BrainMeta'   Connectomics'  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> EVOLUTION ?, EVOLUTION??
ahmetcelik
post Oct 14, 2005, 11:51 AM
Post #1


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Jun 20, 2005
Member No.: 4439



I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rhymer
post Oct 14, 2005, 12:31 PM
Post #2


Supreme God
*******

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2093
Joined: Feb 27, 2003
Member No.: 385



I don't know the how's and I don't know the why's, but I believe that there exists matter, energy and life forms, and that they have always existed, and that they develop (evolve) and decay.

From time to time (and there was no start and there will be no end to time), there is a mighty explosion (singularity?) when everything comes together and then explodes again.

Maybe we'll meet next time round?

As I said earlier I don't know if this scenario is possible given the Laws of Nature, but cycles which show themselves in Nature mimic that sort of process and Nature is consistent!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Unknown
post Oct 14, 2005, 03:19 PM
Post #3


Unregistered









QUOTE (ahmetcelik @ Oct 14, 11:51 AM)
I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

The origin of life has been excessively ad infinitum. It required random generation followed by natural selection. First, self-replicating macromolecules were selected for, and as time went on, increasing complex self-replicating structures arose due to random generation following by natural selection, until the first cell arose. Doh!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Unknown
post Oct 14, 2005, 03:20 PM
Post #4


Unregistered









"The origin of life has been excessively ad infinitum"

I meant "The origin of life has been explained ad infinitum"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rhymer
post Oct 14, 2005, 04:25 PM
Post #5


Supreme God
*******

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2093
Joined: Feb 27, 2003
Member No.: 385



A possible Freudian slip there, what, unknown?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Oct 14, 2005, 08:50 PM
Post #6


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



Yes, points of origin indeed.

Causing the ripple as opposed to riding the wave.

So, your point of origin potentially exists in the Big Bang and information is carried in the wave of its ripples.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Oct 14, 2005, 08:53 PM
Post #7


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



....and who catches that information, by taping into that wavelength, at that particular moment in time and space, when it arives here from it's singular point of origin.

The center, the periphery of which is nowhere.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hey Hey
post Oct 15, 2005, 04:38 PM
Post #8


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 7766
Joined: Dec 31, 2003
Member No.: 845



QUOTE (Trip like I do @ Oct 15, 05:53 AM)
.... at hat particular

Magician's hat?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post May 30, 2006, 12:20 PM
Post #9


Unregistered









EVOLUTION !!!
Such an important issue, guys, and you´re making a storm in a cup of tea.
Evolution! Such an important issue, and look at all the posts on this thread.
Are we really evolving? Are we concerned with our evolution ? Or we are more concerned with a countless number of other issues ?
Who am I? Where am I going ? What is the meaning of my life ?
Are we still asking ourselves these questions ? Or are we trying to avoid them, as we´re trying to avoid the most significant questions of our existence ?
A human being lives unconsciously -- s/he is carried along by the flow of life, by the flow of every day routine. Yes, most of us live unconsciously and die unconsciously.
So, if the "normal" state of our consciousness is the so-called Waking Sleep, are we willing to awake, do we care to awake ? To what ? And why ?
What if a human being is not what s/he thinks s/he is ? What if there is something else ? What if there are dimensions to life, other possibilities ? The human impulse for evolution starts with these inner questions. If, as a humam being, you are not yet asking yourself these questions, you are not aware of your potential, nor are you aware of who you are.
Mechanical existence, dormant existence, conditioned existence is not a True Existence at all.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post May 30, 2006, 12:35 PM
Post #10


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



QUOTE(ahmetcelik @ Oct 14, 12:51 PM) *

I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

See Richard Dawkins and others. The theory has it that a self-replicating chemical system came about under the right initial conditions and here we are, much evolved, with a long way yet to go. The exact details of the original cell are not available yet, but there are several competing hypotheses, none of which is yet entirely satisfactory (that's why they are competing).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post May 30, 2006, 12:36 PM
Post #11


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



QUOTE(Guest @ May 30, 01:20 PM) *
... Mechanical existence, dormant existence, conditioned existence is not a True Existence at all.

What is your suggestion?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post May 30, 2006, 01:25 PM
Post #12


Unregistered









Ah, Rick, here You are again !
It´s good that now we meet in the evolutionary perspective.
You are stuck on the question: How can we build a theory without explaining the origin of the first living organism...
Rickie, Rickie !
Are You more concerned with theories, with understanding logically, with the origins of the first living organism, or with Your innermost potential for growth and evolution ? Can You take charge of Your own inner resources and bring them forth to full flourishment and fulfillment ?
Deep inside You know that this is the only question that matters.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
code buttons
post May 31, 2006, 06:23 PM
Post #13


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 2450
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Member No.: 4556



QUOTE(Guest @ May 30, 01:25 PM) *

Are You more concerned with theories, with understanding logically, with the origins of the first living organism, or with Your innermost potential for growth and evolution ? Can You take charge of Your own inner resources and bring them forth to full flourishment and fulfillment ?
Deep inside You know that this is the only question that matters.

This is the best question I've ever read being put forth for Rick, the consumate existencialist. Let's hear it Rick, and make it straight from the heart. Talk to us like it's all humanity here listening for your answer.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jun 01, 2006, 08:40 AM
Post #14


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



The "answer" is simple and obvious: One's inner potential for growth drives one to understand, which, properly done, requires science and reason.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Jun 01, 2006, 04:27 PM
Post #15


Unregistered









The ordinary consciousness is that in which one knows things only or mainly by the intellect, the external mind and the senses and knows forces, etc., only by their outward manifestations and results, and the rest by inferences from these data.
In this state of consciousness there may be some flashes of mental intuition, insight, or deeper psychic seeing, but they are incidental and do not modify this state of consciousness. It is the second state of consciousness -- of Waking Sleep.

Only in the fourth state of consciousness -- turiya -- can one see the truth about everything existing. In this state the higher intellectual center is operating.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
code buttons
post Jun 01, 2006, 05:54 PM
Post #16


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 2450
Joined: Oct 05, 2005
Member No.: 4556



QUOTE(Rick @ Jun 01, 08:40 AM) *

The "answer" is simple and obvious: One's inner potential for growth drives one to understand, which, properly done, requires science and reason.

How does the artistic mind find a place in your equation? Isn't the artistic (and/or the mystical) another way to express our drive to understand as well? Isn't it as important as science and reason? Or why is it there, in the fabric of our making?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Jun 02, 2006, 04:20 AM
Post #17


Unregistered









A good question, code buttons...

The true artists live at the Edge of Chaos -- it is the state-space of optimal creativity, intelligence and performance; it is a state between order and chaos, a self-organized criticality. It is a state of infinite possibilities and potentialities -- at this point we do not know what will happen, only that something new and interesting will happen.
It is the state of a heightened self-awareness, in which the higher emotional center is operating. It is a state of perceptive intensity, of acute sensitivity, of intuitive and imaginative breakthroughs. It is a state of transcending oneself, of expanding one´s consciousness and perception, of connecting oneself to other subtler dimensions. The artist functions mainly from the heart and the right brain hemisphere, which allow this supra-sensitivity and vision.

"For all good poets compose their beautiful poems not by art, but because they are inspired and possessed -- they are not in their right mind. For a poet is a light and winged and holy thing, and there is no invention in him until he has been inspired and is out of his senses, and reason is no longer in him: no man, while he retains that faculty, has the oracular gift of poetry." Plato

When Plato talks of being possessed, not in the right mind, out of the reason and senses, he means that the act of creation requires transcending our "right" or normal/average mind and senses, expanding the field of our perception, becoming attuned to other spheres and dimensions.

As to the mind or a state of consciousness of a mystic -- it is the Cosmic mind and consciousness. It is a state of being empty of oneself and full of Infinity.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jun 02, 2006, 09:43 AM
Post #18


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



QUOTE(code buttons @ Jun 01, 06:54 PM) *
How does the artistic mind find a place in your equation? Isn't the artistic (and/or the mystical) another way to express our drive to understand as well? Isn't it as important as science and reason? Or why is it there, in the fabric of our making?

Science and reason do not preclude art and vice versa. Reason is a tool an artist can use as well as any other tool. When reliability of knowledge is needed by the artist, he utilizes his reason, should an artist become inspired in that direction. It's up to the artist to decide what is good.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Warren Bonesteel
post Jun 02, 2006, 10:29 AM
Post #19


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 81
Joined: May 04, 2006
Member No.: 5199



Just a note:

It may be worth looking at those who finance studies that say that man is the causative agent behind Global Warming as well. Then, in view of the content of the above post, one should research the political ideologies of those individuals and organizations who finance and donate to such studies.

Just for balance.

That's not to say that we shouldn't take good care of the environment. That's only common sense; but to place man as the causative agent, and then reference right-wing troublemakers as the source of studies refuting mankind's influence as the causative agent behind Global Warming seems a bit irresponsible to me. It's intellectually dishonest, really.

Not all of those studies refuting the present MSM stance on Global Warming are financed or backed by right-wing imperialist oil barons.

More on the other side of the argument is located here:

http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14799

No matter your political ideology, the evidence is interesting.

Global Warming seems to be a solar system wide phenomena. In view of the evidence, if you posit that man has caused Global Warming on earth, then he must be responsible for such changes throughout the solar system...including changing the sun's activity...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jun 02, 2006, 10:56 AM
Post #20


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



QUOTE(Warren Bonesteel @ Jun 02, 11:29 AM) *
Global Warming seems to be a solar system wide phenomena. ...

I haven't seen any evidence of any of the other planets getting warmer. Are you referring to solar output data?

There was a very nice article in Scientific American earlier this year about a new theory how neolithic activity 10,000 years ago, such as agriculture, contributed to warming to end the ice ages. The theory seems well supported by evidence.

http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=P...35B1D2A02A8B6D5
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
maximus242
post Jun 02, 2006, 11:28 AM
Post #21


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1755
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Member No.: 4768



QUOTE(Guest @ Jun 02, 06:20 AM) *

A good question, code buttons...

The true artists live at the Edge of Chaos -- it is the state-space of optimal creativity, intelligence and performance; it is a state between order and chaos, a self-organized criticality. It is a state of infinite possibilities and potentialities -- at this point we do not know what will happen, only that something new and interesting will happen.
It is the state of a heightened self-awareness, in which the higher emotional center is operating. It is a state of perceptive intensity, of acute sensitivity, of intuitive and imaginative breakthroughs. It is a state of transcending oneself, of expanding one´s consciousness and perception, of connecting oneself to other subtler dimensions. The artist functions mainly from the heart and the right brain hemisphere, which allow this supra-sensitivity and vision.

"For all good poets compose their beautiful poems not by art, but because they are inspired and possessed -- they are not in their right mind. For a poet is a light and winged and holy thing, and there is no invention in him until he has been inspired and is out of his senses, and reason is no longer in him: no man, while he retains that faculty, has the oracular gift of poetry." Plato

When Plato talks of being possessed, not in the right mind, out of the reason and senses, he means that the act of creation requires transcending our "right" or normal/average mind and senses, expanding the field of our perception, becoming attuned to other spheres and dimensions.

As to the mind or a state of consciousness of a mystic -- it is the Cosmic mind and consciousness. It is a state of being empty of oneself and full of Infinity.


Leonardo da Vinci stated that for one to understand art, he must also understand science, he said it was absurd to do art without studying the scientific aspects of it. Leonardo was an artist and a scientist, he studied science to increase his art skill, they go hand in hand, creativity and logic, the right and left sides of the brain, the ying and the yang.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Jun 02, 2006, 02:29 PM
Post #22


Unregistered









QUOTE(Rick @ Jun 02, 10:56 AM) *

QUOTE(Warren Bonesteel @ Jun 02, 11:29 AM) *
Global Warming seems to be a solar system wide phenomena. ...

I haven't seen any evidence of any of the other planets getting warmer. Are you referring to solar output data?

There was a very nice article in Scientific American earlier this year about a new theory how neolithic activity 10,000 years ago, such as agriculture, contributed to warming to end the ice ages. The theory seems well supported by evidence.

http://www.sciamdigital.com/index.cfm?fa=P...35B1D2A02A8B6D5



I have provided a number of opposing points of view and other evidences here: http://brainmeta.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14799

A number of scientists and researchers have tied solar "output" to warming trends on earth, as well as to current and ongoing changes in the climates and albedos (among other changes) of other planetary bodies. Additionally, such trends in warming and cooling on earth are quite cyclic in manifestation. 'Ice ages' are merely peaks in the cycle. Several of the Ice Ages (such as Wisconsin) can actually be tied to the locations of the magnetic North and South Poles during the times involved. The poles do wander a bit over the ages. Currently the magnetic North Pole is racing along on a NE heading at about 40 kms per day...

As I said previously, we should take good care of the environment, but my opinion is that currently accepted Global Warming theories (i.e mankind did it) are unsupported by the evidence. Man certainly hasn't helped a damn bit, but we don't seem to be the causative agent. IMO, current presentations in the media and on Kosovo seem to be ideologically/agenda driven and not based upon science.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jun 02, 2006, 03:16 PM
Post #23


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



Kosovo?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Warren Bonesteel
post Jun 02, 2006, 03:24 PM
Post #24


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 81
Joined: May 04, 2006
Member No.: 5199



QUOTE(Rick @ Jun 02, 05:16 PM) *

Kosovo?



My apologies. Freudian slip.

I meant the Kyoto treaty. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.html
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Jun 02, 2006, 05:25 PM
Post #25


Unregistered









Reason is a tool, that´s all; the same as a computer is a useful tool.
Yet, they are not the source or fountain of creation. Science and art can meet and merge when mind and heart are in harmony and balance.
Leonardo da Vinci was more concerned with and interested in science than art. Do you think that his great ideas and inventions came from the left brain hemisphere ?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Jun 02, 2006, 05:56 PM
Post #26


Unregistered









Spontaneously appearing self-luminous structures recorded and reported in the anomalous zones in Altai and other parts of Siberia -- the points at which the energy of the earth´s core connects with interdimensional vortices ? The aspects of the earth´s future etheric body entering into the present moment of time ?

The declining magnetic field of the earth, which is causing the Schumann resonance to increase ...

Winter solstice Dec. 21, 2012 -- the end-date of the Mayan 5125-year Great Cycle and the Solar-Galactic alignment, the time of integration of the galactic code of light into the genetic code of life...

The future scenario -- photonic energy ? An evolutionary quantum leap into the vibrational frequencies of the 5th dimension ?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest
post Jun 04, 2006, 05:49 AM
Post #27


Unregistered









GALACTIC ALIGNMENT
The Alignment Generation and Transformation of Consciousness

http://www.earthportals.com/Portal_Messeng...gnment2012.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Steppenwolf
post Jun 04, 2006, 06:35 AM
Post #28


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 29
Joined: May 30, 2006
Member No.: 5283



QUOTE(ahmetcelik @ Oct 14, 02:51 PM) *

I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer


A brief answer: The ground floor for the theory of evolution is everywhere, it's in the fossile record, and in everyone's genes. All it took was a great amount of intelligence and intuitive insight to go from there. The first organisms where simply the first organisms: They existed in whichever form they did, and the knowledge of how that actually happened shouldn't disturb the theory more than enrichen it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
zanymeri
post Jun 04, 2006, 07:21 PM
Post #29


Newbie
*

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Jun 04, 2006
Member No.: 5295



QUOTE(ahmetcelik @ Oct 14, 11:51 AM) *

I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer

[b][color=#3333FF]
....hmmmm.......
...u build a theory from the root of present consciousness...your central vortex...then one reasons in reverse back in the past....AND foward ahead to the future..........u compare the 2 strains mathematically and they must equal.........U SAID U WANTED BRIEF!!.....meri.herculesway@gmail.com
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Warren Bonesteel
post Jun 04, 2006, 07:53 PM
Post #30


Aspiring
**

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 81
Joined: May 04, 2006
Member No.: 5199



QUOTE(ahmetcelik @ Oct 14, 01:51 PM) *

I ask for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer


I would've asked for verifiable facts, sans interpretations, myself. But that's just me. ;O)

The Creationists only have a relevant position because there are flaws in Evolutionary Theory (huge, gaping holes, actually), particularly in the neo-Darwinist interpretations. The facts don't match the interpretations - unless you close your eyes, turn your back, and stop thinking clearly. Except for the "Young Earth Hypothesis" and their assumption of a Creator, many of them make valid points. If you think that we all originated from chemical soup, please keep in mind - that is an unfounded assumption and not a verifiable fact. Results in laboratory tests have never been able to provide any evidence to the contrary.

Intelligent Design is much better, but it, too, has certain obvious flaws - the assumption of a "creator," for one example. (i.e. Panspermia and the interations thereof.) Its flaws become more apparent when interpreted by ideological, agenda-driven Creationist/fundamentalists.

As well, many of the Mayan 2012 and New Age crowds suffer from the same problems. They see a few facts, make certain assumptions about those facts as based upon their preconceptions and ideologies, and then, like many a scientist, base their interpretative theories upon their assumptions, quite forgetting that the facts may well tell another story when interpreted from another's ideology or by another's agenda and preconceptions. The whole "vibration up to another reality" probably isn't going to happen quite the way that they teach. One obvious assumption is that we are vibrating "up" and not "down." Another is that we will all - or at least some of us - (same story as the fundamentalists) - will be "vibrating" into another dimension that's better than this one...when it could be quite the reverse. (That's a bit like scientists claims that science improves our lot in life and that only science can improve our lot in life...when the sciences actually have a rather checkered past in attempting to achieve such results.)

They all are quite guilty of piling 'epicycle upon epicycle' in spite of any factual evidence that their favorite theories and assumptions are wrong. Thus, instead of achieving what we all say that we so desire, we end up promoting division, strife and conflict because we each claim to know what others do not, while constantly claiming that others are ignorant or unqualified, when none of us really has, nor can we have, all of the answers to Life and Living It. (Godel's Law rears its imperious head once again.) The only logical and rational answers will be found in respectful and courteous co-operation. No. I'm not holding my breath.

In view of the many evidences from many and several different fields, what I'm saying, is that we should, perhaps, abandon all of our preconceptions, agendas and ideologies...and spend more time assembling the facts ...and starting over again.

A multi-disiplinary approach is necessary.




User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th October 2017 - 09:32 PM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

Consciousness Expansion · Brain Mapping · Neural Circuits · Connectomics  ·  Neuroscience Forum  ·  Brain Maps Blog
 · Connectomics · Connectomics  ·  shawn mikula  ·  shawn mikula  ·  articles