|
Author
|
Topic: What is missing from the theory of evolution
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
Message 43 of 68 (686047)
12-28-2012 3:36 PM
|
Reply to: Message 23 by kofh2u
12-20-2012 10:00 PM
|
|
Re: philosophical considerations
What a load of crap.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 23 by kofh2u, posted 12-20-2012 10:00 PM | | kofh2u has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 49 of 68 (686138)
12-29-2012 12:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 39 by kofh2u
12-23-2012 9:59 AM
|
|
Re: Directed Evolution
I would argue that since Instincts are formed from previous life experiences of our species, they evidence an example were we "remember" things that took place in previous generations, after the people had been born, and because they found responses to certain experience were effective. That is not instinct. That is magic. Instinct is a stereotypical behaviour that is not learnt and is species wide. I can't believe you can survive in the real world unaided by social services.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 39 by kofh2u, posted 12-23-2012 9:59 AM | | kofh2u has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 51 of 68 (686140)
12-29-2012 12:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 45 by kofh2u
12-29-2012 12:11 PM
|
|
Re: Directed Evolution
Yes, but not from past lives. There is no evidence we have past lives. If it were true there would be many new lifers with no instinct at all. So that theory does not work.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 45 by kofh2u, posted 12-29-2012 12:11 PM | | kofh2u has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 52 by kofh2u, posted 12-29-2012 12:51 PM | | Larni has replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 55 of 68 (686144)
12-29-2012 1:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 52 by kofh2u
12-29-2012 12:51 PM
|
|
Re: Directed Evolution
The thing that you need to know about Jung and Freud and psychoanalytical tradition in general is that they are not based on empirical evidence. They have no ecological validity and are just culturally generated constructs used to (ineffectively) describe human behaviour. Freud and Jung did not arrive at their theories by the scientific method: in formal technical terms they pulled their ideas out of their arse ex nilo. You may personally like these personal ideas but the rest of the world has moved on.
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 52 by kofh2u, posted 12-29-2012 12:51 PM | | kofh2u has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 57 by kofh2u, posted 12-29-2012 2:09 PM | | Larni has replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 60 of 68 (686172)
12-29-2012 3:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 57 by kofh2u
12-29-2012 2:09 PM
|
|
Re: Directed Evolution
Plagiarist.
kofhu2 writes: Leonard Mlodinow, the best-selling author of The Drunkard’s Walk and coauthor of The Grand Design (with Stephen Hawking), gives us a startling and eye-opening examination of how the unconscious mind shapes our experience of the world and how, for instance, we often misperceive our relationships with family, friends, and business associates, misunderstand the reasons for ou...more Article writes: Leonard Mlodinow, the best-selling author of The Drunkard’s Walk and coauthor of The Grand Design (with Stephen Hawking), gives us a startling and eye-opening examination of how the unconscious mind shapes our experience of the world and how, for instance, we often misperceive our relationships with family, friends, and business associates, misunderstand the reasons for our investment decisions, and misremember important events. Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior by Leonard Mlodinow You show your true colours. You have no understanding of psychology and simply parrot what you have read. You have been called on this by others. You take the position of an armchair theorist. Tell me: what accademic standing do yo have?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 57 by kofh2u, posted 12-29-2012 2:09 PM | | kofh2u has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 62 of 68 (686174)
12-29-2012 3:28 PM
|
Reply to: Message 57 by kofh2u
12-29-2012 2:09 PM
|
|
Re: Directed Evolution
The next step in the scientific Method when applied to Experimental Psychology, or any other field of scientific inquiry, is to find exactly that, some empirical evidence that the idea is credible This, of course is untrue. One tries to break H1 and accept H0. If you can't reject H0 to a specified P value you have tentatively supported your H1. Where did you learn science, the Jamie and the Magic Torch School of Fantasy?
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 57 by kofh2u, posted 12-29-2012 2:09 PM | | kofh2u has not replied |
|
Larni
Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: 09-16-2005
|
|
|
Message 63 of 68 (686175)
12-29-2012 3:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 61 by DC85
12-29-2012 3:26 PM
|
|
Re: Directed Evolution -- not testable philosophic hypothesis
Except for the fact it's far more complex then conscious and unconscious. Exactly. As an aside, Freud and Jung did not have the training to explore in a systematic way (such as in social or behavioural psychology). Freud took a population of morbid subjects, took observations and derived unsubstantiated conclusions. Modern people with any knowledge of psychology know this. How telling that K does not. Edited by Larni, : Wrong target of message
The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53 The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286 Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by DC85, posted 12-29-2012 3:26 PM | | DC85 has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2