Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-24-2019 10:58 AM
52 online now:
dwise1, edge, PaulK, Tanypteryx, vimesey (5 members, 47 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,617 Year: 3,654/19,786 Month: 649/1,087 Week: 18/221 Day: 18/36 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1234
5
6Next
Author Topic:   Think bigger think better.
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 78 (507469)
05-05-2009 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by onifre
04-26-2009 1:30 AM


Percy said "pardon my french" and you felt compelled to write a huge post about slang terms. Yet, when asked to clarify your comments in your posts, you give us poetry and nonsensical replies.

He copied and pasted it...

http://franceexplained.blogspot.com/2004/12/pardon-my-french.html

Fine, you are not illiterate, you clarified that, now stop being vague about the other stuff - for fucks sake.

No. He clearly does not have the communication skills necessary to adequately deliver his idea for a forum such as this one.

Another crank that will eventually disappear.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by onifre, posted 04-26-2009 1:30 AM onifre has not yet responded

  
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 62 of 78 (507470)
05-05-2009 11:43 AM


chatholicscientist writes:

No. He clearly does not have the communication skills necessary to adequately deliver his idea for a forum such as this one.

Another crank that will eventually disappear.

Commnication skills, hark you.
You post you reply to a third party, i am here ask away.

paul.


Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-05-2009 12:01 PM paullesq has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 78 (507472)
05-05-2009 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by paullesq
05-05-2009 11:43 AM


You post you reply to a third party, i am here ask away.

But from reading the thread I can see that you are either unable or unwilling to communicate your ideas in a way that they can be criticized effectively, so why would I even bother?

You'd rather dance around in obscurity and feal like you're on to something *really big*.

It turns out that your just another crank, though.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by paullesq, posted 05-05-2009 11:43 AM paullesq has not yet responded

  
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 64 of 78 (507499)
05-05-2009 4:17 PM


Hello Catholic scientist.

CatholicScientist writes:

But from reading the thread I can see that you are either unable or unwilling to communicate your ideas in a way that they can be criticized effectively, so why would I even bother?

You'd rather dance around in obscurity and feal like you're on to something *really big*.

It turns out that your just another crank, though.

Here is my reply to phage, he has not responded, feel free to read think about what is written and make a reply.

paullesq writes:

Hello.
It is a train of thought i have, tracks for trains *statements for thinking. The statements are emphasised with the elevated star * symbol. The theory is built around this key statement.

*The big bang a single beginning denotes a single process.

Although there are alternatives to the single beginning single process concept, to follow the theory one must accept the most basic premise [key statement] as a possible truth.

There are two main questions that i ask myself and the theory has been constructed to answer both of them.
How is it that i came to exsist, and where does the potential for biological evolution come from.
The questions are my motive, and to answer them i attempt to place the process of biological evolution into context of its own evolution by using the Darwinian frame. Modification descent by means of selection.
New terms/ labels are difficult to accept so i keep this down to a minimum.

Hopefully this gives you some insight into my thinking. Do you understand me so far?
If you do then I will go on to explain the meaning of intelligent selection.

Look i even left you a question mark.
I'm a crank, my, thank you.
Key word. Think.

paul.


Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-05-2009 4:36 PM paullesq has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 78 (507500)
05-05-2009 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by paullesq
05-05-2009 4:17 PM


How, or why exactly, does a single beginning denote a single process? Could not a single beginning lead to multiple processes?

You're "theory" really just lacks any evidence. I don't see any reason to speculate on how biological evolution could be a part of some bigger process other than your say-so.

You seem to be looking with hind-sight and then recognizing a pattern and thus concluding that the direction is there. Its the same problem of seeing a puddle and concluding that the pothole was designed to fit around the water.

Biological Evolution requires replication. The "potential for biological evolution" comes about because organisms don't replicate perfectly. Its not nearly as amazing as your incredulity alludes to.

And you also mention "something from nothing". Well, there was never "nothing" and there has always been "something", so there's no real point in discussing that.

Oh, and if you put down the straw your nose will stop running.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by paullesq, posted 05-05-2009 4:17 PM paullesq has not yet responded

  
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 66 of 78 (507501)
05-05-2009 4:39 PM


Catholicscientist writes:

He copied and pasted it...

Can't get anything past you eh Sherlock. Have you read my full confession to onfire.

paullesq writes:

I'm not french. The explanation of 'excuse my french' was copied and pasted from the web.
The last few lines struck a chord with me.

...........................................

Get real.

It is an overview of 'evolution' that I am trying to explain.

The 'single chain of evolution' theory that starts with the big bang is divided in to three chapters. Even an idiot could understand it.

paul.


Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-05-2009 5:03 PM paullesq has not yet responded

    
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 78 (507505)
05-05-2009 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by paullesq
05-05-2009 4:39 PM


Had you replied to his post rather than using the general reply then there would have been a link to the message and I would have seen it.

But only idiots know how forums actually work.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by paullesq, posted 05-05-2009 4:39 PM paullesq has not yet responded

  
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 68 of 78 (507506)
05-05-2009 5:17 PM


catholicscientis writes:

How, or why exactly, does a single beginning denote a single process? Could not a single beginning lead to multiple processes?

Zackly... Lead to a multiple of processes... You mean that there was one process and all the others branched out from the single one. If you had a mind too you could collect together all the different types of interactions and processes and place them into categories by type. Inorganic organic mind.

You're "theory" really just lacks any evidence. I don't see any reason to speculate on how biological evolution could be a part of some bigger process other than your say-so.

So your not asking the big questions then.

Evidence, if the question is 'where did that complex process [item] come from, then by experience you look for something less complex.

The process of primordial evolution is less complex than biological evolution. It makes perfect sense.

You seem to be looking with hind-sight and then recognizing a pattern and thus concluding that the direction is there. Its the same problem of seeing a puddle and concluding that the pothole was designed to fit around the water.

The problem you speak off is not a problem. The ability, the potential to understand and manipulate nature is greater than nature. That is what good intelligent selection is all about.

The single chain of evolution theory was constructed when i was an atheist, by its understanding i became agnostic. Those with religion have nothing to fear from the theory. Evolution gains direction.

In all of this i never intended to put the big three together.

The big bang, biological evolution and God.

Biological Evolution requires replication. The "potential for biological evolution" comes about because organisms don't replicate perfectly. Its not nearly as amazing as your incredulity alludes to.

Biological evolution requires replication, the more primitive process does not.

Amazing, have you ever showed a child a magic trick and then gone on to show him how the trick was done. If the trick was astounding enough then the magic is never lost.

And you also mention "something from nothing". Well, there was never "nothing" and there has always been "something", so there's no real point in discussing that.

That's right, you cannot have 'natural selection' without primal selection.

Oh, and if you put down the straw your nose will stop running.

Smile.

paul


Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-05-2009 5:47 PM paullesq has not yet responded

    
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 69 of 78 (507507)
05-05-2009 5:20 PM


paullesq writes:

Evidence, if the question is 'where did that complex process [item] come from, then by experience you look for something less complex.

Not strictly true. You might look for something more complex.

paul.


    
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 78 (507510)
05-05-2009 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by paullesq
05-05-2009 5:17 PM


Zackly... Lead to a multiple of processes... You mean that there was one process and all the others branched out from the single one. If you had a mind too you could collect together all the different types of interactions and processes and place them into categories by type. Inorganic organic mind.

So then its not a single process....

Wtf were you typing about then?

The process of primordial evolution is less complex than biological evolution.

But you have no evidence that there is even such a thing as primordial evolution. Basically, you're just making it up.

It makes perfect sense.

To you maybe. To everyone else, things make perfect sense without it.

You seem to be looking with hind-sight and then recognizing a pattern and thus concluding that the direction is there. Its the same problem of seeing a puddle and concluding that the pothole was designed to fit around the water.

The problem you speak off is not a problem.

Sure it is, it is fallacious reasoning. The water conforms to the pothole! We all know that!

The ability, the potential to understand and manipulate nature is greater than nature. That is what good intelligent selection is all about.

Whoopty-do :rolleyes:

Biological evolution requires replication, the more primitive process does not.

So what? You're not really even describing anything at all.

Biological evolution is a very specific process. Your Primal Evolution is a vague musing.

It seems to stem from post hoc ergo propter hoc combined with a little wishful thinking and the desire for profoundness.

And you also mention "something from nothing". Well, there was never "nothing" and there has always been "something", so there's no real point in discussing that.

That's right, you cannot have 'natural selection' without primal selection.

Non-sequitor.

Besides that's an unsupported assertion. Support it please or I get to counter it with my own:

"Yes you can."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by paullesq, posted 05-05-2009 5:17 PM paullesq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Admin, posted 05-05-2009 5:54 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12579
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 71 of 78 (507512)
05-05-2009 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by New Cat's Eye
05-05-2009 5:47 PM


Please see Message 43 and take it down a notch. Thanks.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-05-2009 5:47 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

    
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 72 of 78 (507516)
05-05-2009 6:13 PM


Catholicscientist writes:

So then its not a single process....

Wtf were you typing about then?

Shall i repeat it for you.

If you had a mind too you could collect all the processes and place them into categories.

Three chapters one book get it?

paul.


    
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 73 of 78 (507522)
05-05-2009 6:30 PM


paullesq writes:

The process of primordial evolution is less complex than biological evolution.

Catholic writes:

But you have no evidence that there is even such a thing as primordial evolution. Basically, you're just making it up.

That old chestnut...
You seem to be having trouble with 'innovation'.
Shame...

It's new, your making it up, awwww piffle.

...........................................

You do realise that Darwinian 'natural selection' is constant don't you.

If i am to explain then you are to understand it.

Paul.


    
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 74 of 78 (507524)
05-05-2009 6:44 PM


catholicscientist? writes:

And you also mention "something from nothing". Well, there was never "nothing" and there has always been "something", so there's no real point in discussing that.

paullesq writes:

That's right, you cannot have 'natural selection' without primal selection.

scientist? writes:

Non-sequitor.

Besides that's an unsupported assertion. Support it please or I get to counter it with my own:

"Yes you can."

...........Come see the man who contradicts himself in the space of a few lines...........

paul.


Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by paullesq, posted 05-05-2009 6:50 PM paullesq has not yet responded

    
paullesq 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3519 days)
Posts: 43
Joined: 04-06-2009


Message 75 of 78 (507525)
05-05-2009 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by paullesq
05-05-2009 6:44 PM


Please see Message 43 and take it down a notch. Thanks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Percy
EvC Forum Director
................................

Thanks but there is really no need, i will give as good as i get.

paul.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by paullesq, posted 05-05-2009 6:44 PM paullesq has not yet responded

    
Prev1234
5
6Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019