Jump to content
Science Forums

sman

Members
  • Content Count

    227
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

sman last won the day on February 25 2018

sman had the most liked content!

About sman

  • Rank
    Questioning
  • Birthday 06/16/1973

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Newport, Oregon
  • Interests
    Science, music, woodworking....
  1. sman

    Qualia

    I think the second type of qualia are information. A sweet taste in the mouth conveys some blunt chemical information, yes – but also whether or not it’s good. That’s information.
  2. The evidence for the existence of Mars, Saturn’s rings, or the north pole is easy to understand. The evidence for evolution is not. The fossil record is not a hi-definition photo of the Darwinian algorithm like the kind we have of Mars and Saturn. Anyone not technically trained is bound to misunderstand it – the way you do, and worse. Misunderstandings abound. I disagree with this. Controversy is not falsification. There are avid opponents of the theory of relativity, yet that idea is just as well supported as if there were none. I completely agree with you, however, that insult an
  3. Observers in a given universe may observe that the universe they find themselves in is appropriate for the evolution of observers, however rare that might seem. This is not surprising. It’s called the anthropic principle, as I’ve been saying. And life is not random. It’s targeted by evolution: an idea you’ve denied yourself many opportunities to learn about. I’ve no faith you’re receptive to it now.
  4. Wikipedia’s article on the subject includes some current information and concludes: …buttressing the criticism, I feel, that the thing is just meaningless. My personal criticism of the Drake Equation is more subtle: Which terms should be multiplied? Anything we can think of? This limits the equation by our imagination. Humans are exceptional at dealing with available data – but dismal when it comes to dealing with unavailable data. For instance, it may be obvious that … “the fraction of the above that release detectable signs of their existence into space” (or the fraction of civilizati
  5. This is not your personal blog. It’s a discussion forum. What are you discussing? And with whom? If you mean merely to wax on about water you can retract your opening statement concluding design. You’ve already linked us to Chaplin’s webpage on the subject (well… I did it for you, you’re welcome… otherwise you were just plagiarizing it). Continuing to copy/paste its contents is pointless and redundant.
  6. Not all compounds are of equal utility for organization. They’re all different. That water is particularly suited for life and life makes particular use of water surprises me no more than any of many contrivable anthropic coincidences.
  7. I don’t understand much of the chemistry, but I don’t have to in order to call Non sequitur: This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!, :phones:
  8. I don’t understand what you mean by eternalism. I looked it up, of course. Wikipedia dropped me in a disambiguation page wherein it explains that the philosophical nuance of the word refers to the view that “all points in time are equally real”, and opposes it with presentism: the idea that only the present is real. This seems typical of the kind of semantic minutia philosophers niggle over. I also think you could detail what you mean by the term multiverse. I’m hardly fluid in cosmology (nor philosophy, for that matter), but I’m having a hard time arriving at any meaning of "eternalism" from
  9. Not the first time you've referenced Martin Chaplin's webpage, I've noticed.
  10. Is there something about the article(s) you would like to discuss. That's what we like. This is a discussion forum. :blahblahblah:
  11. Nevertheless, that social groups are subject to selection in competition with other social groups is an idea that many biologists still disagree with. The controversy is ... rather heated. It's a debate I'm following. Not that it has anything to do with the trollish debate that's been hijacked from the OP in here. Completely off-topic on my part. But I feel a bit of disobedience is harmless, sometimes even helpful.
  12. A man has experience, but man - a population of inter-breeding humans - does not. Evolution operates on the latter, not the former.
  13. sman

    Quatrain Corner

    Punishment. Punishment. Reward. The blunt, incessant drumbeat of our labor; Dissonance… consonance… accord, And mindless chemistry becomes behavior.
  14. Of course, I looked it up... Trivedi Effect
×
×
  • Create New...