Here is a question that I personally have but have never heard put, much less answered, although surely it has been posed: Why does matter "want to" exist. It is like a survival instinct at the atomic level. Why does matter want to organize and cohere? It seems to me that without this "instinct" or "drive" nothing would exist. To me, this points to a creator.
My favorite curmudgeonly agnostic. I have enjoyed his talks and his books. I need to get this one. Babel is a correct metaphor for some of the things we are being handed.
Curmudgeonly... wow, I had to look this one up. I disagree... I find his talks and books full of humor, satire and irony, all pointing to the opposite direction
That spark that Dr. Berlinski mentions is the light and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The explosion of knowledge and technology represents the Lord's blessings to the Gentiles in the latter days, which coincided with the restoration of His gospel and Church in 1830, in preparation for the great work of gathering Israel, to prepare a people for His return.
It is such a pleasure to hear from Professor Berlinski again after having read some of his books. Looking at the incredible difference between us who have landed on the moon and chimpanzees who just fight is to me an inappropriate comparison. Rather it is more appropriate to look at humans 250,000 years ago versus chimpanzees. In this case, we appear to be much closer to each other. Then we should look at how we got from simpler primates to modern humans since then. To me it has to do unique abilities to utilize fire for cooking, thumbs to use tools, better positioned voice box to vocalize better (form words), control our breathing and so on that eventually led humankind to be able to organize labor, develop languages, organize labor, record history, pass on knowledge and so on. In the process of evolution, our brain size evolved from 800 to 1000 to 1300 cm3, pushed by many things in our evolutionary path. There is no disputing that we are extremely unique creatures now. But with the advent of AI now, for instance, if it allows us to progress up to a whole new level of intelligence in the next 100 years, we would be super smart. Nevertheless, if scientists took a bunch of humans and raised them to survive on their own in a wild jungle with no access to anything (tools, language, etc), they’d revert back to being wild animals, would they not?
*Trekpac2:* _"Then we should look at how we got from simpler primates to modern humans ..."_ That never happened. To see why we can be sure it didn't, you need to look at the hierarchies and interdependencies between bodily systems. Natural selection _can't_ select a change that's needed for development of a complex system. Let's look at an illustrative example of design that poses an unsolvable conundrum for evolution. The pancreas detects excess glucose in blood and releases insulin to tell cells to take up the glucose. But do you realize insulin would have no positive effect at all if it weren't for insulin receptor proteins that most cells express and position such that they can detect insulin? There are at least five things that have to all exist and work at the same time or they don't work at all: 1) The insulin itself, 2) The capability of the pancreas to measure glucose in the blood, 3) The capability to regulate insulin synthesis in proportion to glucose, 4) Insulin receptors throughout the body and 5) Cell machinery that makes use of glucose they accept (make fat, etc). Whichever one of those supposedly evolved first would not be selected or conserved because it would have no value without the others. Is there a possible sequence of arrivals of these five such that they provided some benefit before the others had evolved? You can't get here little by little as evolution _requires._ The whole mechanism of evolution is riddled with problems just like this in every cell in every organ in every system in every organism. Evolution is a broken mythical theory left over from the 19th century. Clearly, life was designed.
let's start by what evolution is. it DOESN'T lead to more complex forms. It's all about DNA mutations, which never lead to gaining new information, only losing. And only small percent of those mutations actually lead to benefits. So, rare benefits, simplification, loss of information - no mechanism for emerging more complex organisms. You can watch quite a lot about DNA on UA-cam
This is one of the reasons I subscribed to the channel. And I could imagine why these historical events of, 'and yet they did not take the next step' as my thoughts say it remains in human being evolution. They just could not do so, a kind of 'bandwidth' that limits abilities, and you and I are in this 'information measure' of course at different widths of our own within this area of width of the evolution of our time, consciously that is... Some farther along some less developed, but this will all change as the unstoppable juggernaut of evolution continues, and it will change for everything in existence. It is the one thought I am certain of among many personal thoughts.
*1p6t1gms:* _"... as the unstoppable juggernaut of evolution continues, ..."_ Hah! It never existed. The notion that all life evolved from a microbe is 19th century mythology that can 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 be believed by faith with no support from modern molecular biology.
Intelligent design is miss interpreted by people who want to deny that humans have the capability of observing a physical object and deciding absolutely that it is not created by chance , but actually was created by an intelligent designer. Life only comes from preexisting similar life forms. It is a scientific always true observation.
I am stepping out on a limb here, but on the origins of life, it seems to me that one thing that is missing in the discussion is looking at a driving force which would bring about change. This would be an elementary decision-making ability at a molecular level, an awareness and ability to react to circumstances outside. It is a basic intelligence and ability to problem solve. It could be looked at as elementary intelligent design. This is interacting with the environment. But also , I’d look at ways of communicating with the outside, like cells with other cells. There is a lot of work going on in bioelectric fields (morphogenetic fields) that professor Michael Levin at Tufts University is leading research in. This another type of intelligence that is driving change in systems, some type of intelligent design? Something is directing an egg cell to morphogenetically develop into a butterfly or a horse. We have to understand more about this to be able to understand how life evolved.
Tolstoy, through the Prince Andrei character, if I remember correctly, said that technological innovations were sometimes contraindicated for the sake of the masses--the peasant class--because they needed something to do or they would get into mischief. That is a poor paraphrase, but that is the gist.
You tubes algorithm shanks circulation of this series. If they labeled it " abiogenisis and evolutionary theory is fact " it would be circulated into every search
My question has and always will be if you were correct in your assumptions are true and your research valid then why are you not able to do anything with it?
Which came first the chicken or the egg ? We may remember that God created the Heaven and the Earth , in that order, and that Heaven and Earth are one. As far as I know the human mind has not created any instruments to peer into Heaven and thus this realm remains to the human mind a fictional and imaginary sphere of influence, even though that sphere of influence is a critical part of earthly affairs .Mankind has forgotten this remains in a state of amnesia with regard to his own station and purpose in life, and wants to keep it that way. Hence the popularity of Dawkins and his ilk.
This man has been giving his pompous speeches for almost 15 years on the Internet, and hasn’t made any sense at all to the educated mind. But has wowed the uneducated and ignorant.
I've watched this multiple times and shared with my sons. Love David berlinski
A light in the darkness.
what an amazing discussion I just love Berlinksi's erudite speech, and his searing rationale bravo bravo
Here is a question that I personally have but have never heard put, much less answered, although surely it has been posed: Why does matter "want to" exist. It is like a survival instinct at the atomic level. Why does matter want to organize and cohere? It seems to me that without this "instinct" or "drive" nothing would exist.
To me, this points to a creator.
My favorite curmudgeonly agnostic. I have enjoyed his talks and his books. I need to get this one. Babel is a correct metaphor for some of the things we are being handed.
Maranatha.
Curmudgeonly... wow, I had to look this one up. I disagree... I find his talks and books full of humor, satire and irony, all pointing to the opposite direction
That spark that Dr. Berlinski mentions is the light and inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The explosion of knowledge and technology represents the Lord's blessings to the Gentiles in the latter days, which coincided with the restoration of His gospel and Church in 1830, in preparation for the great work of gathering Israel, to prepare a people for His return.
Never you get dissatisfied with Dr Berlinski
It is such a pleasure to hear from Professor Berlinski again after having read some of his books.
Looking at the incredible difference between us who have landed on the moon and chimpanzees who just fight is to me an inappropriate comparison. Rather it is more appropriate to look at humans 250,000 years ago versus chimpanzees. In this case, we appear to be much closer to each other.
Then we should look at how we got from simpler primates to modern humans since then. To me it has to do unique abilities to utilize fire for cooking, thumbs to use tools, better positioned voice box to vocalize better (form words), control our breathing and so on that eventually led humankind to be able to organize labor, develop languages, organize labor, record history, pass on knowledge and so on.
In the process of evolution, our brain size evolved from 800 to 1000 to 1300 cm3, pushed by many things in our evolutionary path.
There is no disputing that we are extremely unique creatures now. But with the advent of AI now, for instance, if it allows us to progress up to a whole new level of intelligence in the next 100 years, we would be super smart.
Nevertheless, if scientists took a bunch of humans and raised them to survive on their own in a wild jungle with no access to anything (tools, language, etc), they’d revert back to being wild animals, would they not?
Try the opposite. Take a bunch of apes, train their brains with AI and see what is the best you can get
*Trekpac2:* _"Then we should look at how we got from simpler primates to modern humans ..."_
That never happened. To see why we can be sure it didn't, you need to look at the hierarchies and interdependencies between bodily systems. Natural selection _can't_ select a change that's needed for development of a complex system.
Let's look at an illustrative example of design that poses an unsolvable conundrum for evolution. The pancreas detects excess glucose in blood and releases insulin to tell cells to take up the glucose.
But do you realize insulin would have no positive effect at all if it weren't for insulin receptor proteins that most cells express and position such that they can detect insulin?
There are at least five things that have to all exist and work at the same time or they don't work at all:
1) The insulin itself,
2) The capability of the pancreas to measure glucose in the blood,
3) The capability to regulate insulin synthesis in proportion to glucose,
4) Insulin receptors throughout the body and
5) Cell machinery that makes use of glucose they accept (make fat, etc).
Whichever one of those supposedly evolved first would not be selected or conserved because it would have no value without the others. Is there a possible sequence of arrivals of these five such that they provided some benefit before the others had evolved? You can't get here little by little as evolution _requires._
The whole mechanism of evolution is riddled with problems just like this in every cell in every organ in every system in every organism. Evolution is a broken mythical theory left over from the 19th century. Clearly, life was designed.
let's start by what evolution is. it DOESN'T lead to more complex forms. It's all about DNA mutations, which never lead to gaining new information, only losing. And only small percent of those mutations actually lead to benefits. So, rare benefits, simplification, loss of information - no mechanism for emerging more complex organisms. You can watch quite a lot about DNA on UA-cam
You absolutely refuse to believe that you were created by an omnipotent 'god' who made you in his image?
That's kinda sad, dude!
This is one of the reasons I subscribed to the channel. And I could imagine why these historical events of, 'and yet they did not take the next step' as my thoughts say it remains in human being evolution. They just could not do so, a kind of 'bandwidth' that limits abilities, and you and I are in this 'information measure' of course at different widths of our own within this area of width of the evolution of our time, consciously that is... Some farther along some less developed, but this will all change as the unstoppable juggernaut of evolution continues, and it will change for everything in existence. It is the one thought I am certain of among many personal thoughts.
*1p6t1gms:* _"... as the unstoppable juggernaut of evolution continues, ..."_
Hah! It never existed. The notion that all life evolved from a microbe is 19th century mythology that can 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 be believed by faith with no support from modern molecular biology.
Intelligent design is miss interpreted by people who want to deny that humans have the capability of observing a physical object and deciding absolutely that it is not created by chance , but actually was created by an intelligent designer. Life only comes from preexisting similar life forms. It is a scientific always true observation.
I am stepping out on a limb here, but on the origins of life, it seems to me that one thing that is missing in the discussion is looking at a driving force which would bring about change. This would be an elementary decision-making ability at a molecular level, an awareness and ability to react to circumstances outside. It is a basic intelligence and ability to problem solve. It could be looked at as elementary intelligent design.
This is interacting with the environment. But also , I’d look at ways of communicating with the outside, like cells with other cells. There is a lot of work going on in bioelectric fields (morphogenetic fields) that professor Michael Levin at Tufts University is leading research in. This another type of intelligence that is driving change in systems, some type of intelligent design?
Something is directing an egg cell to morphogenetically develop into a butterfly or a horse. We have to understand more about this to be able to understand how life evolved.
Where is part one?
Please include a link to the first in this series. I can't locate it within the podcast's list of episodes. Thanks
Tolstoy, through the Prince Andrei character, if I remember correctly, said that technological innovations were sometimes contraindicated for the sake of the masses--the peasant class--because they needed something to do or they would get into mischief. That is a poor paraphrase, but that is the gist.
You tubes algorithm shanks circulation of this series. If they labeled it " abiogenisis and evolutionary theory is fact " it would be circulated into every search
My question has and always will be if you were correct in your assumptions are true and your research valid then why are you not able to do anything with it?
That is a good question. I don't get the context, so I need some help, so please provide a couple of paragraphs that might assist me.
Dang, I feel like I am 4 IQ points short of understanding all the finer points of this discussion.
The egg came first. Dinosaurs laid eggs and were on the planet prior to birds.
Thanks! Finally i know, chicken is made by dinosaurus. But why did no dinos with wings came out of the chicken eggs? Oh wait that are dragons.
You need to look into Eucharistic Miracles.
Is that like cheating at euchre.
Which came first the chicken or the egg ? We may remember that God created the Heaven and the Earth , in that order, and that Heaven and Earth are one. As far as I know the human mind has not created any instruments to peer into Heaven and thus this realm remains to the human mind a fictional and imaginary sphere of influence, even though that sphere of influence is a critical part of earthly affairs .Mankind has forgotten this remains in a state of amnesia with regard to his own station and purpose in life, and wants to keep it that way. Hence the popularity of Dawkins and his ilk.
One chicken or one egg is useless there needs to be two a male and female
FIRST
This man has been giving his pompous speeches for almost 15 years on the Internet, and hasn’t made any sense at all to the educated mind. But has wowed the uneducated and ignorant.
I don’t know if he wowed me but he made some very good points. You had one sentence to make at least one good point and failed….so
Make that two sentences.
Silly statement. 1. Have you ever read his books? 2. Could you last 5 minutes against Berlinski in a discussion/debate?
*Where is part one?*