Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:27:18 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 09:19:34 +0200, Piotr Wyderski
bom...@protonmail.com> wrote:
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Somehow. But RNA World requires at least as much faith as \"God did
it.\"
It is interesting that some people so fiercely oppose the very idea of
some chemical blob coming into existence spontaneously and yet at the
same time they have no slightest doubt in the pre-existence of an
infinitely more complex and capable entity. Some even believe its
capabilities are literally unconstrained and somehow they know there is
only one of this species. Logic wept.
Since you are replying to my post, I guess you are describing me.
Entirely falsely.
Not all that incorrectly. Your self-image is shaped by your vanity,
You are being illogical, not me. I never declared any source of life
to be of \"no slightest doubt.\" I did suggest that various things might
be possible, some interesting and some silly but none impossible. I
guess designing electronics made me this way, always ready for
surprises.
You\'d run into fewer of them if you could actually design your electronics.
Given that nobody knows how life originated, declaring anything impossible actually needs proof.
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
Actually, the problem is that you read intelligent design propaganda, don\'t understand that it is propaganda, and recycle it as if were your own invention. You do the same with climate denial propaganda.
Agressive atheism shuts off thinking more than attending church on Sunday.
Neither has any necessary effect on peoples willingness to think. You don\'t seem to be able to think for yourself at all, so your ideas on the subject are entirely worthless.
--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney
On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 9:22:29 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:27:18 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 09:19:34 +0200, Piotr Wyderski <bom...@protonmail..com> wrote:
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
Actually, the problem is that you read intelligent design propaganda, don\'t understand that it is propaganda, and recycle it as if were your own invention. You do the same with climate change denial propaganda.
Aggressive atheism shuts off thinking more than attending church on Sunday.
Neither has any necessary effect on peoples willingness to think. You don\'t seem to be able to think for yourself at all, so your ideas on the subject are entirely worthless.
Sloman can\'t resist the impulse to take personal attacks, which is clearly a defect in his personality (assuming he has one).
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I
dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 8:27:18 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I
dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
Daring? Hardly. You repeatedly insert worthless suggestions instead
of workable theory or testable hypothesis.
On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 14:21:13 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 8:27:18 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I
dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
Daring? Hardly. You repeatedly insert worthless suggestions instead
of workable theory or testable hypothesis.
How do you know my suggestions are worthless? Are you an evolutionary
biologist? They don\'t now how life started either.
And what problem do you have with worthless suggestions? You would
poison a brainstorming session.
No, <mutations in DNA are caused by things we experience and are \'consciously\' made to increase survival skills
What a load of utter nonsense. Mutations are frequently caused by subatomic particles shooting through the cell and breaking up the DNA helix. It puts itself back together, but not quite the way it was before. There\'s nothing \"conscious\" about that.
On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
That\'s been explained to you many times by several people.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
That\'s been explained to you many times by several people.
Claimed, not explained.
Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
That has been explained to you many times.
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:34:47 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 14:21:13 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 8:27:18 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I
dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
Daring? Hardly. You repeatedly insert worthless suggestions instead
of workable theory or testable hypothesis.
How do you know my suggestions are worthless? Are you an evolutionary
biologist? They don\'t now how life started either.
So, credentials in \'evolutionary biology\' don\'t address a pertinent skill?
What\'s the point, then, of the question?
And what problem do you have with worthless suggestions? You would
poison a brainstorming session.
Untrue; a brainstorming session, after all, ends with evaluation.
The phase
where rejection is discouraged is ONLY a phase, not the whole process. I\'ve reached
a few conclusions, and on most such occasions, I addressed the \'how to know\' issue.
On 29/03/22 16:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
That\'s been explained to you many times by several people.
Claimed, not explained.
If you think that, you need to polish your cognition skills.
Mostly insults.
It sounds like you are looking for reasons not to take the
time and effort to understand.
Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
That has been explained to you many times.
The moon is made of green cheese. That improbable idea
has value until you prove to me that it isn\'t?
I think not.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:48:35 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 16:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
That\'s been explained to you many times by several people.
Claimed, not explained.
If you think that, you need to polish your cognition skills.
Mostly insults.
It sounds like you are looking for reasons not to take the
time and effort to understand.
Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
That has been explained to you many times.
The moon is made of green cheese. That improbable idea
has value until you prove to me that it isn\'t?
I think not.
Moon surface samples have been collected and analyzed. We know some
about seismic propagation in the bulk of the moon. And we can measure
tidal effects; green cheese would radically increase orbital decay.
That is hard experimental data that works against the cheese theory.
On 29/03/22 17:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:48:35 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 16:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
That\'s been explained to you many times by several people.
Claimed, not explained.
If you think that, you need to polish your cognition skills.
Mostly insults.
It sounds like you are looking for reasons not to take the
time and effort to understand.
Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
That has been explained to you many times.
The moon is made of green cheese. That improbable idea
has value until you prove to me that it isn\'t?
I think not.
Moon surface samples have been collected and analyzed. We know some
about seismic propagation in the bulk of the moon. And we can measure
tidal effects; green cheese would radically increase orbital decay.
That is hard experimental data that works against the cheese theory.
The moon landings were faked.
The rocks were picked up on the earth. You can even find
identical ones on the earth.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:48:35 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 16:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
That\'s been explained to you many times by several people.
Claimed, not explained.
If you think that, you need to polish your cognition skills.
Mostly insults.
It sounds like you are looking for reasons not to take the
time and effort to understand.
Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
That has been explained to you many times.
The moon is made of green cheese. That improbable idea
has value until you prove to me that it isn\'t?
I think not.
Moon surface samples have been collected and analyzed. We know some
about seismic propagation in the bulk of the moon. And we can measure
tidal effects; green cheese would radically increase orbital decay.
That is hard experimental data that works against the cheese theory.
We have zero experimental data that resolves the origin of DNA-based
life, so options remain open.
On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:18:25 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:34:47 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless? Are you an evolutionary
biologist? They don\'t now how life started either.
So, credentials in \'evolutionary biology\' don\'t address a pertinent skill?
Do you have such credentials?
And what problem do you have with worthless suggestions? You would
poison a brainstorming session.
Untrue; a brainstorming session, after all, ends with evaluation.
Not always. Sometimes there is no obvious discovery, but maybe some
people leave with different attitudes or unresolved hunches. That
might inspire an idea years later.
On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 8:54:05 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:18:25 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:34:47 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless? Are you an evolutionary
biologist? They don\'t now how life started either.
So, credentials in \'evolutionary biology\' don\'t address a pertinent skill?
Do you have such credentials?
Do class credits from a well-known developmental biologist count?
Odd question.
What\'s the point, then, of the question?
Yeah, lots of odd questions, what\'s the point?
And what problem do you have with worthless suggestions? You would
poison a brainstorming session.
Untrue; a brainstorming session, after all, ends with evaluation.
Not always. Sometimes there is no obvious discovery, but maybe some
people leave with different attitudes or unresolved hunches. That
might inspire an idea years later.
Brainstorming is a means to an end. It serves my ends to know
a broad range of ideas, but also to know the best ones.
Brainstorming exercizes mental flexibility... if you let it.
It\'s a solution for groupthink deficiencies, not individual mentation.
You\'re degrading it into a metaphor: that\'s not the best use of the idea.
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
That\'s been explained to you many times by several people.
Claimed, not explained. Mostly insults.
Until you truly know the origin if life, mocking any possible source
is emotion-driven and irrational.
Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
That has been explained to you many times.
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:29 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 9:22:29 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:27:18 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 09:19:34 +0200, Piotr Wyderski <bom...@protonmail.com> wrote:
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
snip
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
Actually, the problem is that you read intelligent design propaganda, don\'t understand that it is propaganda, and recycle it as if were your own invention. You do the same with climate change denial propaganda.
Aggressive atheism shuts off thinking more than attending church on Sunday.
Neither has any necessary effect on peoples willingness to think. You don\'t seem to be able to think for yourself at all, so your ideas on the subject are entirely worthless.
Sloman can\'t resist the impulse to take personal attacks, which is clearly a defect in his personality (assuming he has one).
Flyguy\'s enthusiasm for seeing defects in my personality saves him from making comments of any substance, which is clearly beyond him.
He will most likely do the same to my post.
It\'s not easy to be critical of the defects in John Larkin\'s logic without being critical of John Larkin\'s enthusiasm for parading them. Flyguy has even less capacity for rational thought. I don\'t even have bother pointing out how stupid he is. He makes it obvious with every word he posts.
--
SNIPPERMAN, Sydney
On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 10:53:21 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:29 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 9:22:29 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:27:18 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 09:19:34 +0200, Piotr Wyderski <bom...@protonmail.com> wrote:
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
snip
People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
Actually, the problem is that you read intelligent design propaganda, don\'t understand that it is propaganda, and recycle it as if were your own invention. You do the same with climate change denial propaganda.
Aggressive atheism shuts off thinking more than attending church on Sunday.
Neither has any necessary effect on peoples willingness to think. You don\'t seem to be able to think for yourself at all, so your ideas on the subject are entirely worthless.
Sloman can\'t resist the impulse to take personal attacks, which is clearly a defect in his personality (assuming he has one).
Flyguy\'s enthusiasm for seeing defects in my personality saves him from making comments of any substance, which is clearly beyond him.
He will most likely do the same to my post.
It\'s not easy to be critical of the defects in John Larkin\'s logic without being critical of John Larkin\'s enthusiasm for parading them. Flyguy has even less capacity for rational thought. I don\'t even have bother pointing out how stupid he is. He makes it obvious with every word he posts.
LOL! Hey Sloman, you PROVED MY POINT for me!!!!!!!!