Nature, Evolution and Reality will Remain a Mystery to Those that Can't Answer this Question!

[Jonathan]

Q: What circumstances are required in a system so that
if it's microscopic level is replaced the macroscopic
level remains unchanged?



The answer is the key to understanding a "gateway event
as Murray Gell-Mann calls it" [1], in evolution.

The large increases in complexity, things like the
origin of life, the self regulating properties of an
old growth forest or the advent of culture and wisdom.

The top-down or supervenient system properties that guide
evolutionary systems towards the better solution, and
create the ever expanding hierarchies of complexity
as in how evolution goes from microbes to Microsoft
so to speak.

This is the next level of evolutionary thought above the
Modern Synthesis.

A perfectly good analogy is this ng has been practicing
geometry, with complexity science and the concept of
emergence, representing calculus.

Stay in the old ways if you like, ignore advances in
evolutionary thought if you like, but if so, don't
pretend you have a curious mind, care about science
or understand how nature, evolution and reality
works.

You do not!



[1] Emergence Taxonomy
http://old-classes.design4complexity.com/7701-S14/reading/critical-thinking/Types-and-Forms-of-Emergence.pdf





Jonathan



"Tell all the Truth but tell it slant --
Success in Circuit lies
Too bright for our infirm Delight
The Truth's superb surprise

As Lightning to the Children eased
With explanation kind
The Truth must dazzle gradually
Or every man be blind"





--

"To paraphrase the Buddha — Three things cannot be long hidden:
the sun; the moon; and the truth. ‬

~ Former FBI Director James Comey (12-1-17)


s

[Jonathan]

On 3/11/2018 8:44 AM, Jonathan wrote:
>
>
> Q: What circumstances are required in a system so that
>    if it's microscopic level is replaced the macroscopic
>    level remains unchanged?
>

Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
Or for that matter even comprehend why it's
importance to evolution.

Wow, this ng is intellectually dead.

And please don't reply with the usual bullshit
replies like 'why should we', 'it's your version
we object to', 'we know all about it just don't
have the time' etc etc etc, the song of the
clueless and pretenders.

Unless you can demonstrate a working knowledge of
these concepts any other reply is just plain
embarrassing to witness.

And NO ONE, not one person in this ng has
demonstrated the slightest inkling of these
concepts.

[erik simpson]

Even an idiot knows the answer: the system must be invariant under a chrono-
synclastic infundibulary transform.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 15 Mar 2018 18:32:47 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Jonathan
<WriteI...@gmail.com>:

>On 3/11/2018 8:44 AM, Jonathan wrote:

>> Q: What circumstances are required in a system so that
>>    if it's microscopic level is replaced the macroscopic
>>    level remains unchanged?

>Not one person in this ng can answer this question?

Maybe no one cares to get into fruitless discussions with
you.

<snip>
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[Panthera Tigris Altaica]

On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:

> Not one person in this ng can answer this question?

Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage that it is, you will simply state that you merely asked a rhetorical question. Why should anyone waste their time responding when they _know_ the result, based on your pat actions?

[Jonathan]

On 3/16/2018 3:10 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
>
>> Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
>
> Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage that it is,

Let me interpret, what you mean is you haven't the foggiest
idea about any of the concepts I discuss. So of course it
all sounds like hooey to you.


As those kooks over at Scientific American said in the
article I recently posted...


"While the reductionist zeitgeist of the twentieth century
yielded great dividends, we are now seeing a movement away
from strict reductionism toward emergent phenomena.

While the word "emergence" is often thrown around as a
fashionable place-card, the fact is that complex, emergent
phenomena do need a different kind of skill set."
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunction/stephen-hawkings-advice-for-twenty-first-century-grads-embrace-complexity/


That different kind of skill set is the ability
for abstract thought.

>you will simply state that you merely asked a rhetorical question.

Good grief, if you thought a post about aliens not
knowing how to make soft landings was a serious
question, you really need to go shoot yourself
right away, before someone asks you to jump off
the nearest roof and you hurt some innocent
bystanders.

> Why should anyone waste their time responding when they _know_ the result, based > on your pat actions?
>

I'm always responsive and courteous to anyone that replies
in a serious fashion. Sadly that never happens in this ng.

Mindless insults get what they deserve.

[Jonathan]

On 3/15/2018 7:04 PM, erik simpson wrote:



> Even an idiot knows the answer: the system must be invariant under a chrono-
> synclastic infundibulary transform.
>

The question was...

Q: What circumstances are required in a system so that
if it's microscopic level is replaced the macroscopic
level remains unchanged?

The answer is easily found in the link I provided
along with the question.

Simply click the link and search for the word
'replaced'. An idiot could have answered that
question in 30 flippin' seconds.

And that questions just happens to answer the
great remaining unanswered questions concerning
evolution, and represents the next level of
evolutionary thought above the new synthesis.


I'm sorry but this ng is a pile of dunderheads.
What's the point, no one in this ng could
grasp the idea in any event.


http://old-classes.design4complexity.com/7701-S14/reading/critical-thinking/Types-and-Forms-of-Emergence.pdf

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 07:30:05 -0400, the following appeared

in talk.origins, posted by Jonathan
<WriteI...@gmail.com>:

>On 3/15/2018 7:04 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>
>
>
>> Even an idiot knows the answer: the system must be invariant under a chrono-
>> synclastic infundibulary transform.
>>
>
>The question was...
>
>
>Q: What circumstances are required in a system so that
> if it's microscopic level is replaced the macroscopic
> level remains unchanged?
>
>
>
>The answer is easily found in the link I provided
>along with the question.
>
>Simply click the link and search for the word
>'replaced'. An idiot could have answered that
>question in 30 flippin' seconds.

Yes, we all see that an idiot can do so; thanks for the
demo.

>And that questions just happens to answer the
>great remaining unanswered questions concerning
>evolution, and represents the next level of
>evolutionary thought above the new synthesis.

Explain how, in detail and in your own words. With cites.

>I'm sorry but this ng is a pile of dunderheads.
>What's the point, no one in this ng could
>grasp the idea in any event.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass...

>http://old-classes.design4complexity.com/7701-S14/reading/critical-thinking/Types-and-Forms-of-Emergence.pdf

You might want to note, although it's been noted for you
several times over the past months, that emergent properties
are "old hat" to evolutionary biologists (and others, as the
article makes clear), and I imagine it gets rather tiresome
for professionals to be lectured repeatedly by a dilettante
layman. You remind me of a teenager who's just discovered
sex, and can't wait to tell everyone all about it.

[*Hemidactylus*]

The sapient complexiscope obfuscares its opposing doldrums.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/15/2018 7:04 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>
>
>
>> Even an idiot knows the answer: the system must be invariant under a chrono-
>> synclastic infundibulary transform.
>>
>
> The question was...
>
>
> Q: What circumstances are required in a system so that
> if it's microscopic level is replaced the macroscopic
> level remains unchanged?
>

I dunno . Me stupedd. Can your qualia be subserved by computer architecture
without losing “you”? I think this critical substrate neutrality problem
plagues transhumanist ambitions without getting into the swamp man
continuity of experience issue. If we uploaded jonathan’s mindfiles to the
intertubes would he still remain ignorant of biological evolution? Maybe
someone should run that experiment.

Your synaptic connections are pruned and regrown all the time. The lower
causal features undergo a replacement cycle in constant flux, yet you
maintain your obnoxious idee fixe and refuse to learn any real biology. I
recall an argument about replacing boards on a ship one by one and whether
it retains its identity, but cannot recall the source. I do recall
something about knockout attempts in mice failing because redundancy. In
evolution there are neutral changes that can occur with no discernible
consequence:

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6381/1283

[Panthera Tigris Altaica]

On Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 7:25:03 AM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> On 3/16/2018 3:10 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> > On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> >
> >> Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
> >
> > Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage that it is,
>
>
>
> Let me interpret, what you mean is you haven't the foggiest
> idea about any of the concepts I discuss.

No. I mean that you sprout an empty mass of verbiage and when caught out you mumble nonsense about rhetorical questions. You do this because you are a severely brain-damaged troll.

[*Hemidactylus*]

He’s actually only learned to pleasure himself in public. Onan the
Barbarian. Sex is intercourse, something he is incapable of.

[Ernest Major]

On 17/03/2018 19:02, *Hemidactylus* wrote:
> Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/15/2018 7:04 PM, erik simpson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Even an idiot knows the answer: the system must be invariant under a chrono-
>>> synclastic infundibulary transform.
>>>
>>
>> The question was...
>>
>>
>> Q: What circumstances are required in a system so that
>> if it's microscopic level is replaced the macroscopic
>> level remains unchanged?
>>
> I dunno . Me stupedd. Can your qualia be subserved by computer architecture
> without losing “you”? I think this critical substrate neutrality problem
> plagues transhumanist ambitions without getting into the swamp man
> continuity of experience issue. If we uploaded jonathan’s mindfiles to the
> intertubes would he still remain ignorant of biological evolution? Maybe
> someone should run that experiment.

You remind me of Glenn Spiegel's arguments about robots. (Was he one?)

Anyway, on my way back from the supermarket, the example of a
Turing-complete system crossed my mind as something that can have
fundamentally different substrates. But Turing-completeness is a
property, and different Turing-complete systems still differ in other
properties - when you change the underlying mechanisms you change the
other properties.

(As I understand, Turing-completeness requires infinite memory, but
discussion tends to overlook this, and describe something as
Turing-complete if it would be Turing-complete if provided with infinite
memory.)

>
> Your synaptic connections are pruned and regrown all the time. The lower
> causal features undergo a replacement cycle in constant flux, yet you
> maintain your obnoxious idee fixe and refuse to learn any real biology. I
> recall an argument about replacing boards on a ship one by one and whether
> it retains its identity, but cannot recall the source. I do recall
> something about knockout attempts in mice failing because redundancy. In
> evolution there are neutral changes that can occur with no discernible
> consequence:
>
> http://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6381/1283
>
>
>
>
>

--
alias Ernest Major

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 15:32:24 -0500, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by *Hemidactylus*
<ecph...@allspamis.invalid>:

Doesn't he make diesel engines?

> Sex is intercourse, something he is incapable of.

[jonathan]

On 3/17/2018 4:11 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> On Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 7:25:03 AM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
>> On 3/16/2018 3:10 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
>>> On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
>>>
>>> Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage that it is,
>>
>>
>>
>> Let me interpret, what you mean is you haven't the foggiest
>> idea about any of the concepts I discuss.

>
> No. I mean that you sprout an empty mass of verbiage

Like I said~

>and when caught out you mumble nonsense about rhetorical questions. You do this because you are a severely brain-damaged troll.
>

This from someone with a creepy handle like Panthera, with
a handle like that you better be female else I need
to go wash my hands

[erik simpson]

"Panthera Tigris Altaica"is Siberian Tiger, dimwit.

[*Hemidactylus*]

Details not found in emergentist literature sadly.

[jonathan]

Duh, with a cat for a handle he/she/it better be a
female else the creep needle is off the scale.

Taking an androgynous handle isn't normal
for a guy, it's just plain weird.

Try it some time, take a female sounding handle
and see how fast it creeps you out when guys
start hitting on you.


s

[Wolffan]

On 18Mar 2018, jonathan wrote
(in article<Yf6dnQO-Ff5rnDLH...@giganews.com>):

> On 3/17/2018 4:11 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 7:25:03 AM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> > > On 3/16/2018 3:10 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
> > > >
> > > > Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage
> > > > that it is,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Let me interpret, what you mean is you haven't the foggiest
> > > idea about any of the concepts I discuss.
>
> >
> > No. I mean that you sprout an empty mass of verbiage
>
> Like I said~

you’re an idiot and you _do_ sprout empty masses of verbiage.

>
>
> > and when caught out you mumble nonsense about rhetorical questions. You do
> > this because you are a severely brain-damaged troll.
>
> This from someone with a creepy handle like Panthera, with
> a handle like that you better be female else I need
> to go wash my hands

You’'re an idiot. ‘Panthera’: the genus of the Felidae containing the
big cats. ‘Tigris’: tigers. ‘Altaica’: the Siberian, or Amur, tiger.
You don’t know much biology, now do you? Tell me, exactly what makes
‘Panthera’ creepier than, of, ‘Jonathan’? You’re more of a twat
than Pags or the Alphabet Boy, though still less than the Double Doctor. But
you’re trying hard to beat him.

[Wolffan]

On 18Mar 2018, jonathan wrote

(in article<6qqdnWBf3Jl6hzLH...@giganews.com>):

> On 3/18/2018 8:44 PM, erik simpson wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 5:20:03 PM UTC-7, jonathan wrote:
> > > On 3/17/2018 4:11 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 7:25:03 AM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> > > > > On 3/16/2018 3:10 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage
> > > > > > that it is,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Let me interpret, what you mean is you haven't the foggiest
> > > > > idea about any of the concepts I discuss.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > No. I mean that you sprout an empty mass of verbiage
> > >
> > >
> > > Like I said~
> > >
> > >
> > > > and when caught out you mumble nonsense about rhetorical questions. You
> > > > do this because you are a severely brain-damaged troll.
> > >
> > >
> > > This from someone with a creepy handle like Panthera, with
> > > a handle like that you better be female else I need
> > > to go wash my hands
> >
> > "Panthera Tigris Altaica"is Siberian Tiger, dimwit.
>
> Duh, with a cat for a handle he/she/it better be a
> female else the creep needle is off the scale.

Hmm. All cats are female. Got it. You really know your biology, there, boy.
Everyone show consider you to be a top authority on biology in general and
evolutionary theory in particular. Keep on establishing your credentials,
there, boy.

>
>
> Taking an androgynous handle isn't normal
> for a guy, it's just plain weird.

So... what gender is, oh, ‘Wolffan’? Tell me more about your obsession
with the gender of people who you will never meet in person.

>
>
> Try it some time, take a female sounding handle
> and see how fast it creeps you out when guys
> start hitting on you.

So... you’re saying that because you’re a raving asshole who hits on
random people based solely on their names, someone else is weird and creepy?
Tell me more about your infantile delusions. Explain in detail why your
opinion matters to anyone over the age of three.

And your every post confirms the original point: you, and I quote, ‘sprout
an empty mass of verbiage’ in response to anything said to you. You are,
and I quote again, ‘a severely brain-damaged troll’. Your attempt at
changing the subject has been noted. You have succeeded. The subject is no
longer your idiotic question, as it is very clear that it was and is nothing
but empty verbiage. The subject is now just how much of a total raving
sub-moronic asshole you want to show yourself to be.

[Bill Rogers]

So I guess homophobia is an emergent phenomenon, too.

[jillery]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 05:14:51 -0400, Wolffan <akwo...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I love the smell of petard hoist in the morning.

--
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Attributed to Voltaire

[Panthera Tigris Altaica]

On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 8:20:03 PM UTC-4, jonathan wrote:
> On 3/17/2018 4:11 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 7:25:03 AM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> >> On 3/16/2018 3:10 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
> >>>
> >>> Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage that it is,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Let me interpret, what you mean is you haven't the foggiest
> >> idea about any of the concepts I discuss.
>
> >
> > No. I mean that you sprout an empty mass of verbiage
>
>
> Like I said~

You are still spouting an empty mass of verbiage.

>
>
> >and when caught out you mumble nonsense about rhetorical questions. You do this because you are a severely brain-damaged troll.
> >
>
>
> This from someone with a creepy handle like Panthera, with
> a handle like that you better be female else I need
> to go wash my hands

I would have thought that the email address 'northerntiger at outlook' would hve been a hint, but it appears that you are even more clueless than I had thought. Panthera tigris altaica is the old classification for the Siberian tiger. If you have a good enough newsreader and know how to set it properly, neither of which are likely in your case, you will see a picture of a Siberian tiger attached to my posts. The current classification for Siberian tigers, and for all tigers except the Sumatran tiger, is Panthera tigris tigris. I have been using P. t. altaica for quite some time and really see no reason to change.

Pray explain exactly what is female about 'Panthera'. You may also attempt to show which gender should be attached to 'Tshaka', 'Kaur', 'Jassa', and 'Nanak'. You should be very careful if you try to cheat and look them up; Wikipedia has at least one of those incorrectly defined.

You are not merely a severely brain-damaged troll, you are also a bigot of the vilest type, and you know very little about biology and even less about any culture other than Anglo-American. Not that you know very much even about that.

[Panthera Tigris Altaica]

On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 10:10:02 PM UTC-4, jonathan wrote:

> On 3/18/2018 8:44 PM, erik simpson wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 5:20:03 PM UTC-7, jonathan wrote:
> >> On 3/17/2018 4:11 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 7:25:03 AM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> >>>> On 3/16/2018 3:10 PM, Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:
> >>>>> On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 6:35:03 PM UTC-4, Jonathan wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Not one person in this ng can answer this question?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Once your position has been revealed to be the empty mass of verbiage that it is,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Let me interpret, what you mean is you haven't the foggiest
> >>>> idea about any of the concepts I discuss.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> No. I mean that you sprout an empty mass of verbiage
> >>
> >>
> >> Like I said~
> >>
> >>
> >>> and when caught out you mumble nonsense about rhetorical questions. You do this because you are a severely brain-damaged troll.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> This from someone with a creepy handle like Panthera, with
> >> a handle like that you better be female else I need
> >> to go wash my hands
> >
> > "Panthera Tigris Altaica"is Siberian Tiger, dimwit.
> >
>
>
> Duh, with a cat for a handle he/she/it better be a
> female else the creep needle is off the scale.

Thank you for conforming just how bigoted you are.

>
> Taking an androgynous handle isn't normal
> for a guy, it's just plain weird.

Why?

>
> Try it some time, take a female sounding handle
> and see how fast it creeps you out when guys
> start hitting on you.

I have used this 'handle' for quite some time. No-one has ever 'hit' on me. Whatever you use instead of thought processes are very strange.

[Mike_Duffy]

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 07:09:36 -0700 (PDT), Panthera Tigris Altaica wrote:

> If you have a good enough newsreader and know how to set it properly,

> [...], you will see a picture of a Siberian tiger attached to my posts.

Exactly how are you attempting this? I see no picture. I do see pictures
(of mine & several various other posters) who use 'X-Face' headers. (32x32
pixel two-tone.)

[*Hemidactylus*]

I am glad that’s settled. I wondered if it was some reference to Jesus’s
alleged dad or a Texan heavy metal band known for mixing speed and
heaviness.

>
> Pray explain exactly what is female about 'Panthera'. You may also
> attempt to show which gender should be attached to 'Tshaka', 'Kaur',
> 'Jassa', and 'Nanak'. You should be very careful if you try to cheat and
> look them up; Wikipedia has at least one of those incorrectly defined.
>
> You are not merely a severely brain-damaged troll, you are also a bigot
> of the vilest type, and you know very little about biology and even less
> about any culture other than Anglo-American. Not that you know very much even about that.
>

I am named for a female-only asexual lizards. That’s a frickin’ mind
bending outrage.

[erik simpson]

For some reason, male-only asexual organisms are very rare.

[Panthera Tigris Altaica]

The only one which I can think of is the College of Cardinals.

[Panthera Tigris Altaica]

I used Google's Profile system. Some, but not all, regular newsreaders can see the picture attached to Google's Profile. The posters posting as Ralph and Donnie and others all had remarkably similar Google Profile pictures.

[Jonathan]

I could think like everyone else, but that would make
me invisible.

[Jonathan]

Third grade replies hardly hoist anything but the
posters juvenile and ignorant mentality for all
to see.

I ask a perfectly reasonable question concerning
the latest evolutionary thought, and the only
replies aren't even worthy of a sandbox.

And those like you that pat ignorant children
on the back are even worse.

Can you state why the original question is important?
Of course not, this ng is about hurling insults
not discussing science.

> --
> I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
>
> Evelyn Beatrice Hall
> Attributed to Voltaire
>

[Jonathan]

Whatever you say Tony the Tiger.

Do you have anything to say about the science of the
original post? Do you even have a clue what the
question is about?

Of course not, insults is all you, or anyone in this
ng, has. Anything more is beyond you.


Pathetic.


s

[Jonathan]

I bet one of you works in the Geek Squad at Best Buy.

[jillery]

On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 18:42:40 -0400, Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>I could think like everyone else, but that would make
>me invisible.

So you're contrary for the sake of it. Is anybody surprised.

[jillery]

On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 18:47:03 -0400, Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Wolffan's reply above quotes your words, and so by your words
illustrate your ignorant mentality.

>I ask a perfectly reasonable question concerning
>the latest evolutionary thought, and the only
>replies aren't even worthy of a sandbox.
>
>And those like you that pat ignorant children
>on the back are even worse.
>
>Can you state why the original question is important?
>Of course not, this ng is about hurling insults
>not discussing science.

Since you asked, your question might be important in other contexts,
but not to this thread. You're welcome.

[*Hemidactylus*]

What would be wrong with that? Are they less than human to a arrogant
jackass such as you. Not only are you hung up on gender, but apparently
social status indicated by employment too. This from a virtue signaler who
spams the group with Syria carnage to make himself appear more concerned
about others than he really is deep down inside. Your comments on this
thread betray your true colors. You are a piece of work.

[jonathan]

I knew it~

I'm being flamed by the guy that shows ya
the thumb drives are in aisle 8 when they're
really in aisle 11.

>Are they less than human to a arrogant
> jackass such as you. Not only are you hung up on gender, but apparently
> social status indicated by employment too. This from a virtue signaler who
> spams the group with Syria carnage to make himself appear more concerned
> about others than he really is deep down inside. Your comments on this
> thread betray your true colors. You are a piece of work.
>

I like to provide a public service, so many out there
need something to hate, in order to reduce a lifetime
of built up frustrations and deny their own sense of
personal desperation.

The following excerpt from a shrink explains nicely
the types that love to flame me. I've found hate to
reveal far more about the hater. Trust me, I used
to experiment in generating hate online, was very
good at it, hated like the devil by many people
all with badges, and you have no idea how purifying
being truly hated can be.

You have no idea how much one can learn by
unbridled hate.



A Man may make a Remark --
In itself -- a quiet thing
That may furnish the Fuse unto a Spark
In dormant nature -- lain --

Let us deport -- with skill --
Let us discourse -- with care --
Powder exists in Charcoal --
Before it exists in Fire.




A Guide to Psychology

Anger

"For example, when another car suddenly cuts in front of your car
on the road, adrenaline pumps into your bloodstream. Your
heart rate jumps. Your blood pressure surges. These things,
however, are just immediate fight-or-flight physiological
responses to a perceived threat.

Then, in a split second, as a psychological reaction to those
immediate physiological responses, indignation and animosity
toward the other driver overrun your mind. And then, in split
second after these feelings erupt, you fall into the desire
for revenge. You honk your horn. You give a dirty look.
You scream a curse. And there you have it: anger.

Anger, therefore, is the wish for harm or bad or evil
to come upon someone or something that—in your eyes—
has injured or obstructed you.

So the psychological process is clear and simple. When you
feel hurt by someone, then, in your anger, you want to hurt
him or her back, just as you have been hurt.

Anger can also be expressed indirectly. If something like a
traffic jam, for example, leaves you feeling tense and
frustrated, then what do you do? Maybe you go home and
find some petty thing out of order and then blow up, just
to take out your frustration on your family. Or maybe you
go to a bar, maneuver someone into offending you, and get
into a fight. Either way you vent your frustrations at
the traffic jam by hurting innocent persons—after first
manipulating circumstances so that you can believe in
your own mind that these persons have somehow hurt you
and deserve to suffer for it."
http://www.guidetopsychology.com/anger.htm

[Wolffan]

On 20Mar 2018, Jonathan wrote
(in article<E8SdnWqV2sG5DSzH...@giganews.com>):

You have made it quite clear that you don’t know even basic biology. Why
should anyone answer your mass of empty verbiage?

[Wolffan]

On 20Mar 2018, Jonathan wrote

(in article<E8SdnWuV2sHmEizH...@giganews.com>):

ooh, I like this. The weird and creepy guy who judges people by their names
thinks (ha!) that someone else is juvenile and ignorant!

>
>
> I ask a perfectly reasonable question concerning
> the latest evolutionary thought,

You sprouted a mass of empty verbiage.

> and the only
> replies aren't even worthy of a sandbox.
>
> And those like you that pat ignorant children
> on the back are even worse.
>
> Can you state why the original question is important?

Sure. It showed that you’re a troll.

>
> Of course not, this ng is about hurling insults
> not discussing science.

t.o. is about keeping creationist cretins (that’s _you_) contained away
from the rest of usenet. Creationist cretins (that’s _you_) are too dim to
see this. This makes you easy to play with.

[Jonathan]

What contexts? Why not this context? Can you state
your objections with more than 'no it isn't'.

Am I supposed to reply 'yes it is'?

Broken record, you're well practiced dodge is wearing thin.

> --
> I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
>
> Evelyn Beatrice Hall
> Attributed to Voltaire
>

[Jonathan]

On 3/20/2018 7:32 PM, jillery wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 18:42:40 -0400, Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I could think like everyone else, but that would make
>> me invisible.
>
>
> So you're contrary for the sake of it. Is anybody surprised.
>

Almost the entire scientific community still holds to
reductionism, that is now a backwards view. It's science
that's contrary to nature and reality.

> --
> I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
>
> Evelyn Beatrice Hall
> Attributed to Voltaire
>

[jillery]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 19:00:31 -0400, Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 3/20/2018 7:32 PM, jillery wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 18:42:40 -0400, Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I could think like everyone else, but that would make
>>> me invisible.
>>
>>
>> So you're contrary for the sake of it. Is anybody surprised.
>>
>
>
>
>Almost the entire scientific community still holds to
>reductionism, that is now a backwards view. It's science
>that's contrary to nature and reality.

Right, everybody but you is out of step. I've heard that one before,
too.

[jillery]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 18:59:00 -0400, Jonathan <WriteI...@gmail.com>

Apparently you don't like having to eat your own words. Poor baby.

>What contexts? Why not this context? Can you state
>your objections with more than 'no it isn't'.
>
>Am I supposed to reply 'yes it is'?
>
>Broken record, you're well practiced dodge is wearing thin.

Broken records and evasion are your shtick, not mine.

With that said, your argument above implies that your "latest
evolutionary thoughts" are relevant to any and all topics. Apparently
others' mileage varies.

I can only hope the above doesn't exceed your attention span, but I
won't bet on it.