Human Devolution? Interesting Article... (page 17)

cofty

what would you say are the flaws in peer review Cofty?

I wouldn't.

it can't be verified without secular knowledge and education

As opposed to....?

sabastious

I do not see life this way. You appear to, and then seem to add god in to the straw man scenario to make it all better. I think this is getting off topic. So will not address this any further.

The OP states that depending on technology has made our brains stupider. This furthers the concept that we are doomed for failure, it's no different than the Bible saying it's not for man to direct his own step. A JW would LOVE to use this article to "prove" their faith that man is a degrading species. This subject has undertones of religion because that's the question that God frameworks answer. And if you believe in the Torah you will know that we were actually created to be good and progressive and that anyone who works counter to that has actually lost their natural affection for the nature of humanity. It's not off topic, and I think it's funny that you would say what you said and THEN tell me the discussion is over. It sucks you live in New Zealand, we would get along.

-Sab

sizemik

You don't acknowledge the bad with the good because if you did, you'd see the bad outweighs the good. . . . sab

While there exists a general overall movement toward greater complexity . . . the forces at work in the universe are neither malevolent nor benevolent . . . this is a uniquely human concept. The fact is shit happens . . . cosmological cataclysm can be obseved as we speak. The hubble has detected two colliding galaxies . . . the collision beginning and ending over a multi-million year time frame. Solid evidence of meteorite impacts are found throughout the world. Active super-volcanoes exist. Any one of such cataclysms can fill the upper atmosphere with debris causing temperatures to plunge, punctuating the natural cycles with periods of environmental hostility.

Mass extinctions have occurred in the past for just these sorts of reasons . . . biological evolution is not an even lineality, but has taken profound directional changes from these events. The universe is not a piece of balanced hardware like a ticking clock . . . except through the narrow window of the human lifespan. The challenge lies in utilising our current level of biological complexity to understand it . . . and work within it's parameters and confines to better our relationship with it . . . and contribute to our continued existence in it.

sabastious

I wouldn't.

So the scientific method and it's peer review community is a perfect then?

per·fect /'p?rfikt/

Adjective:

Having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be.

There are literally no tweaks that could be made to the system to improve it?

-Sab

cofty

The OP states that depending on technology has made our brains stupider

No it doesn't.

The scientific paper said no such thing. I don't know if Shelby said this but from what I know she did post its clear she didn't understand the article she was writing about. No amount of explanation is ever going to change that.

sabastious

While there exists a general overall movement toward greater complexity . . . the forces at work in the universe are neither malevolent nor benevolent . . . this is a uniquely human concept. The fact is shit happens . . . cosmological cataclysm can be obseved as we speak. The hubble has detected two colliding galaxies . . . the collision beginning and ending over a multi-million year time frame. Solid evidence of meteorite impacts are found throughout the world. Active super-volcanoes exist. Any one of such cataclysms can fill the upper atmosphere with debris causing temperatures to plunge, punctuating the natural cycles with periods of environmental hostility.

Yeah but we don't know if there was life in those gallaxies. It could literally just be God's junkyard. That scanario proves nothing other than stuff happens in space. The only reason why you and I are here is because our genetic lines were not destroyed. Is that random chance?

-Sab

EntirelyPossible

Once I helped design a mobile data center for <insert name of military group here> for coordinating communications and operation between field units. Rather than have my peers review it, people that have the knowledge and experience to evaluate the design, I should have had my neighbor do it. He was a financial planner. I mean, he had zero understanding of why I would sometime choose a top-of-rack switch or choose 15K drives or RAID10 vs RAID5, but what the heck, right? Why the hell should knowing what you are doing, experience and knowledge be a barrier to doing things that require knowing what you are doing, experience and knowledge?

NewChapter

Okay, Sab, I'm going to withdraw from this discussion with you. It has become nearly impossible. You are all over the board, making assertions without support, playing by a different rule book, and assigning attitudes and motivations. There comes a moment when it is no longer constructive. I cannot have a scientific discussion with a person who views the scientific method with deep suspicion and extrapolating the motive behind the method until life has no meaning and we are all robots. Even saying that we won't ADMIT that we think we are organic robots but that what we really THINK, is deeply offensive, but more importantly, a conversation and thought stopper.

When you can focus a bit more, perhaps I will engage again.

cofty

So the scientific method and it's peer review community is a perfect then?

I didn't say it was perfect. You do that a lot - putting words in people's mouth.

The scientific method is the best tool we have by far to discover truths about reality. It has been astonishingly successful.

still thinking

It's not off topic, and I think it's funny that you would say what you said and THEN tell me the discussion is over....sab

I think it is off topic to discuss what atheists think and feel. I have made it clear that as an atheist I do not think and feel what you are suggesting. So I see nothing more to discuss about it because it will take the thread too far off topic. Also, we are meant to be discussing the article, not possible space travel outside or inside the universe.

Human Devolution? Interesting Article...

per·fect /'p?rfikt/

Share this