iNow

Like I said, fast and loose. “Seems to show some elements of cognitive behavior” ≠ cognition The worst part is I tend to agree with the thrust of your position but I hate sloppiness like this. Like in this most recent article you cite… they explicitly state naturalism isn’t sufficient to understand our mind. Horseshit, because the only thing left then is supernaturalism and that’s a nonstarter. They conclude by acknowledging this is an argument against materialism… so woo woo wish thinking it is.

You seem to be using a rather fast and loose definition of cognition

Yes, agreed. See also my repeated mention of how environment and fatigue and hunger and thirst and illness etc anll influence us mentally despite our loud claims of having freedom. Fairly sure this is another example of us being on same page.

Nice strawman. The idea is they can be linked indefinitely allowing nearly unrestricted processing power. The limits are financial and resource based, not technical… and nobody is saying there won’t be exceptions. You are so confident about your predictions regarding the future, practically dogmatic and preachy and soapboxxing. Maybe use your powers for something more rewarding like buying lotto tickets (since you can see the future and all).

They seem to have escaped or simply been abandoned by their captors. Which actually happened is unclear since they couldn’t be questioned or debriefed. They were hiding in a building and came out shirtless waving a white flag with SOS written out using leftover food when the soldier felt threatened and fired. Two immediately died. One was wounded and went back into the building, but was then shot again and killed when he exited a second time.

Well, this sure is a fun and enriching way to spend my time.

My request wasn’t for you to leave, but happiest and healthiest of holidays all the same to you and those you love.

Label the States Even with a blank map, a lot of people can only name 45-50 of the 64 states.

Not seeing any support for your assertion, just a bunch of waffling.

So says you. I’m challenging this assertion. You’re making broad sweeping and dismissive claims about an entire field of study. It’s far more likely that MANY researchers are doing this already and you’re simply unaware of their work. And I’m sure you have numbers to support the assertion this population makes a minority?

The congestion propagates backward, yes. I’m not denying higher order effects, but it’s still individual cars and drivers which lead to that congestion in aggregate and any behavioral focus must be at the vehicle/driver level. They are navigating larger situational restrictions, but it’s still them doing the navigating.

Why assume they are not already doing this, or have not already been doing exactly this for decades?

For instance?

You’ve been offered this feedback many times before, but this tone and approach needlessly tangles and derails already hard complex conversations. Not always, but often when you comment it is bitingly personal, regularly besmirching of the character and intentions of fellow forum members, and consistently needling toward them with an undercurrent of bile. I know I’ve felt it toward you, and readily acknowledge that I’m hardly some angel here leading by example, but please maybe… in the holiday spirit… try focusing on the argument instead of the personal making it. More than anything the existing approach is unproductive and amplifies animus, but more broadly it makes it more difficult to nourish allyship and come together on what are your otherwise extremely well informed and consistently valid points. It makes it harder to agree with you among those who want to. tl;dr? Be more ambassador than curmudgeon, old man. The attacks cascading across the world need not so easily find refuge among what I hope are your friends here at SFN. ✌🏼

Will you please summarize the key points in the article and introduce what about it you wish to discuss with others here? Basically, help readers to follow along here without explicitly clicking the link, while also not treating thread forum as a blog?

You can’t kill hatred by killing the people who hate you, especially if you don’t simultaneously kill every single one of their children, family, friends, and sympathetic onlookers.

God of the gaps. Confused about something? That’s okay, Goddidit! Cant answer a question? That’s okay, Goddidit! Want your version of reality to feel more valid? That’s okay, Goddidit! Science closes more of those gaps everyday, and the spaces where “That’s okay, Goddidit!” remains in any way viable or satisfying continue shrinking toward zero.

Which is why we must focus so fiercely on avoiding them and ending them when for whatever reason we cannot

One of my professors used to say that all roads lead to thalamus. She obviously didn’t have a taste for the powers of the nose to smell out a shortcut.

Find the Speculations section. This is the pinned post at the top of it:

https://acikders.ankara.edu.tr/pluginfile.php/95402/mod_resource/content/1/The_Best_Short_Works_of_Mark_Twain_-_Mark_Twain.pdf

No true Scotsman. The bad faith persists… pun intended

What makes you think there’s any “center” at all? Why couldn’t it be like the universe itself which has no center? You keep claiming that you are compelled by evidence wherever it may lead, but you also appear to make multiple logical leaps and unfounded assumptions regarding spaces where there simply isn’t any. Anyway, why assume there’s a “center” we can point to and call it a mind? Why wouldn’t it be more like highway traffic that involves lots of cars and different movements of them? Have you already dismissed my recommendation of the cerebellum as the mostly likely answer if there is a center?

Unnecessary. Problematic works, too.

https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/question-8/ “CO2 has its strongest heat-trapping band centred at a wavelength of 15 micrometres (millionths of a metre), with wings that spread out a few micrometres on either side. There are also many weaker absorption bands. As CO2 concentrations increase, the absorption at the centre of the strong band is already so intense that it plays little role in causing additional warming. However, more energy is absorbed in the weaker bands and in the wings of the strong band, causing the surface and lower atmosphere to warm further.“