Miscellany (General)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 04, 2021, 00:42 (967 days ago) @ dhw

New amphibious whale

DAVID: A designer directly using His mental powers to design is much easier to accomplish than teaching cells how to design a required design to cover future needs for the next species.

dhw: Who said anything about teaching cells how to design a required design? That means giving them instructions!!! Intelligent cells would work out their own designs – not to cover future needs, but to respond to current needs! Why do you think your God is incapable of designing such cells?

You are again asking for a second-hand design system, much more difficult and much more cumbersome than direct hands on.

Introducing the brain
QUOTES: Both kinds of neurons receive incoming signals and, based on that information, decide whether to send their own signal to other neurons.
In most of the networks, that equated to about 1,000 artificial neurons for just one biological neuron.

DAVID: This study from AI shows how very complex a single neuron is in its potential activities. Not by chance.

dhw: I’d say that with all these potential activities, the neuron needs a fair degree of intelligence to decide what signals to send to the other members of the cell community. Wouldn’t you?

Just lots of intelligent instructions for the neuron to act on.

Back to New amphibious whale
dhw: But you dismiss the theory because my human proposal is somehow more human than your human proposal. Anyway, do please give us your other reasons for why we are here.[/i]

DAVID: It all revolves about our unique exceptional mental powers, which mirror His in some way and for His own reasons He created us. And then we guess at His reasons as you describe. I see His obvious purposeful activity, and try to go no further.

dhw: Nice to hear that our powers “mirror” his in some way. I’ll add that to my collection. You told me I had no idea why we are here, and so I asked you for his purpose, and you tell me he’s purposeful! The question is WHAT is the purpose, so what was the point of you telling me I have no idea, when I keep offering you ideas and you refuse to do so?

Well, we extremely exceptional ones are here and He did lots of creating to get us here. Remember our battle is over why he wanted us as His goal.

LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
DAVID: If you are correct, it is counter to today's linguist theories. I can only read the opinions along with yours.

dhw: It is obvious from the article I quoted that there are different theories. I do wish you would tell us why you disagree with the above observations instead of suggesting that today’s linguists are all Chomsky fans. Have you done a survey?

DAVID: We've covered the arguments about the importance of recursion, and the one language without it.

dhw: No we haven’t, and what on earth has that got to do with your claim that today’s linguists agree with Chomsky that the brain is “hard-wired for syntax”? Some do and some don’t. Now please tell us why you disagree with the “copying” theory so vividly demonstrated by feral children.

I didn't disagree. I thought it was an interesting point. And we did cover the argument about recursion

Junk DNA
dhw: [..] every time you mention “junk”, I have to point out that if all of DNA is useful, it simply provides a demonstration of natural selection at work, since NS would remove anything that wasn’t useful.

DAVID: We still have about 20% junk, not removed.

dhw: So what does that prove?

The atheist Darwinists use 80% junk as a direct argument for chance mutations being kept!!! They still rave about it and fight current research and majority opinion. You are unaware of the continuing battle. I've named names in the past, not worth it now.