unanswered questions. And you do not appear to care for answers.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Taq, posted 11-26-2012 2:54 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by ringo, posted 11-27-2012 11:14 AM tesla has replied
 Message 89 by Taq, posted 11-27-2012 11:35 AM tesla has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 87 of 285 (681636)
11-27-2012 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by tesla
11-26-2012 2:31 PM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
You’re going to win this conversation in your own eyes. But you lost. I.D. is a possibility. There is a scientific path to explore the potential. You will never accept that truth.
But I think we all accept that truth. ID is a "possibility". So are pigs with wings. You say there is "a scientific path to explore the potential". So tell us how you would spend five million dollars exploring that potential.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by tesla, posted 11-26-2012 2:31 PM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by tesla, posted 11-30-2012 11:35 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 88 of 285 (681662)
11-27-2012 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by tesla
11-27-2012 2:28 AM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
tesla writes:
Science is about exploring possibilities.
And exploration is about going there to see what you can find, not just sitting in your armchar dreaming about what "might" be there. Five million dollars would buy a pretty nice Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria but IDists don't seem to be interested in leaving the dock.
Edited by ringo, : Splling.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by tesla, posted 11-27-2012 2:28 AM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by tesla, posted 11-30-2012 11:41 PM ringo has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 89 of 285 (681669)
11-27-2012 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by tesla
11-27-2012 2:28 AM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
Science is about exploring possibilities.
No, it isn't. Science is about testing hypotheses through experimentation.
Genomes do not explain where the universe came from, or if there is greater species and beings.
Genomes do explain where species came from, which is the question at hand.
You bring up church when referring to potentials of I.D. I did not bring religion into this.
"You think just because you cannot run a 'test' on God that there is no possible way to do research on whether or not God is reality."--tesla, message #75
It leaves a lot of unanswered questions.
Could you be more vague?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by tesla, posted 11-27-2012 2:28 AM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by tesla, posted 11-30-2012 11:49 PM Taq has replied

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 1592 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 90 of 285 (682292)
11-30-2012 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Dr Adequate
11-27-2012 2:35 AM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
So tell us how you would spend five million dollars exploring that potential.
I would have to do research on who to fund in the realms of the proposal to either increase interstellar travel capabilities, research A.I. capabilities (build a better 'brain' potentials) or finally, fund brain research equipment.
The best place to sink money is into universities or private or government assisted research agencies to employ the best and the brightest to research the given capabilities with today’s technology and emerging new information.
I would find someone to fund to those ends, but I wouldn't mind buying an $80,000 house for the work of locating a scientist who could answer questions as they arise and are able to show they know the question being asked, and have some idea of how to begin.

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2012 2:35 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024