Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Origin of Specious Nonsense. Twelve years on. Still going. Answer soon.

Options
1…5681011…106

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    In before 'quantum'.

    Again.


  • Options
    #213
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    swampgas wrote: »
    What does the word "spatiotemporal" actually add to the description?
    The air of ineffable.


  • Options
    #214
    darjeeling
    Registered Users Posts: 962 ✭✭✭darjeeling


    Sarky wrote: »
    In before 'quantum'.

    Again.

    Never underestimate the solace of quantum.


  • Options
    #215
    nagirrac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    Considerable levels of argument from ignorance in the prior 4 posts, a bit surprising from some who generally favor science over ignorance:rolleyes:

    This has nothing to do with quantum, although there are quantum theories of consciousness (Penrose, Hameroff, Stapp). There are broadly speaking four categories of consciousness theories, the EM field theory is one of them.

    Yes, all EM fields are spatiotemporal in that they are fields in space time. However, EM fields take on different spatial shapes depending on their source, this has been known since the time of Faraday and Maxwell. These shapes or patterns can be in 1D, 2D or 3D. Think about a magnet and iron filings around a magnet, that's a simple example.

    What Pocket is proposing (and her use of the term spatiotemporal is hers not mine) is there are specific 3D patterns that are created by certain sequences of neuron activity (and not by others) that are the source of consciousness. This suggests consciousness is digital information stored in EM fields and could explain how information flow gets around the brain, explaining the binding problem for example which at this point we have no other known mechanism for. It also suggests that consciousness does not require a brain as the same fields could be generated by hardware other than a brain.

    The attached paper explains EM fields and digital information. Interestingly the author in this case is specifically referring to the use of specific spatiotemporal EM fields carrying digital information in AI. A future with conscious robots would be interesting, might improve the level of discourse on this thread:P

    http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0701/0701081.pdf


  • Options
    #216
    nagirrac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    swampgas wrote: »
    Isn't every EM field "spatiotemporal" (i.e. has time and spatial dimensions) ?

    What does the word "spatiotemporal" actually add to the description?

    I have always assumed that consciousness is an emergent property of the brain, based on how neurons interact. That interaction may be a combination of chemical and electromagnetic (EM) processes. Are you suggesting that EM fields being involved somehow ups the "woo" level?

    Yes, all EM fields are in space time, like everything we know about in the universe. Pockett is referring to specific 3D EM field patterns, should maybe have made that more clear. This theory fits within your broad description, as consciousness arises from specific sequences of neuron firings.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Anybody in Athlone Institute of Technology who might know why this piece of stinky poo might have been given airtime there today?

    282053.jpg


  • Options
    #218
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Argh! One J C thread is more than enough! Close it! Close it with fire!

    I've forwarded the pic to Athlone IT's Twitter, anyway, maybe they'll find an answer.


  • Options
    #219
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,865 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    FSMdammit, that poster is so misleading.


  • Options
    #220
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    I tried to ban Rob but my computer exploded. :(


  • Options
    #221
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Their rather disappointing response:

    "Third level is also about hearing & respecting opinions different from our own."


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Sarky wrote: »
    Argh! One J C thread is more than enough! Close it! Close it with fire!
    One thread for good stuff, one thread for idiocy and, uh, that should be enough!

    The FB page on Comfort's page is here for anybody who'd like to comment:

    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=683678811652595&set=a.122900324397116.15609.110962898924192&type=1&theater


  • Options
    #223
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Sarky wrote: »
    "Third level is also about hearing & respecting opinions different from our own."
    Does this fine third-level institution give airtime to flat-earthers too?


  • Options
    #224
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    I'm going to try ban myself now for resurrecting this thread. :o


  • Options
    #225
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Thread renamed for lame reasons. Take it away folks!


  • Options
    #226
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    Can we merge the threads?


  • Options
    #227
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    [-0-] wrote: »
    Can we merge the threads?
    From an organizational point of view, I think it's neater to keep this thread for creationism and the other thread for more serious discussion of evolution, biology etc. We can see how it pans out anyhow.


  • Options
    #228
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    [-0-] wrote: »
    Can we merge the threads?

    We can and we could but we're not going to because YOU suggested it.
    Edit : Rob is way better at this PR thing than I am.


  • Options
    #229
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Ray Comfort is on Twitter saying he got a prayer request for the screening of that 'film. 5,000 students attending, apparently. Athlone IT has a little over 6,000 students according to its website. I think someone's telling porkies.


  • Options
    #230
    gaynorvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭gaynorvader


    Sarky wrote: »
    Their rather disappointing response:

    "Third level is also about hearing & respecting opinions different from our own."

    If only those opinions weren't been presented as facts. If you were to make a video about the deep-seated corruption that exists in Athlone IT, in your opinion, but presented it as fact, I wonder if they'd allow that?


  • Options
    #231
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    Jernal wrote: »
    We can and we could but we're not going to because YOU suggested it.
    Edit : Rob is way better at this PR thing than I am.

    Yeah, Rob is not a dick. Good to know, you stay classy Jernal.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Jernal wrote: »
    Rob is way better at this PR thing than I am.
    Learnt all I know off Dades + Asiaprod - they're pro's at that


  • Options
    #233
    gaynorvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭gaynorvader


    Jernal wrote: »
    We can and we could but we're not going to because YOU suggested it.
    Edit : Rob is way better at this PR thing than I am.

    ....Prime Ribs?


  • Options
    #234
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Brian Shanahan wrote: »
    Boy JC you sure do know how to tell a joke.

    By the way did you know the single most important article in the US constitution establishes both freedom of speech and the wall of separation between church and state.

    The first bit doesn't affect what I highlighted, but the second shows that you don't know **** about the situation in America. The wall of separation clause means that no state institution (including the Dover Area School District) can support the process of religious indoctrination out of state funds (if a pastor wants to rent out school rooms after school-hours to brainwash the children of his flock is a slightly different matter, settled on a state by state basis), and teaching creationism is religious indoctrination. Therefore the religiously partisan, and incidentally unconstitutional, ruling would have been to allow the teaching of creationism, because it would privilege several religions over all the others.

    You see JC the founding fathers of the US took the eminently sensible chain of decisions that a) nobody should be persecuted for their religious beliefs (if those beliefs were the cause of unlawfullnes, e.g. a religion proscribing the monthly murder of multiple maidens, then they could be prosecuted), b) the state had no business interfering in private affairs (as long as they didn't affect others), and c) the best way to do this was for the state to stay out of religion and religion to stay away from the state. Therefore in the US if you want your child brought up religious, you either have to do it yourself or take them to Sunday school, a private, religiously run system with no state funding or interference.
    A classical example of 'fighting the last war' ... the founding fathers of America were trying to protect people's freedom of religion (following on from the religious oppression suffered by themselves as immigrants into the USA, in their home countries) ... but they never took account of the fact that irreligion could be just as pernicious in both the proselytisation of its own ideas ... and its suppression and intolerance of alternative opinion.
    ... and now we have the weird situation that the American 'state-protected religion' is irreligion ... with all of its basic principles and dogmas protected by law and taught in public schools ... and all opposing principles and ideas banned by law ... in the name of religious freedom, no less!!!
    You just couldn't make it up!!!


  • Options
    #235
    gaynorvader
    Registered Users Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭gaynorvader


    J C wrote: »
    A classical example of 'fighting the last war' ... the founding fathers of America were trying to protect people's freedom of religion (following on from the religious oppression suffered by themselves as immigrants into the USA, in their home countries) ... but they never took account of the fact that irreligion could be just as pernicious in both the proselytisation of its own ideas ... and its suppression and intolerance of alternative opinion.
    ... and now we have the weird situation that the American 'state-protected religion' is irreligion ... with all of its basic principles and dogmas protected by law and taught in public schools ... and all opposing principles and ideas banned by law ... in the name of religious freedom, no less!!!
    You just couldn't make it up!!!

    And yet you did.


  • Options
    #236
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,738 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    A classical example of 'fighting the last war' ... the founding fathers of America were trying to protect people's freedom of religion (following on from the religious oppression suffered by themselves as immigrants into the USA, in their home countries) ... but they never took account of the fact that irreligion could be just as pernicious in both the proselytisation of its own ideas ... and its suppression and intolerance of alternative opinion.
    ... and now we have the weird situation that the American 'state-protected religion' is irreligion ... with all of its basic principles and dogmas protected by law and taught in public schools ... and all opposing principles and ideas banned by law ... in the name of religious freedom, no less!!!
    You just couldn't make it up!!!

    Ironically, you just did.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #237
    nagirrac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    gaynorvader wrote: »
    If only those opinions weren't been presented as facts.

    Have people actually watched the movie? It consists of a creationist interviewing college professors and 3rd level students, all of whom identified as atheists. It is actually quite entertaining, the funniest moment for me was when a UCLA professor was asked to name a famous atheist and after careful consideration she said Newton. Newton! Better than the students interviewed though who were stumped. The most disturbing thing about the movie was the appalling inability of the 3rd level students interviewed, some of whom were biology majors, and all of whom were science majors, to answer a few basic questions about evolution.

    It is quite disturbing that some atheists are asking, even demanding censorship, an indication that they want one form of intolerance replaced by another. The same atheists who would be screaming blue murder if the government, churches, or whoever were advocating censorship. A free society is one that allows dissent, regardless of how strongly individuals feel about the subject. Its a movie ffs, should the poor impressionably students in Athlone be protected from it? How arrogant.

    If one student walked out of the movie convinced against the fact of evolution because of that movie, they are in the wrong place and should do something else with their time.


  • Options
    #238
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    robindch wrote: »
    That paper doesn't seem to control for age of the father, so is is right to assume that the 128 mutations figure is the average for all males?

    I'm asking since women produce their eggs at birth (so replication errors will be low) while male's sperm-producing cells reproduce constantly, so they'll carry a greater and greater number of reproduction errors as the male ages.
    Its the opposite actually ... background mutagenesis affects the egg cells as they age ... leading to greater genetic issues with children of older mothers ... while the genetic correction mechanisms present in all reproducing cells ensure that newly produced sperm are genetically almost as good in a 60 year old man as in a 20 year old ... and that is why the age of the father isn't linked to genetic issues in children!!!

    A forty five year old egg cell has much greater potential to be mutated than a 60 day old sperm cell.


  • Options
    #239
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    JC wrote:
    the founding fathers of America were trying to protect people's freedom of religion (following on from the religious oppression suffered by themselves as immigrants into the USA, in their home countries)

    Looks like you don't know your history either JC.

    There is quite a large list of founding fathers, but the key ones are known as the following: John Adams(born in Braintree, MA), Benjamin Franklin(born in Boston, MA) , Alexander Hamilton(born in Charlestown, Nevis, British West Indies), John Jay(born in NYC, New York), Thomas Jefferson(born in Shadwell, Virginia), James Madison(born in Fort Conway, Virginia), and George Washington(Westmoreland, Virginia, British America).

    Also, they're not the founding fathers of America. They are the founding fathers of the United States of America. There's lots of Ameircas: North, South, Central.


  • Options
    #240
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    J C wrote: »
    A classical example of 'fighting the last war' ... the founding fathers of America were trying to protect people's freedom of religion (following on from the religious oppression suffered by themselves as immigrants into the USA, in their home countries) ... but they never took account of the fact that irreligion could be just as pernicious in both the proselytisation of its own ideas ... and its suppression and intolerance of alternative opinion.
    ... and now we have the weird situation that the American 'state-protected religion' is irreligion ... with all of its basic principles and dogmas protected by law and taught in public schools ... and all opposing principles and ideas banned by law ... in the name of religious freedom, no less!!!
    You just couldn't make it up!!!

    JC not only are you **** at science, you're **** at both legal studies and basic english too. I'm getting mightily sick of listening to you peddle the same lies over and over again, so for this reason you're going on my ignore list. I'll still get enough of your idiocy, but it will be only when someone with intelligence responds and destroys whatever utter ****e you've just posted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    nagirrac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,019 ✭✭✭nagirrac


    The founding fathers of the USA were mainly deists and were driven by the desire to keep religious intolerance out of state affairs.


Advertisement