What does self-organization mean?
backspace
cassandra
> What does self-organization mean?
In what context?
Garamond Lethe
> What does self-organization mean?
If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). If you were a bright chemistry
undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
organize to form cells. If you had some interest in becoming an
astrobiologist I could probably hunt down a couple of good papers on
how to detect interesting self-organizing at a distance.
But you're backspace, and you're bored, and so you're going to drag
out the same threadbare argument you always do: given a sufficiently
bad theory of linguistics, communication is impossible, thus Jesus.
I do enjoy your belief in the magic of words, but when I need to
accomplish something I find it best to treat language like a tool, not
like a magic wand.
backspace
> On May 31, 11:31�am, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). �If you were a bright chemistry
> undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
Michael Young
Right? I'm pretty sure that's the definition...
bpuharic
the question has no meaning when discussing forces of nature. it's an
irrelevant concept.
as i predicted, however, you can not understand the answer due to your
poor language skills
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>What does self-organization mean?
think oil and water. oil self organizes into micelles in water due to
its lower surface energy, when faced with hydrogen bonding of water.
due to physical forces of nature....no demons or angels needed.
you, of course, will not be able to understand this since your
language skills have collapsed due to creationism
Will in New Haven
He's using it in the "your mother is a whore" sense. All sentences
addressed to you actually carry this, if any, meaning. Do not complain
about my saying this as, as we all know, none of these words actually
means anything.
But I do wish you would die already.
--
Will in New Haven
backspace
> To self-organize is to clean your room without your mom's help.
Here self-organize is used in the design sense. But when used in a
biology text book would it be pattern or design sense?
backspace
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 11:31:18 -0700 (PDT), backspace
>
> >What does self-organization mean?
>
> think oil and water. oil self organizes into micelles in water due to
Here self-organize is used in the pattern sense.
bpuharic
which is a tautology when applied to natural processes.
as i said, and you keep proving, your language skills have collapsed
under the onslaught of your religious fanaticism.
Garamond Lethe
When observing, you look for patterns. When modeling, you design
models to generate patterns similar to what you've observed. As
astrobiologists, chemists and biologist perform observations and
create models, "self-organize" informs both observed patterns and
designed models.
RAM
> On May 31, 11:31�am, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). �If you were a bright chemistry
> undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> organize to form cells. �If you had some interest in becoming an
> astrobiologist I could probably hunt down a couple of good papers on
> how to detect interesting self-organizing at a distance.
>
> But you're backspace, and you're bored, and so you're going to drag
> out the same threadbare argument you always do: �given a sufficiently
> bad theory of linguistics, communication is impossible, thus Jesus.
>
true delight to read. It is parsimonious and captures his
assumptions, his illogic and predetermined conclusion.
odin
> What does self-organization mean?
Self-organization? Its is a localized persistent system that
spontaneously goes from higher complexity to lower complexity at the
entropic expense of its surroundings. See Spot. See Spot rotate. See
Spot not go away. Good Big Red Spot. Nice Big Red Spot.
-Snorri
John Harshman
odin
Does anyone have any definitions that can sort out these terms
"pattern-sense-self-organization" and "design-sense-self-
organization"? Is it like a Kolmogorov thing versus a Shannon thing
type of thing? Or is it more like a "I say tomato and you say tomato"
type of thing? And what about "fashion-sense-self-organization"? Did
that slip somewhere between the salad bins somehow? And... are we out
of goddamned blue cheese again?
-Snorri
backspace
> >> If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> >> that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> >> Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> >> undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). �If you were a bright chemistry
> >> undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> >> organize to form cells. �
> >Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
> the question has no meaning when discussing forces of nature. it's an
> irrelevant concept.
Are you using "forces of nature" in pattern or design sense?
bpuharic
the fact you ask the question
means you can't understand the answer. you're a creationist. to you,
the forces of nature are governed by demons, angels, magical forces,
etc. trying to explain how nature works to you is useless. you
simply are unable to comprehend how the world works
that's what happens with fundamentalists. you're no different than an
islamist who thinks, as v. s. naipul once pointed out, that when islam
conquers the world, god will continue to supply TV's, computers,
radioes, etc. magic is what governs the world, in your view.
so your question is begging the question.
backspace
> On May 31, 12:12�pm, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 31, 8:59�pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 31, 11:31�am, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > What does self-organization mean?
>
> > > If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> > > that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> > > Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> > > undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). �If you were a bright chemistry
> > > undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> > > organize to form cells. �
>
> > Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
> When observing, you look for patterns.
Design patterns or random patterns?
> As astrobiologists, chemists and biologist perform observations and
> create models, "self-organize" informs both observed patterns and
> designed models.
Would the patterns be design or random patterns?
r norman
This is almost as interesting as the Linnean sense vs. the vernacular
sense.
Mitchell Coffey
> What does self-organization mean?
Do you mean in the economic or biological sense?
Mitchell Coffey
Burkhard
> What does self-organization mean?
It is an organisation that lobbies for Will Self to become Prime
Minster.
David Hare-Scott
Said the bot that is programmed in such a way that it cannot say otherwise.
David
David Hare-Scott
Is that in a pattern sense or a design sense?
David
David Hare-Scott
What does that mean?
David
Michael Young
backspace perhaps six? It seems like a kid asking why something is,
getting an answer, and continuing to repeat "but why?" ad infinitum.
Self-organization means self-organization regardless of "sense."
Things naturally organize into stuff, to stupidly put it simply.
Bubbles form spheres. Oil amalgamates into micelles in hydrophilic
substances. Water vapor condenses.
Your question has been asked and answered. Do not ask another "sense"
question again, as it is redundant and now irrelevant.
carlip...@physics.ucdavis.edu
> What does self-organization mean?
I don't understand the question. What does "mean" mean?
Steve Carlip
Darwin123
Self-organization is an increase in local complexity that occurs
without the direct and immediate supervision of a designer.
odin
Nope. Reduced complexity.
r norman
You mean the designer hires (or compels) henchman to intervene?
Of do you mean more like the example of the drilling rig in the Gulf
of Mexico where the designer doesn't exert any supervision over the
project?
John Harshman
I can't say until I know your pragmatics. Who established the meaning of
"meaning", and when?
John Harshman
John Harshman
It's pointless to expect any meaning to emerge from a backspace post, so
don't bother trying. Try the thousand island.
Will in New Haven
He has been up-front about his nature the whole time. His NAME is back-
space. He back-spaces through everything anyone tells him and then
repeats his ?question? as if no one has said anything.
I don't know why anyone bothers with him. I don't even know why I
bother to despise him.
--
Will in New Haven
R Brown
"backspace" <steph...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:535b7c10-08f9-4a26...@x27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> > What does self-organization mean?
>>
>> that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
>> Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
>> undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). If you were a bright chemistry
>> undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
>> organize to form cells.
>
> Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
>
Paul J Gans
>What does self-organization mean?
A very simple form of self-organization is a sugar solution
left to allow the water to evaporate. At some point the
solution becomes saturated and sugar crystals start to
precipitate.
The sugar goes from a disorganized state in solution to
an essentially organized state in the crystal.
These days folks are working on various kinds of complex
self-assembly where, when triggered, a fairly complex
structure is formed.
Several collegues of mine work in this area. There is a
nice example of Ned Seeman's work given at:
http://seemanlab4.chem.nyu.edu/three.d.html
--
--- Paul J. Gans
David Hare-Scott
You blokes are just being mean.
David
Scott Balneaves
> What does self-organization mean?
When you use the word "What" do you mean that in the design sense or the
pattern sense?
When you use the word "does" do you mean that in the design sense or the
pattern sense?
When you use the word "self" do you mean that in the design sense or the
pattern sense?
When you use the word "organization" do you mean that in the design sense or the
pattern sense?
When you use the word "mean" do you mean that in the design sense or the
pattern sense?
Kalkidas
> What does self-organization mean?
It's a fictitious attribute whereby fictitious "isolated" systems appear to
increase in complexity over time, as long as the illusion of "isolation" is
maintained.
Perplexed in Peoria
Perhaps, but it is a golden mean.
odin
> "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Nope. It is a decrease in complexity.
Garamond Lethe
Kinda depends on what you're modeling/observing, doesn't it? If
you're working with diffusion, things will look pretty random at a low
enough level. The greater the population, the more things look
deterministic.
backspace
What is the difference between a "design pattern" and "pattern
design"?
backspace
> On May 31, 2:25嚙緘m, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 31, 10:21嚙緘m, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 31, 12:12嚙緘m, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On May 31, 8:59嚙緘m, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On May 31, 11:31嚙窮m, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > What does self-organization mean?
>
> > > > > If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> > > > > that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> > > > > Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> > > > > undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> > > > Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
> > > When observing, you look for patterns.
>
> > Design patterns or random patterns?
>
> > > As astrobiologists, chemists and biologist perform observations and
> > > create models, "self-organize" informs both observed patterns and
> > > designed models.
>
> > Would the patterns be design or random patterns?
>
> you're working with diffusion, things will look pretty random at a low
> deterministic.
mmmmh at the moment I don' t have a witty reply to this.... but do
keep going I really enjoy this game with words!
backspace
> "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
My premise is that there is only designs or patterns, this is what I
believe in my religious YEC metaphysical framework. There also could
be "design pattens" or "patterned designs" (Note : words have no
meaning, only my religious belief in the design pattern dichotomy has
meaning, thus even though I say "design pattens" or "patterned
designs" it could only symbolically represent what I by faith believe.
backspace
> Okay, seriously...what the hell is going on in this thread? Is
> backspace perhaps six? It seems like a kid asking why something is,
> getting an answer, and continuing to repeat "but why?" ad infinitum.
>
> Self-organization means self-organization regardless of "sense."
meaning. What it means though depends on whether you accept the
http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/Naming_Conventions outline I have
written and
http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/SentencesHaveNoMeaning
> Things naturally organize into stuff, to stupidly put it simply.
Yes as in ice crystals but crystals don't have intent their pattern
only represents themselves not something else. Genes represents
something other than its molecules alone,hence genes were designed by
God.
> Bubbles form spheres.
But they only represent themselves, they aren't information.
> Oil amalgamates into micelles in hydrophilic
A pattern.
> substances. Water vapor condenses.
> Your question has been asked and answered. Do not ask another "sense"
> question again, as it is redundant and now irrelevant.
Ice fractals only represent themselves symbolically, their symmetry
pattern is "self-organizing". I am using "self-organizing" in the
pattern sense here.
backspace
> backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> I don't understand the question. �What does "mean" mean?
>
> Steve Carlip
It means like "quark" absolutely nothing. Is quark a type of german
cheese or is it an atomic particle?
See this post for clarity:
http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/TauTology#What_does_Quark_mean_.3F
backspace
> John Harshman wrote:
> > carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
> >> backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> What does self-organization mean?
>
> >> I don't understand the question. �What does "mean" mean?
>
> > I can't say until I know your pragmatics. Who established the meaning
> > of "meaning", and when?
The meaning we represent with mean was established by God himself.
backspace
> backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >What does self-organization mean?
>
> A very simple form of self-organization is a sugar solution
> left to allow the water to evaporate. �At some point the
> solution becomes saturated and sugar crystals start to
> precipitate.
The crystals only represent themselves and are forming their distinct
patterns as per the laws of physics.
> The sugar goes from a disorganized state in solution to
> an essentially organized state in the crystal.
It goes from a non-symmetrical to a symmetrical state per atomic
bonding theory- it remains a pattern.
> These days folks are working on various kinds of complex
> self-assembly where, when triggered, a fairly complex
> structure is formed.
self-assembly - pattern or design?, because self-assembly has no
meaning, it is just a different symbolic representation of the patter/
design dichotomy.
backspace
David Hare-Scott
Do you always answer a question with a question?
David
backspace
You must understand what it is that I actually believe: There is only
a pattern design dichotomy. Thus we say "self-assembly" but actually
mean pattern sense or it could be design sense, it all depends what
you are trying to say withing this dichotomy. See how easy it is to
classify YEC, at least nobody is confused as to what we believe. In
contrast the ID or "restricted design" theorists don't know what they
are trying to say. When you ask them if "God did it" , they stall, lie
and don't answer the question.
It is generally agreed amongst all participants that at least the YEC
aren't lying about their intentions or motives. Thus the atheists are
correct in keeping us out of jobs, university posts because the first
thing we will do is fire everybody who doesn't believe in the pattern
design dichotomy.
David Hare-Scott
This is interesting to me. I would like to ask some questions about that.
When and by means did God convey this meaning to humanity?
Did he convey it to some person or entity in ancient times? Does that make
this meaning available to all people?
Did he convey it directly to you? Does that make this meaning available to
all people?
David
backspace
> On May 31, 3:12�pm, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:> On May 31, 8:59�pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 31, 11:31�am, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > What does self-organization mean?
>
> > > that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> > > Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> > > undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). �If you were a bright chemistry
> > > undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> > > organize to form cells. �
>
> > Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
>
> � � �Self-organization is an increase in local complexity that occurs
> without the direct and immediate supervision of a designer.
Are you using complexity in the pattern or design sense?
backspace
> backspace wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 4:16 am, "David Hare-Scott" <sec...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >> John Harshman wrote:
> >>> carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
> >>>> backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> What does self-organization mean?
>
> >>>> I don't understand the question. What does "mean" mean?
>
> >>> I can't say until I know your pragmatics. Who established the
> >>> meaning of "meaning", and when?
>
> > The meaning we represent with mean was established by God himself.
> This is interesting to me. �I would like to ask some questions about that.
> When and by means did God convey this meaning to humanity?
Outside of the Godel circle, those of us who have touched by God know
that he Jesus Christ is the answer to Godel's incompleteness theorem:
necessary truths, axioms or logical validity's - Tautology1. They
can't be verified but neither refuted and as such should be viewed as
"promissory notes", taken by faith a shadowing of Godel's
incompleteness theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goedels_ontological_proof
and - http://www.perrymarshall.com/articles/religion/godels-incompleteness-theorem:"....Anything
you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring
to something outside the circle � something you have to assume but
cannot prove..". Ultimately everything we do or say in religion,
science, engineering and politics are based on a "promissory note".
There is in no such thing as an empirical "scientific" reality only a
reality of faith which is the evidence of things not seen, the firm
conviction that our existence based on a promise has ultimate meaning.
Our entire system of being, condition of existence hopes and dreams
are based on assumptions, promissory notes, than can't be verified but
neither refuted. How do we therefore know what the Truth is? Tarski
showed with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_theory_of_truth
that any attempt at deriving Truth itself from logic leads to a
contradiction.. More on this from http://raherrmann.com , Prof.
Herrmann Ph.D in math US Naval Academy.(He is a YEC who believes that
Dembski's ID is Restricted Design theory). What http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Tautology.html
refers to as logical tautologies can be more accurately defined as
logical validity's , the only evidence for their valid nature is
faith. The symbolic mathematical expression of these validity's by
themselves aren't fallacies, they are not rhetorical tautologies.
Burkhard
> On Jun 1, 3:04�am, "R Brown" <bro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:535b7c10-08f9-4a26...@x27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...> On May 31, 8:59 pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On May 31, 11:31 am, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> > >> If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> > >> that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> > >> Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> > >> undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). If you were a bright chemistry
> > >> undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> > >> organize to form cells.
>
> > > Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
>
> > Begging the question.
>
> My premise is that there is only designs or patterns,
Which breaks down once you encounter knitting patterns.
There are patterns that are not designed (the expression waves leave
on the beach) , patterns that are designed (the grid pattern of
streets in US cities), designs that are not patterns (a picture by
Jackson Pollock) and designs that tare (knitting patterns) .Hence, no
semantic relation between these terms, not even one of inclusion.
backspace
> On 1 June, 07:28, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 3:04�am, "R Brown" <bro...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:535b7c10-08f9-4a26...@x27g2000prf.googlegroups.com...> On May 31, 8:59 pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> On May 31, 11:31 am, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> > > >> If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> > > >> that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> > > >> Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> > > >> undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). If you were a bright chemistry
> > > >> undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> > > >> organize to form cells.
>
> > > > Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
>
> > > Begging the question.
>
> > My premise is that there is only designs or patterns,
>
> Which breaks down once you encounter knitting patterns.
>
> There are patterns that are not designed (the expression waves leave
> on the beach)
Correct, pattern is used in the pattern sense.
> patterns that are designed (the grid pattern of streets in US cities),
Exactly , pattern is used in the designs sense.
> designs that are not patterns (a picture by Jackson Pollock)
Wouldn't know.
>and designs that tare (knitting patterns).
Correct, the design patten dichotomy with "design and pattern" not
having any actual meaning.
> Hence, no
> semantic relation between these terms, not even one of inclusion.
Correct because only ideas can be antonyms or synonyms not symbols.
They antonym of cold water is hot water. But the antonym of a cold
women is a "sprightly" women.
Show me what does "sprightly" water look or feel like? This shows us
that hot,cold don't mean anything, only the ideas have meaning.
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Begging the question.
>
>My premise is that there is only designs or patterns, this is what I
>believe in my religious YEC metaphysical framework. There also could
>be "design pattens" or "patterned designs" (Note : words have no
>meaning, only my religious belief in the design pattern dichotomy has
>meaning,
which is why it's useless to explain science to you. the noted
historian daniel diner has shown that islamist fundamentalists show a
similar inability to understand modern concepts due to their religious
beliefs. their language does not encompass the flexibility to step
into the modern world.
bpuharic
what does 'god' mean? it's a useless word to describe a useless idea
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Outside of the Godel circle, those of us who have touched by God know
>that he Jesus Christ is the answer to Godel's incompleteness theorem:
well, it's a good thing for god godel came along, isn't it?
". Ultimately everything we do or say in religion,
>science, engineering and politics are based on a "promissory note".
>There is in no such thing as an empirical "scientific" reality
doubletalk; one reason creationism has collapsed under the weight of
science.
only a
>reality of faith which is the evidence of things not seen, the firm
>conviction that our existence based on a promise has ultimate meaning.
>Our entire system of being, condition of existence hopes and dreams
>are based on assumptions, promissory notes, than can't be verified but
>neither refuted. How do we therefore know what the Truth is? Tarski
>showed with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_theory_of_truth
>that any attempt at deriving Truth itself from logic leads to a
>contradiction.. More on this from http://raherrmann.com , Prof.
>Herrmann Ph.D in math US Naval Academy.(He is a YEC who believes that
>Dembski's ID is Restricted Design theory).
too bad dembski's math has been shown to be invalid (see david
wolpert's analysis regarding the no free lunch theorem).
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 1, 3:14�am, Paul J Gans <gan...@panix.com> wrote:
>> backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >What does self-organization mean?
>>
>> A very simple form of self-organization is a sugar solution
>> left to allow the water to evaporate. �At some point the
>> solution becomes saturated and sugar crystals start to
>> precipitate.
>
>The crystals only represent themselves and are forming their distinct
>patterns as per the laws of physics.
as evolution, a law of biology, causes ecosystems to structure
themselves in the same way
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Things naturally organize into stuff, to stupidly put it simply.
>Yes as in ice crystals but crystals don't have intent their pattern
>only represents themselves not something else. Genes represents
>something other than its molecules alone,hence genes were designed by
>God.
god never told us about molecules. certainly creationism was unable to
discover them. creationism failed at telling us what they do or how
they work
so how in the hell could you know they're designed by god when your
creationism is a failure at even knowing they exist?
>
creationism is a failure
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>You must understand what it is that I actually believe: There is only
>a pattern design dichotomy. Thus we say "self-assembly" but actually
>mean pattern sense or it could be design sense, it all depends what
>you are trying to say withing this dichotomy. See how easy it is to
>classify YEC, at least nobody is confused as to what we believe.
except, of course, it's all wrong. after 2000 years, you still havent
gotten the hint. in 300 years science made more progress in
understanding the world than creationism ever did.
yet you insist your useless ideas are true. religious extremism
retards intellectual growth.
In
>contrast the ID or "restricted design" theorists don't know what they
>are trying to say. When you ask them if "God did it" , they stall, lie
>and don't answer the question.
well at least you got this right
>
>It is generally agreed amongst all participants that at least the YEC
>aren't lying about their intentions or motives. Thus the atheists are
>correct in keeping us out of jobs, university posts because the first
>thing we will do is fire everybody who doesn't believe in the pattern
>design dichotomy.
just like the wahabis do in saudi arabia. another proof that religious
fanaticism retards the intellect
backspace
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 23:28:14 -0700 (PDT), backspace
>
Correct their lexicon is full of puerility , declamation and logic
incoherence.
This was my first encounter with Dan Diner's work. He is a wonderful
writer, and I look forward to other works of his. I was drawn to this
book by his promise to explain why the Muslim world has so abjectly
failed to modernize. This issue is made salient by the events of 9/11,
which revealed the depth of Muslim hatred toward the West. Why was
Islam apparently unable to become another participating member of the
modern world, like China or India or Brazil? Why this lust to destroy
the achievements of the West rather than to enjoy them?
The only other author I have found who has anything of substance to
say on this topic is Bernard Lewis. His books "The Muslim Discovery of
Europe" (1982), and "The Crisis of Islam" (2003), were addressed to
this issue. But Lewis failed to answer my questions satisfactorily.
The target of his explanation had to be Arabia, but his examples and
evidence are almost entirely derived from Turkey. But above all I felt
Lewis succeeded only in describing the Muslim failure to modernize,
not in explaining it. Sure Muslims had suppressed the use of the
printing press for 300 years. But why? The scribes may have had a
special interest in this suppression, but why did scribes have so much
more ability to impose their interests on Muslim countries than they
did in the West? The inability of Muslims to modernize, and their
general hostility toward western modernity, remained unexplained.
Dan Diner goes much deeper in his quest for the historical causes of
this effect than does Lewis. He draws attention to the special status
of oral recitation in the communication of the sacred Word of God in
Islam, and uses that to explain the resistance to printing the Koran.
The Koran is not to be read, so much as recited aloud from memory, and
the written text is merely a memory aid to facilitate this process.
Diner traces the unwillingness of Muslims to accept cultural
innovation and to the immutability of the recited sacred Word of God.
Mechanical printing was a sacrilege because it removed the Sacred Word
too far from its revealed source.
So far so good. But the same could be said of printed versions of
Hebrew scripture, or of printed versions of the New Testament. Why
were they not stopped in their tracks by the distance of printed
translations from the original oral revelation, or at least from the
hand-copied manuscripts? This is where Diner gets difficult. I am
abbreviating here, but Diner traces the immutability of the revealed
Word in Islam to a conservative political philosophy shared by Leo
Strauss and religious fundamentalists of whatever faith. This is the
view that unless social and political norms are based on immutable
revealed foundations, life will degenerate into emptiness and
nihilism. Muslims, like Orthodox Jews and political conservatives like
Strauss, fear cultural changes because they believe these changes will
destroy the disciplining structures which give life meaning and value.
This is hard for an American Midwestern Pragmatist like myself to
swallow. First, no example of "Revealed Truth" is in fact free of
error and contradiction. Consider the contradictions between the seven
day creation story and the Adam and Eve story in Hebrew scripture, or
the problem of the "Satanic Verses" in the Koran (where the Prophet is
portrayed as changing his mind about an alleged revelation from God).
Kant showed us another way to ground our beliefs. Analyze the
practices which are required for a fruitful social life, and ask what
are the norms presupposed by these indispensable practices. (Kant
called such an analysis a "transcendental deduction.") This gives us
all the norms and procedures of validation one needs for a vital and
developing culture. (My understanding of Kant is of course mediated by
Habermas.) My advice to my Islamic colleagues is to come on in. The
water of modernity is fine, at least so long as you do not allow your
fears of developmental change to make you cruel and destructive.
backspace
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 02:14:46 -0700 (PDT), backspace
>
>
> >Outside of the Godel circle, those of us who have touched by God know
> >that he Jesus Christ is the answer to Godel's incompleteness theorem:
>
> well, it's a good thing for god godel came along, isn't it?
>
> ". Ultimately everything we do or say in religion,
>
> >science, engineering and politics are based on a "promissory note".
> >There is in no such thing as an empirical "scientific" reality
>
> doubletalk; one reason creationism has collapsed under the weight of
> science.
>
> �only a
>
> >reality of faith which is the evidence of things not seen, the firm
> >conviction that our existence based on a promise has ultimate meaning.
> >Our entire system of being, condition of existence hopes and dreams
> >are based on assumptions, promissory notes, than can't be verified but
> >neither refuted. How do we therefore know what the Truth is? Tarski
> >that any attempt at deriving Truth itself from logic leads to a
> >Herrmann Ph.D in math US Naval Academy.(He is a YEC who believes that
> >Dembski's ID is Restricted Design theory).
>
> too bad dembski's math has been shown to be invalid (see david
> wolpert's analysis regarding the no free lunch theorem).
I wouldn't grasp the math , where Dembski went wrong is explained as
follows in my latest update:
".....EpiCurus (341- 270 B.C.). "...only those capable of life and
reproduction have been preserved..." The conclusion that Epicurus came
to "chance" was arbitrary , his argumentation scheme was a rhetorical
tautology, meaning any conclusion would be a non-sequitur. Such was
the deceptive brilliance of the ancient Greek tautological philosphy ,
which today is perpetuated but with slightly different conclusions by
different world views as per Naming Conventions. The apologetics
movement from YEC to ID the last 150 years focused largely on the
impossibility of genes arising by chance. They missed the point that
the argumentation scheme was fallacious. If Epicurus had come to the
conclusion that the universe is the result of divine intervention he
would be correct from a YEC view point but his argumentation scheme
would still be wrong. You could come to the correct conclusion using
an incorrect argumentation scheme. Epicurus came to the wrong
conclusion from a wrong argumentation scheme, with the main fallacy
being his and Aristotle's rhetorical tautological reasoning....."
Stuart
> "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> It's a fictitious attribute whereby fictitious "isolated" systems appear to
> increase in complexity over time, as long as the illusion of "isolation" is
> maintained.
So a mostly hydrogen rich gas cloud collapsing under its own gravity
and becoming a star
is not an increase in complexity?
Stuart
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 1, 11:38�am, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 May 2010 23:28:14 -0700 (PDT), backspace
>>
>>
>> which is why it's �useless to explain science to you. the noted
>> historian daniel diner has shown that islamist fundamentalists show a
>> similar inability to understand modern concepts due to their religious
>> beliefs. their language does not encompass the flexibility to step
>> into the modern world.
>
>Correct their lexicon is full of puerility , declamation and logic
>incoherence.
as is yours.
>
>http://www.amazon.com/Lost-Sacred-Muslim-World-Stood/dp/0691129118/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275385600&sr=1-1
>
>This was my first encounter with Dan Diner's work. He is a wonderful
>writer, and I look forward to other works of his. I was drawn to this
>book by his promise to explain why the Muslim world has so abjectly
>failed to modernize
a failing it shares with christianist creationists like yourself.
you're no different than they are. it's not islam alone that has this
failing; your religious beliefs are just as incoherent as theirs are.
.. This issue is made salient by the events of 9/11,
>which revealed the depth of Muslim hatred toward the West
and the noted creationist pat robertson blamed the west for it as
well.
.. Sure Muslims had suppressed the use of the
>printing press for 300 years. But why? The scribes may have had a
>special interest in this suppression, but why did scribes have so much
>more ability to impose their interests on Muslim countries than they
>did in the West? The inability of Muslims to modernize, and their
>general hostility toward western modernity, remained unexplained.
and creationists contribute nothing to science. they do not read it.
they oppose its publications, its conclusions...when they bother to
read them at all
see a parallel here?
>
>Dan Diner goes much deeper in his quest for the historical causes of
>this effect than does Lewis. He draws attention to the special status
>of oral recitation in the communication of the sacred Word of God in
>Islam, and uses that to explain the resistance to printing the Koran.
>The Koran is not to be read, so much as recited aloud from memory, and
>the written text is merely a memory aid to facilitate this process.
another paralllel. the have their literal, sacred, unalterable texts
you have yours. there is no difference
and the results are the same. incoherence. a collapse of critical
thinking skills and langauge.
My advice to my Islamic colleagues is to come on in. The
>water of modernity is fine, at least so long as you do not allow your
>fears of developmental change to make you cruel and destructive.
you should take the beam out of your own eye, to coin a phrase
backspace
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 02:48:37 -0700 (PDT), backspace
>
> >On Jun 1, 11:38�am, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 31 May 2010 23:28:14 -0700 (PDT), backspace
>
> >> which is why it's �useless to explain science to you. the noted
> >> historian daniel diner has shown that islamist fundamentalists show a
> >> similar inability to understand modern concepts due to their religious
> >> beliefs. their language does not encompass the flexibility to step
> >> into the modern world.
>
> >Correct their lexicon is full of puerility , declamation and logic
> >incoherence.
>
> as is yours.
>
>
>
>
> >This was my first encounter with Dan Diner's work. He is a wonderful
> >writer, and I look forward to other works of his. I was drawn to this
> >book by his promise to explain why the Muslim world has so abjectly
> >failed to modernize
>
> a failing it shares with christianist creationists like yourself.
> you're no different than they are. �it's not islam alone that has this
> failing; your religious beliefs are just as incoherent as theirs are.
>
> .. This issue is made salient by the events of 9/11,
>
> >which revealed the depth of Muslim hatred toward the West
>
> and the noted creationist pat robertson blamed the west for it as
> well.
Pat Robertson is an atheist pretending to be a Xtian, his God is
Mammon. He is also an idiot who sunk $70mil in Liberia! There are
thousands of pastors who are secret atheists making money out of a
legalized ponzy scheme (10% tithe nonsense). The moment money gets
involved or a person appears on television you know he is false. True
Xtians won't be allowed on the broadcast networks by the FCC. A true
Xtian for example would openly oppose the democratic party telling
people to vote republican. But because the false sheisters on TBN love
money and don't want to be taxed by the Gov. they aren't getting
involved in politics.
Garamond Lethe
Sure. How do you validate revealed knowledge?
John Harshman
Garamond Lethe
> "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4ee8b46f-f4f5-4c0b...@q36g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> It's a fictitious attribute whereby fictitious "isolated" systems appear to
> increase in complexity over time, as long as the illusion of "isolation" is
> maintained.
Spoken like someone who has never seen the inside of a chemistry class
(or cooked much, for that matter).
Scott Balneaves
When you use the word "The" do you mean that in the design sense or the pattern
sense?
When you use the word "semantic" do you mean that in the design sense or the pattern
sense?
When you use the word "sense" do you mean that in the design sense or the pattern
sense?
sbalneav@3jane:~$ cat backspace.sh
#!/bin/sh
for WORD in $*; do
echo "When you use the word \"${WORD}\" do you mean that in the design sense or the pattern sense?\n"
done
sbalneav@3jane:~$ ./backspace.sh The semantic sense
Man, this is fun!
raven1
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>What does self-organization mean?
backspace
> On May 31, 11:23�pm, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 6:52�am, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 31, 2:25�pm, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On May 31, 10:21�pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On May 31, 12:12�pm, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On May 31, 8:59�pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On May 31, 11:31�am, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > What does self-organization mean?
>
> > > > > > > If you were a bright undergraduate in a biology department, I'd answer
> > > > > > > that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> > > > > > > Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> > > > > > > undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
>
> > > > > > Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
> > > > > When observing, you look for patterns.
>
> > > > Design patterns or random patterns?
>
> > > > > As astrobiologists, chemists and biologist perform observations and
> > > > > create models, "self-organize" informs both observed patterns and
> > > > > designed models.
>
> > > > Would the patterns be design or random patterns?
>
> > > you're working with diffusion, things will look pretty random at a low
> > > deterministic.
>
> > mmmmh at the moment I don' t have a witty reply to this.... but do
> > keep going I really enjoy this game with words!
>
> Sure. �How do you validate revealed knowledge?
Revealed knowledge must include the break-through in thinking: Karl
Popper. Any God or holy book or person claiming divine attributes must
give us some way to disprove his claims:
Mark 16: 16 "..... and they shall speak with tongues....." William T.
Samarrin has indeed falsified tongues in 70 peer reviewed articles
that all suffer some form of publication bias. As popper noted if you
can find just one black swan: Why doesn't a single linguist (have
contacted many) neither confirm nor deny my tongues.
I spoke on a personal level to one of the foremost academic in the
world researching tongues.... he told me his career will be toast and
cut off all further contact. He neither confirmed nor denied.
RAM
cassandra
> On Jun 1, 1:26�am, carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
>
> > backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > What does self-organization mean?
>
>
>
> It means like "quark" absolutely nothing. Is quark a type of german
> cheese or is it an atomic particle?
I give up. How do little pieces of cheese help you clean up your room
without your mother?
Stuart
And has never eaten 1-2-3 Jello
Stuart
Steven L.
"backspace" <steph...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6340bc66-7358-4c6c...@t26g2000prt.googlegroups.com:
Well, both the Bible and the Quran fail THAT test.
I'm no expert on religion, that's for sure. But all the religions I
know of were based on revelation, not verification.
When Moses purportedly got the Ten Commandments from God, he didn't have
a video camera to record the event. Nor did he even have other
eyewitnesses.
-- Steven L.
Kalkidas
"Stuart" <bigd...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9f39901a-e853-4c7a...@c22g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
It's not an isolated system.
Klaus Hellnick
> My premise is that there is only designs or patterns, this is what I
> believe in my religious YEC metaphysical framework. There also could
> be "design pattens" or "patterned designs" (Note : words have no
> meaning, only my religious belief in the design pattern dichotomy has
> meaning, thus even though I say "design pattens" or "patterned
> designs" it could only symbolically represent what I by faith believe.
>
You have a very poor grasp of reality. Now you are using your very poor
language skills to pry your remaining fingers off.
Klaus Hellnick
It is more like yogurt than cheese. I think the English equivalent is
clabber.
Bob Casanova
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Michael Young
<young...@gmail.com>:
>To self-organize is to clean your room without your mom's help.
>
>Right? I'm pretty sure that's the definition...
Surely a theoretical definition only?
--
Bob C.
"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless
Bob Casanova
>But... you're bored, and so you're going to drag
>out the same threadbare argument you always do: given a sufficiently
>bad theory of linguistics, communication is impossible, thus Jesus.
Kermit
> >> backspace wrote:
> >>> On May 31, 9:38 pm, Michael Young <youngms...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> To self-organize is to clean your room without your mom's help.
>
> >>> biology text book would it be pattern or design sense?
>
> >> What does that mean?
>
> > What is the difference between a "design pattern" and "pattern
> > design"?
>
> Do you always answer a question with a question?
>
> David
Someone asked my Irish uncle-in-law why the Irish always do that. He
replied "Do we now?"
Kermit
backspace
> "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Tell me Steven, who has verified that 1=1 ?
backspace
I believe by faith that 1=1 because it can't be verified, neither
refuted. How do you know other than a "scientific empirical reality"
that 1=1 - how do you actually know that?
Kermit
> On Mon, 31 May 2010 12:38:27 -0700 (PDT), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Michael Young
>
> >To self-organize is to clean your room without your mom's help.
>
> >Right? I'm pretty sure that's the definition...
>
> Surely a theoretical definition only?
Applied theoretical, or metaphysical theoretical?
> --
>
> Bob C.
>
> "Evidence confirming an observation is
> evidence that the observation is wrong."
> � � � � � � � � � � � � � - McNameless
Kermit
Stuart
> "Stuart" <bigdak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
For starters, that doesn't have anything to do with self-organization.
The key is that the system is out-of equilibrium.
Stuart
Stuart
Furthermore, what does God mean, mean? Its turtles all the way down.
Stuart
Kermit
> On May 31, 10:21�pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 31, 12:12�pm, backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On May 31, 8:59�pm, Garamond Lethe <cartographi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > > > > What does self-organization mean?
>
> > > > that by pointing you to the 1972 Humberto Maturana and Francisco
> > > > Varela paper on autopoiesis (which I dug out for a particular
> > > > undergraduate a couple of weeks ago). �If you were a bright chemistry
> > > > undergrad, I'd probably point you to the work on how lipid self-
> > > > organize to form cells. �
>
> > > Are you using "self-organize" in the pattern or design sense?
> > When observing, you look for patterns.
>
> Design patterns or random patterns?
>
> > As astrobiologists, chemists and biologist perform observations and
> > create models, "self-organize" informs both observed patterns and
> > designed models.
>
> Would the patterns be design or random patterns?
Do you mean unpredictable random, or undetermined random, or
unintended random?
Kermit
carlip...@physics.ucdavis.edu
> It means like "quark" absolutely nothing.
Sorry, I still don't understand. What does "It means absolutely
nothing" mean?
Steve Carlip
Kalkidas
Then why did you bring it up? The thread is about self-organization.
Stephen
> What does self-organization mean?
Actually, the term self-orgainzation is a symbol that does not mean
anything outside of what a user of the symbol intends for it to mean.
So what do you intend for it to mean? Are you using it in the design
sense of the pattern sense?
You stepped into your own doo-doo here.
--
Stuart
> "Stuart" <bigdak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5344f23c-338b-4efa...@q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 6:50 am, "Kalkidas" <e...@joes.pub> wrote:
> >> "Stuart" <bigdak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:9f39901a-e853-4c7a...@c22g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On May 31, 4:50 pm, "Kalkidas" <e...@joes.pub> wrote:
> >> >> "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >> >>news:4ee8b46f-f4f5-4c0b...@q36g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> >> >> It's a fictitious attribute whereby fictitious "isolated" systems
> >> >> appear
> >> >> to
> >> >> increase in complexity over time, as long as the illusion of
> >> >> "isolation"
> >> >> is
> >> >> maintained.
>
> >> > So a mostly hydrogen rich gas cloud collapsing under its own gravity
> >> > and becoming a star
> >> > is not an increase in complexity?
>
> >> It's not an isolated system.
>
> > For starters, that doesn't have anything to do with self-organization.
>
> Then why did you bring it up? The thread is about self-organization.
I didn't bring up "isolated system" you did.
If you can't follow a thread, perhaps you should spend your time
elsewhere.
Stuart
backspace
> backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 1:26�am, carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
> > > backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > What does self-organization mean?
> > > I don't understand the question. �What does "mean" mean?
> > It means like "quark" absolutely nothing.
>
> Sorry, I still don't understand. �What does "It means absolutely
> nothing" mean?
>
> Steve Carlip
backspace
> "Stuart" <bigdak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:5344f23c-338b-4efa...@q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 6:50 am, "Kalkidas" <e...@joes.pub> wrote:
> >> "Stuart" <bigdak...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:9f39901a-e853-4c7a...@c22g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > On May 31, 4:50 pm, "Kalkidas" <e...@joes.pub> wrote:
> >> >> "backspace" <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >> >>news:4ee8b46f-f4f5-4c0b...@q36g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> >> > What does self-organization mean?
>
> >> >> It's a fictitious attribute whereby fictitious "isolated" systems
> >> >> appear
> >> >> to
> >> >> increase in complexity over time, as long as the illusion of
> >> >> "isolation"
> >> >> is
> >> >> maintained.
>
> >> > So a mostly hydrogen rich gas cloud collapsing under its own gravity
> >> > and becoming a star
> >> > is not an increase in complexity?
>
> >> It's not an isolated system.
>
> > For starters, that doesn't have anything to do with self-organization.
>
> Then why did you bring it up? The thread is about self-organization.
The thread is about how any word can be used in either the pattern or
design sense. Self-organization whatever, doesn't matter what symbol
you use, either a pattern or design will be referred to. Paley's watch
is a design, the flagellum motor with its IC interlocking parts is a
design. Motors don't build themselves and neither do watches.
I know, I know naaaaturralll selection, something got naturaled or as
Ken Miller "Natural selection is blind" Note that NS is blind but not
stupid! Our universal mechanism which Berlinski said is just as
implausible as a single differential equation explaining all of
physics is conjured up. How did a monkey turn into a human - natural
selection. How did the stars form - natural selection. How did the
stator, rotor of an IC flagellum get there - natural selection.
backspace
> backspace wrote:
> > What does self-organization mean?
> Actually, the term self-orgainzation is a symbol that does not mean
> anything outside of what a user of the symbol intends for it to mean.
No matter what he intends it to mean, it still doesn't mean anything,
only the idea he has , has meaning. Such meaning is like the number 7
neither here nor there. "self-organization" the symbol exists in a
physical space on my PC monitor, but the idea with it resides where?
And such an idea you have in your mental space would depend on how you
invoke natural selection as some sort of universal constant in
chemistry, physics, math , cosmology, psycology etc.
> So what do you intend for it to mean?
STeven Wolfram wants to know what got naturaled and who did the
selecting, so does Chomsky and Fodor. What they thus mean with "self-
organization" would differ from what Dennett means with it because he
thinks that everything in existence got naturaled.
Your religious beliefs influences what idea you represent with the
symbols pattern,design and self-organization. Figure out what it is
that you are trying to say, then use these symbols to hopefully
communicate such idea.
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>Revealed knowledge must include the break-through in thinking: Karl
>Popper. Any God or holy book or person claiming divine attributes must
>give us some way to disprove his claims:
or it could just be a codification of power politics. see robert
wright's book 'the evolution of god'....turns out god, as believed by
most societies, follows an orderly path. tribal deity...city state
deity...nation state deity...universal deity. happens again and again
god seems to like to go through adolescence.
>
>Mark 16: 16 "..... and they shall speak with tongues....." William T.
>Samarrin has indeed falsified tongues in 70 peer reviewed articles
>that all suffer some form of publication bias. As popper noted if you
>can find just one black swan: Why doesn't a single linguist (have
>contacted many) neither confirm nor deny my tongues.
because it's a delusion.
>
>I spoke on a personal level to one of the foremost academic in the
>world researching tongues.... he told me his career will be toast and
>cut off all further contact. He neither confirmed nor denied.
creationists seem to be more intent on telling us about what geniuses
they are than in finding the truth
ray martinez is the only true christian
tony pagano is smarter than einstein
kalkidas knows god is hare krishna
nando wants to gas all scientists because they disagree with him
backspace thinks he's blessed of god because he speaks in
tongues...and he's a martyr because no one believes him
creationism breeds narcissism
bpuharic
<steph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jun 1, 12:37�pm, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 02:48:37 -0700 (PDT), backspace
>>
>>
>> a failing it shares with christianist creationists like yourself.
>> you're no different than they are. �it's not islam alone that has this
>> failing; your religious beliefs are just as incoherent as theirs are.
>>
>> .. This issue is made salient by the events of 9/11,
>>
>> >which revealed the depth of Muslim hatred toward the West
>>
>> and the noted creationist pat robertson blamed the west for it as
>> well.
>
>Pat Robertson is an atheist pretending to be a Xtian,
and i'm sure he'd say the same about you. that's the nice thing about
you fanatics. you all hate each other.
his God is
>Mammon. He is also an idiot who sunk $70mil in Liberia!
and you believe you're a martyr who speaks in tongues. the difference
between your mental illness and his is that he has more money.
carlip...@physics.ucdavis.edu
> On Jun 1, 8:09�pm, carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
> > backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jun 1, 1:26�am, carlip-nos...@physics.ucdavis.edu wrote:
> > > > backspace <stephan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > What does self-organization mean?
> > > > I don't understand the question. �What does "mean" mean?
> > > It means like "quark" absolutely nothing.
> > Sorry, I still don't understand. �What does "It means absolutely
> > nothing" mean?
> http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/TauTology
Sorry, but what does "http://scratchpad.wikia.com/wiki/TauTology"
mean?
Steve Carlip