International Aspects of Creationism/ID

Could it be that Europeans are just too weary of American enthusiasm such that they simply refuse to alter the conclusion that politically at least has already been effected in this node of this Earth. Could it not just be that no one over there has thought this out below like I am doing.
A few things could now be added concerning a certain very subtle spirit pervading gross bodies and lying hidden I them;INEWTONIs it noHidden in the difference of the angiosperm and gymnosperm tori as taxogenic dielectrics of its ontogeny and cladistics in Earth’s gravity.BSMby its force and actions, the particles of bodies attract at very small distances and cohere when they become contiguous ; and electrical [i.e. electrified] bodies act at greater distances, INEWTONThe force is thermal(electric) currents caused by sun heating differences between the top and bottom of the plant relative to gravity which effects capillary forces IN THE CELLS where without adaptations to the currents the Gladyshev monoheirarchy only retains the place contiguous to the capillary force between the different effects of the gas (air)and the liquid (water) electrotonically (chemical acid base ionically supramoleculary) no matter the solids (minerals etc) sustained during growth and development but as soon as selection for electrified bodies fit to the physics of temperature dependent thermal currents, larger distances are reached in the form of the plant, speciation is a causal possibility in the contiguity of the genes revolved in the meantime by the Sun’s gravity. Gibbs minimization equilibrates this stage in the bifurcation of the clades rotated in the process. BSMrepelling as well as attracting neighboring corpuscles; and ligh is emitted, relflected, refracted, inflected, and heats bodies; and all sensation is exicited,INEWTONThe ability of the electric heritability enables the genes to be LIFTED over the quantuam mechanical barrier of the dielectric properties because of repulsion but it is the higher order population genetics that reverse information flows where without the shifting balance the no engineer could build by a physical teleology alone. This enables the neiboring correlations to posses not only a stationary macrothermodyamnic aspect but also a mobile one where the chemicals participating are not trapped but moved by variable cavitations of air during speciation time and deme diversification.BSMand the limbs of animals move at command of the will, namly by the vibrations of this spirit being propogated thought the soild fibers of the nerves from the external organs of sense to the brain and from the brain to the muscles.INEWTONFurther ideas about leaf physiology are incumbent. Certainly Dostal’s determinations if only reflective at this reading are not unrelated.It is entirely imaginable to suspect that with both pressure and voltage differences across the Frohlich SPHERE (as the torus) that analytic chemistry can develop a new department of organic analysis based on genetically enginerred contols of the potentials across levels of organizations. If woodyneess can be deconstructed so as to permit wood in the leaf and still remit photons suffienent tosustain development (given that such are grown) then a new taxa of plants might be designed to survive in extremely cold environements (poles, mars) provided the thermal currents are able to sustain the fitness to the plan given the decreased photonic receptivity both by the form and the location relative to the sun. This might indeed offer an intellectual response to the social issue of biology’s failure to address its past eugenical excesses sans economics. We would be what we eat. Let us add a little bark to the diet.BSMbut these things cannot be explained in a few words; furthermore there is not a sufficient number of experiments to determine and demonstrate the laws governing the actions of this spirit.INEWTONibchohen

quote:

---

The final paragraph of the General Scholium has attracted much scholarly attention, notably in an effort to discern what Newton intended (in the opening and closing sentences) by a spirit which may be operative in various types of phenomena. It might even appear that Newton was here introducing a speculation — we dare not call it a hypothesis — although Newton’s actual language indicates that for him there was no question about whether this spirit really exists, only about the laws according to which this spirit acts

---

quote:

---

We may readily understand why Newton omitted to carry out either the revision or the proposed cancellation of the final paragraph. By the time that the third edition was fully printed, in about February 1726, Newton and Pemberton had spent several years revising the text and reading the proofs and Newton was a little more than a year of his death. When Newton reached the last paragraph he was probably so weary that he overlooked his proposed alteration of the conclusion.

---

Can this change to the Frolich statement(not included in this post) modified by applications of electrotonics to macrothermodynamics no matter the hierachical thermodynamics not find this last elasticity of the spirit?BSMibcohen

quote:

---

One possible reason why Newton decided not to insert the qualifying phrase electric and elastic into the text of the third edition (1726) is that in his interleaved copy of the second edition he has finally drawn a line through the whole paragraph, showing his intention of deleting it in the third edition. The reason for this decision seems to be that some time after 1713 Newton lost his enthusiasm for electricity as a possible agent in gravitation.

---

Could we find the means to genetically engineering large tracts of small woody plants to populate the tundra and possibly Mars providing new food sources for man’s growing population such that the design is altered for the difference in gravity on the two planents??BSMibcohen

quote:

---

A puzzle relating to the interpretation of this spirit is the appearance of thqualifiying adjectives electric and elastic introduced in the original Motte translation and retained in the Motte- Cajori version

---

there is more in criticism...BSM
If so, then the effect of freeszing and thawing in the vincity of surviving plants provides the environs in which the electric affect of the temperature difference can sustain the geneitic passage to a new construction of plants where man is not currently present. In short, man would have come to look at today’s modern deciduous and gymnosperm TREES as dinosaurs of yesterpopular year. Whether electricity is an agent of gravity depends on the heritibile information in aliens if they exist.The quotes were from Cohen's edition of Newton's Principia

Could it be that US teaching had been more GOD GIVEN and less aposteriori based? Is it possible that Europeans assimilated more of Herbartianism than Americans at an earlier date?? I dont know. Could it be that Kantianism by default is putting US education in a better position now that we still can experience both(since the 60s)???

quote:

---

John Friedrich Herbart, the founder of this movement in education, was born at Oldenburg in 1776, and died at Gottengen in 1841. He labored seven years at Gottingen at the beginning of his career as professor, and a similiar period at its close. But the longest period of his university teaching was at Koningsburg where, for twenty-five years, he occupied the chair of philsophy made famous before him by Kant.

---

The Elements of General Method Based on The Principles of Herbart by Charles McMurry 1901, Bloomington Ill, Public-School Publishing Company.

quote:

---

Kant, with many other psychologists, gives greater prominence to the orginial powers of the mind, to the innate ideas, by means of which it recieves and works over the crude materials furnished by the senses. The difference between Kant and Herbart in interpreting the process of apperception is an index of a radical difference in their pedagogical standpoints. With Kant, apperception is the assimilation of the raw materials of knowledge through the fundamental categories of thought (quality, quantity, relation, modality, etc.) Kant's categories of thought are original properties of the mind; they recieve the crude materials of sense-perception and give them form and meaning. With Herbart, the ideas gained through experience are the apperceiveing power in interpreting new things. Practically, the difference between Kant and Herbart is important. For Kant gives controlling influence to innate ideas in the process of acquisition. Our capacity for learning depends not so much upon the results of experience and thought stored in the mind, as upon original powers, unaided and unsupported by experience. With Herbart, on the contrary, great stress is laid upon the acquired fund of empirical knowledge as a means of increasing one's stores, of more rapidly receiveing and assimiliating new ideas.

---

opcitp217Are not these the powers protected by the US BILL OF RIGHTS?Can not the euro currency be jokingly referred to by this 'fund'? Is not european sequestration of means to facilitate biodiveristy informatics by captial control of the fastest critical infrastructure rather not slowing down the move to Earth sustainability???what would need to change to change the 44% americans still skeptical
News | The Institute for Creation Research

Tell me then, please my man, what ARE the "real" reasons?I can do all of this without any links.This is a thread.I posted twice here.I do not use the word "rant".Are you ONLY? interested in what ICR said??I am from East Orange. My Grandfather got his Phd using flies from Columbia. My mother wanted to leave US for Australia and start a Christian Mission with my Newark native father of the melting pot population abandoning my Grandmother's agnositicism of a lineage back to the Ward of revolutionary war days that was not incompatible with the teaching of Evolution TO TEACHERS that occurred in WESTERN NY in this family by leaving a Seventh Day Adventist farming family unable to deal with a death at child birth.I had said that things would have to CHANGE in US if the %skeptical was to no longer DOUBT evolution. I still hold to the position that if one can change ICR type minds then the rest of US will follow.You dont agree?Please if you refuse to mention me at all (which you did) why cant you say what you think the reasons really were.So you dont have a subjective confidence of what counts for a bacterial "species"?You think that placing a series of morphologies in a series explains the "transition"(Gould is well aware this is not suffient).ICR is concerned not as much with this kind of response but with a demonstration from a rock facie of the same, not one pieced together from different places.Abiogenesis is used to stifle questions by both evolutionists and creationsists because the philosophy of reductionism vs holism is a heterogenity but the failure occurrs in a homogeneity of objections that either you or I could write.from the GENERAL METHOD opcit p 186

quote:

---

"Since the old ideas have so much to do with the proper reception of the new, let us examine more closely the interaction between the two. If a new ideadrops into the mind, like a stone upon the surface of the water, it produces a commotion. It acts as a stimulus or wakener to the old ideas sleeping beneath the surface. It draws them up above the surface level; that is int consciousness. But what ideas are thus disturbed? There are thousands of these latent ideas, embyronic thoughts, beneath the surface. Those which possess sufficient kinship to this newcomer to hear his call, respond. For in the mind "birds of a feather flock together." Ideas and thoughts which resemble the new one answer, the others sleep on undisturbed. Or, to state it differently, certain thought-groups or complexes, which contain elements kindered to the new notion, are agitated and raised into conscious thought. They sem to respond to their names. The new idea may continue for some time to be a sort of telegraphic inquiry through the regions of the mind to find out where the kindred dwell. The distant relatives and strangers (the unrelatd or unserviceable ideas) soon discover that they have responded to the wrong call and drop back asleep again. But the real kindred wake up more and more. They come forward to inspect the new-comer and to examine his credentials. Soon he finds that he is surrounded by inquisitive friends and relatives. They threaten even to take possession of him. Up to this point the new idea has taken the lead, he has beeen the aggressor. But now is the time for the awakend kindreed ideas to assume control and lead the stranger captive, to bring him in among themselves and gvie him is appropriate place and importance. The old body of ideas, when once set in motion, is more powerfu than any single-handed stranger that happens to fall into their company. The outcome is that the stranger , who at first seemed to be producing a sensation, now discovers that strong arms ar about him and he is carried captive by vigorous friends. New ideas when first entering the mind are very strong, and , if they come through the senses, are especially rich in the color and vigor of life. They therefore absorb the attention at first and seem to monopolize the mental energies; but the older thought masses, when fully aroused, are better organized, more firmly rooted in habit, and posses much wider connections. They are almost certain, therefore , to apperceive the new idea; that is, to conquer and subdue it, to make it tributary to their power."

---

If you only want to "debate" within creation and evolution, I can oblige you elsewhere. I merely provided the link for balance. Please try to address what I, BSM, wrote. Even if only to ask a question. I regret that it appears that to be a "good evcer" one has to sound like one is "answering" another poster's questions. I wish that wasnt a general take home message but it appears that way. I did say at one place, "I dont know". You can take advantage of that dont forget.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 05-14-2005 09:21 AM

Ok I get it.
That was me dropping acid drops where it belongs not at first. I understand now.I retract the context. I can make the transition thing clearer. We can do it in another thread. Yes collecting forms and trying to relate them sequentially is the first stage in any good taxanomic tool book. I dont think it is ignorance, but at least you gave something to go off of however I dont think my eyes were deceiveing me last night as I dont recall your postinterdigitated between Limbo's and Mick's perhaps it came in on delay.
----------------------------
May the loom do the prunning.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 05-15-2005 07:58 AM

Do you know anything particular about this work?I found it quite curious that I didnt see (perhaps I didnt look at enough of the pages(this is a real possibility) anything "new" about the origin of genetic information (genetic variance) as on the abcissus of his graphing AND YET he dedicated the book to Dawkins.Is this really a creationist tract and not hoax like Chardin's piltown man where he didnt reaveal the rub for some years even after many knew?? Lewontin also in related matters would use a different pen name when writing to NYTImes book review.The clue for figuring this out myself is that he speaks of "inbreeding" "on top" etc but if you can confirm that 50% is creationist while explaning the Dawkins reference without a meme of it I would appreciate it.

Ok, I wont be that suspicious.
I guess he derived his idea BECAUSE amino acids have THREE bases in the code. I just think I see how a memeist might using Dawkins' DEVIL's CHAPLIN, gain say Gould's death (and gap in communication between Gould and Dawkins) (in)to a social advantage, skipping a generation, that thus might constrict biology FURTHER (than a simple outworking of the inbreeding could explain on condition if one were forced scientifically to deal with variance less plurivocally than I think I read him to have said).I'll drop this. Thanks again.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 05-16-2005 08:43 AM

Holmes, "Creationism in an historical context" can not survive current humanism so dont freak, but it is not bad to have biology students think harder about spontaneous generation even if only in such a historical content. Mayr simply decided it was not profitable to think of the distinction of life and non life but he was talking about a German experience in the US.