Mart

To say that creationists are not worth listening to is to try to dehumanise them.

If they have arguements to justify their claims then find the flaws in their arguements.

Stop the arrogant assumption that you don't have to do this.

 

Funny you should gibber that. The Third Reich was the most stringent anti abortion state ever to exist.

 

That and Godwin's Law kills of any point you may have had.

Apologies for gibbering, atinymonkey

I was trying to explain that some people regard abortion as NOT murder. They sometimes justify this by saying that the fetus is not human or not sufficiently human. I used the Nazi program as a way of evidencing this type of thinking.

Godwin's Law? I haven't heard of that. Can you help?

That was, IIRC, the Greek definition of an atom back when they were hypothesized. After we understood their structure we also found that there were subatomic particles, but had already locked in to that word.

IIRC, in Ancient Greek thought, atomic meant something that could not be cut into smaller parts.

So an atom was some thing that was fundamental.

Modern particle physics has the task of finding out whether there are atomic things or that there are no fundamental (un-cut-up-able) things. Scientists are still investigating the issue.

Do you think that the fetus is somehow inhuman? /QUOTE]

The Nazis' first step in their final solution was to classify Jews (along with other "inferior" groups) as sub-human. This allowed them to justify the murder of millions. Some of the Nazis responsible for these crimes were sentenced as breakers of international law. If a person can convince themselves that a fetus is less than human (sub-human) and can be justly killed then what uniform are they wearing?

Natural Selection is not => evolution.

Evolution is the belief that species change with time.

Natural Selection is a theory about the way these changes occur.

Natural means what it says. It is not Supernatural.

He suffered from depression. It's rather cruel to label that psychosomatic. It also has nothing to do with his theorys, but lay in the death of his daughter.

Maybe he suffered from depression.

Psychosomatic means to me a medical condition that has its origin in a person's psychology. I wasn't trying to be cruel - honest.

I can see your point about his daughter. But I'm sure that the revolutionary idea of Natural Selection which he supported would have been a big strain on him.

Darwin clarified and gave strength to the arguement for evolution

The real issue here is that he suggested a way for evolution to occur. He called this Natural Selection. It meant that God was not required in the explanation. Darwin suffered with severe health problems and historians have suggested that he suffered from a psychosomatic disorder. This sounds very plausible when you think about the public's religious views in Victorian times.

To fail to assume that a rabbit is conscious is not the same as assuming that no animals are conscious, so your premise is invalid.

Agreed. But then which animals would you nominate?

Humans evolving consciousness does not necessarily require a "big jump" in evolution, nor can it be measured against other species, so your conclusion is a non sequitur.

If no animals apart from humans have any consciousness (which may be true) how would you explain this using evolutionary theory. I am asking for your expertise here since you have a degree in applied biology. Remember I'm not an expert but I'm not a complete idiot (but then you know that otherwise you wouldn't have bothered answering my post )

Then you must be some sort of idiot, and I think we can narrow that down further, can't we?

The ball's in your court. Read my private post. I would be grateful if you reciprocated my intention to keep it private.

In eastern cultures children are tought to respect there parents words ' date=' In western cultures most children are tought through television

[/quote']

 

Do you think that the reason for this difference is modern technology, its availability and the willingness to use it?

Why not use that famous (I think it's famous) formula Gauss came up with to sum all of the number from 1 to x' date=' such that it equals (x)(x-1)/2, and if you want to sum on the interval a to b, use ((b)(b-1)-(a)(a-1))/2. There's a very nice, intuitive way to figure out the formula for the young kids which I'm sure is easy to find after a quick google.

 

[edit']Sorry, I just noticed that bloodhound pretty much posted the same thing.

We're all trying to find some way to explain this to hanuman_2000. he needs to feed back to us which explanations suit him.

How do we know that a cat avoiding pain is acting consciously? I would strongly argue that avoiding pain is a deep rooted instinct that the cat unconsciously acts upon. It still all depends upon a clear defintion of consciousness or self awareness' date=' which i do not believe we are anywhere near producing.

/QUOTE']

 

A cat is a mammal. Humans are mammals. This is not an analogy but an identity - in the sense that we belong in the same group. Therefore we share certain features in common. We are mammals because . . . .

 

Consequently I believe I share with a cat the deeply rooted instinct to avoid INJURY. When there is damage to the body automatic processors do their stuff. But if the damage is severe enough then a message is sent to the non-instinctive part of the body (consciousness) to say damage - work in progress - take care . Consciousness, being non-instinctive and therefore not automatic has the task of how to respond to the message. This is a task that consciousness is repeatedly engaged in. It's no coincidence that we are very much more alert to deviations from the norm than we are to the norm itself. Consciousness deals with novelty.

 

So I think it easier to get a handle on consciousness if we can agree about what it does rather than what it is. This would lead to questions like "what sort of activities are dependent on consciousness?".

There are 9 places to put digits in.

The first place always has a 6.

The second place can have any one of ten different digits using these: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

The third place can have any one of ten different digits using these: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

And so on . . .

So there are 10 possible digits for the second place. 10 for the third and so on . . . up to the 9th place

place . . . . . . = 2 . . 3 . . 4 . . 5 . . 6 . . 7 . . 8 . . 9

possible digits = 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 x 10 = 10^8

This is 10 000 000 = 10 million. They're telling it how it is

This is not a factorial type problem

If you need to know about this ask

If you have an object undergoing a constant acceleration, then the v vs t curve will be continuous and pass through zero.

Constant acceleration means that the acceleration has been measured during various time intervals and found to be unchanging. But it doesn't follow that there can be a process such as an acceleration at a point in time. Drawing a continuous curve is pushing the process to a limit which it can't sustain. Newton's calculus using limits is only a workable approximation to this.

How many chord can pass through the center of a circlr?

Please, explain what you mean by a chord

TEACHERS!

 

Could you please explain it to me for a Square and a rectangle.

 

Thanks.

Get a square sheet of paper and a pencil.

Fold the paper from corner to corner.

Draw a line down the fold.

When you fold the paper along the line the two sides of paper fit on each other exactly. They are triangles. The line you have drawn is called a line of symmetry.

Fold the paper from the other two corners.

Draw a line down the fold.

The line you have drawn is called a line of symmetry because . . .

Get another square sheet of paper.

Fold down the middle of the paper.

Draw a line down the fold.

The line you have drawn is called a line of symmetry because . . .

What shapes are on both sides of the line?

Fold down the middle of the paper (the way you didn't fold before).

Draw a line down the fold.

Count the lines you've drawn. That's how many lines of symmetry a square has.

Now try it with a rectangular sheet of paper

The difference of two number is always

 

1.equal to one number or less than both the number.

 

IS (1) correct? Could you please explain it to me?

Say X = 5 and Y = 2 then X - Y = 5 - 2 = 3

So the difference = 3 and X > 3 and Y < 3

So in this case the difference is not less than both numbers.

Are there any numbers where the difference is less than both numbers?

Say X = 5 and Y = 7 then X - Y = 5 - 7 = -2

-2 is said to be less than 5 and 7 because -2 is to the left of zero on a number line.

So the difference between two positive numbers is sometimes less than both numbers and sometimes more than both numbers

Can X - Y = X ?

If X = 2 and Y = 0 then 2 - 0 = 2

So the answer is yes.

Can X - Y = Y ?

If X = 2 and Y = 1 then X - Y = 2 - 1 = 1

So the answer is yes.

Can X - Y = X or can X - Y = Y for every pair of numbers.

Try it for yourself

How to add number from 21+22+............+30?

Get some paper and a pencil.

Kid first needs to be able to add 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + . . . . + 10

Start with 1 + 2 = ?

Continue with 1 + 2 + 3 = ?

A triangle of dots can help to visualise the process.

*

* *

* * *

* * * *

When the kid feels comfortable with that they may spot the connection with the original problem 21 = 21 -20 = 1 , 22 = 22 - 20 = 3

If not spot it for them but beware of rushing them

Why?

I think you mean HOW. Unless you want some explanation of purpose in how things do what they do.

SayonaraAre you a behaviorist by any chance?

He won't answer you. If he does it'll be an answer to a different question and one you didn't ask.

Rabbits and higher mammals seem to have many of the same brain structures . . . . so I dont see an obvious reason to assume consciousness is unique to humans.

I imagine something is conscious if at minimum it can have mental experiences and understand its experiences . . .

Yes, this is a big problem with the big bang. Having said that, it would have been worse if the inhomogeneities were absent.

Could asymmetrical behaviour have emerged some time after the singularity? I thought that a singularity (whatever that is or isn't) is where and when spacetime doesn't exist. That's a bummer for scientists because they can't say anything about it - but I expect they won't stop trying.

Does an object necessarily have to come to a stop before it can reverse it's direction?

Is this is the same type of problem as throwing a ball vertically in the air? Or the problem of a bee hiitting the windscreen of a car? When the bee hits the car it bounces off (as bees usually do) and continues its flight in the same direction as the car. So the bee has to stop. And therefore the car has to stop. But does the bee stop the car or does the car stop the bee?

Can an animal that is not consious of himself have dreams?

 

Because I used to have a rabbit dog who would sleep in front of the fireplace and in his sleep he would be doing little "woff woffs" and sometimes his hind legs would kick a little bit.

 

I figured that he was dreaming about running rabbits. Whaddya think?

I would guess that a dog that wasn't conscious of anything in it's waking existance would not be conscious when it was asleep. It'd be a bit weird if the only time the dog was conscious was when it was asleep. However, it's still possible that if animals have no consciousness that what your dog was doing was simply a type of automatic action with no consciousness at all. I have my suspicions that Sayonara³ is not conscious.

No' date=' there is a fundemental flaw in that arg, here`s how it goes.

 

You may change the pathways in your brain and become conscious of all the living truths out there possible!

 

that changes nothing.

Actions employing this data in a significant fashion WILL change Nature though.

 

imagine, you know all the secrets of the universe (nature) and then die, the synaptic junctions, dendrites and neurons break down, a little while later the electrons change hands to make new compounds as you rot and decay, nature benefits ZERO from this.

 

and so it`s my opinion, that unless this thought through consciousness is actively employed in a meaningfull manor, the configuration of your brains synapses and neurons is worth little more than a buy one get one free Mc Donalds cheese burger offer![/quote']

I think I get what you're saying. Actions change things, thinking doesn't. OK. Say someone thinks X. Tells it to Y. Is that not an action?

It is far more reasonable for you to assume that any given human you can interact with is conscious in the same fashion as yourself' date=' than it is to assume that any given animal is.

[/quote']

If you assume that animals have no consciouness then you would you have to assume that consciousness is unique to humans and that there was a "big jump" in evolution that effectively seperated us from animals?

I must be misunderstanding you. You seem to me to be suggesting that we should consider our models of nature to be nature. Please tell me that I am wrong.

You are not misunderstanding me.

But don't get me wrong. I said consider not assume.

Our species has had models of nature since the beginning of consciousness. Although nature has not changed all that much in the interim . . .

If our models of nature are nature then they are (as you imply) products of human consciousness

It's an assumption that nature has not changed only if you assume there is nature behind our model of nature. If nature is our model of nature then nature changes as our consciousness changes.