Page 1 of 25
Pages: 12345
Results 1 — 30 of 744
Having read a couple of books by Gary Jennings, Aztec and The Journeyer, and since he was an amateur philosopher, I thought I should report some significant features here. These books are fairly recent and well received. Aztec made the New York Times best seller list. They are both fictionalized history, a very good method of writing history, though leaving the reader to try to distinguish the
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
Thanks Don, and is it closer to where it should be according to modern measurements of the positions of Orion's Belt stars?
by
Joe Schiller
-
Ancient Egypt
What is the Taylor point and why do you have G3 offset from the map?
by
Joe Schiller
-
Ancient Egypt
I posted a link to a Washington Post article but it was deleted because the relationship between it and this thread was not apparent to some. I understand it is in the Laboratory forum.
My reason for posting it was in response to the many posts suggesting that the AE's would have had no motivating reason for the elaborate siting plan suggested by Scott. I assumed that all posters on this
by
Joe Schiller
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
Scott:
Thanks for all your time and effort working out this theory. Since it offers solutions to three great puzzles of civilization, I find it likely to be accurate though not proven. (Giza, Atlantis, the end of the last ice age).
The arguments on Ma’at can be summarized as follows: Is the appropriate model for the construction of Giza 1) the construction of the three tallest buildings in M
by
Joe Schiller
-
Alternative Geometry and Numerology
From the age I guess you have an old candy colored iMac or maybe a cube? In any case you can open it by removing a couple of screws. Inside the hard drive is a metal box 3 t0 5 inches across and an inch thick. it has a data cable and a power cable attached. Disconnect the cables and remove the screws attaching it to the frame. Throw it in your desk. Apple has a free recycling program you c
by
Joe Schiller
-
Coffee Shop
I agree, the amazing complexity of DNA structure and purposes is instructive whatever one's opinion regarding awareness might be. As a computerist with some experience in data base design, I find the amount of information stored to be both undeniable and incredible.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
This is out of my depth, I never heard of uricil (Neither did W).
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
It is a four symbol code and my computer is designed using a two symbol on/off code.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
You are right about that, the study of awareness has no scientific value. It is however, crucial to any comprehensive understanding of life. Asking science to explain awareness is like asking religion to explain DNA.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
The main rule of evidence for science is materiality. if the entity is non material, it either doesn't exist or is outside of science's competence to investigate. A good example here is the Shroud of Turin. Science can and does investigate it but never reaches any useful conclusion since the shroud isn't the question, the implications are which is ultimately a matter of opinion.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
How does one judge scientific validity? Your problem is that you don't know if my knowledge is reliable. This is a very complex question and I can't be relied upon to dispel your doubts. In the end, each must reach his own conclusions. Degrees might help but only marginally. The issue here is awareness and therefor life which cannot be investigated using scientific methods since sc
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
That's tough, Pete.
It is obvious to me that there is an enormous difference between awareness and consciousness. I assume the awareness in bacteria is very minute and amounts to the ability to detect changes in temperature and pressure. Whether or not this is sufficient to be called self awareness, I don't know. On the other hand, at the point recombination occurs, in my opinion, s
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
I don't understand because no explanation is available. Look up awareness in Wikipedia, is there an explanation there? I don't think so. I know when I don't understand. I frequently fail to understand Einstein. But, maybe you can explain exactly which species marks the dividing line between unaware life and aware life and the reason that's true? If you are right that thi
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
You have invented an intermediate entity named replicator that exists between non life and life. I contend that your replicator is life. This is a semantics distinction, isn't it? I find it hard to imagine two double helix strands of DNA tearing themselves in two and mating as a likely unaware chemical process. Didn't the first entity using this scheme need some amount of awareness
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
Yes but, viewing animate things as a whole, where would you draw the line? Horses, dogs, dolphins, flies, bacteria, viruses? Is multicellularity necessary? I would suggest that each cell in my brain is aware and the sum of that awareness is what I identify as my awareness. A 747 is a good symbol. Of all the 747s bulk, its only awareness is the pilot. By which I mean to point out that awaren
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
None the less, the generalization applies as the Wiki article on DNA says. I find the insistence that recombination must have been developed by random processes over however long a time, simply incredible. This insistence by science I cannot account for except ideologically. It is opinion and of course everyone is entitled to theirs. But what is the point? One just postpones the day of recko
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
"The abundance of carbon in the universe, along with the unusual polymer-forming ability of carbon-based compounds at the common temperatures encountered on Earth, make this element the basis of the chemistry of all known life." Wikipedia.
This exhausts my knowledge of chemistry. In addition, demanding that one be a PhD in chemistry to hold opinions about life is simply a turf battle
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
What do you suggest for dealing with an aspect of reality for which there is no way science can develop evidence since it has no basis in materiality? Awareness is objectively untestable. None the less it is responsible for an increasingly large part of our reality. Some things are alive and some not apparently and dismissing speculation about the awareness of inanimate things. What is the es
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
It's true I'm unaware of most of what goes on in my body. But, when I get indigestion I know it. The chemical response mechanism doesn't imply the absence of awareness. Mechanisms in living things are obviously there and very fortunate we are to have them, otherwise we wouldn't have time for conversations like this.
When writing computer programs, one reduces common algori
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
I agree, mostly, but I didn't say all carbon molecules are aware, I said some complex mostly carbon molecule is. The early oceans, while sloshing around carbon atoms and others, by happenstance allowed the special complex carbon molecule to come into existence. Since it was aware, it strove to maintain that awareness. This is, of course, my guess about what actually occurred. Carbon is t
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
Many behaviors are genetically controlled, but the method of genetic programming, in my opinion, is practice. A violinist, for instance, programs his finger cells to respond appropriately so that he can concentrate on style rather than individual notes. It is the same for ants. They develop suitable responses to situations in their lives by habitual behavior or practice until it requires as li
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
OK, thanks for the feedback.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
You keep saying that. Why do you favor that idea? The scientist says it is a form of communication. Why would an entity wish to communicate if it were unaware of anything to communicate with?
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
I said, "Awareness is assumed to be an attribute of a complex mostly carbon molecule." (by me). It is an assumption, by which I mean it sounds reasonable. I don't know where awareness comes from. Common sense seems to suggest that living things are aware as opposed to non living things. I resent science making pronouncements about it when they are as much in the dark as anyone.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
What are the biological pieces that produce awareness? DNA? Bacteria have a small amount of DNA. The brain? Ants lack a brain as conventionally understood but they are certainly aware judging from their behavior.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
Pardon me Stephanie, but you appear to be ideologically biased on this point. If you read the post at the end, you will see good evidence that bacteria are aware. Of course you can claim chemistry if you like, but I can see no objective reason for that opinion. On the other hand it sounds much like the opinions that led the pope to imprison Galileo.
The chemistry you are referring to is the a
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
"Carbon occurs in all organic life and is the basis of organic chemistry." Wikipedia.
by
Joe Schiller
-
Humanities
Page 1 of 25
Pages: 12345