"... doubts about the reductionist account of life go against the dominant scientific consensus, but that consensus faces problems of probability that I believe are not taken seriously enough, both with respect to the evolution of life forms through accidental mutation and natural selection and with respect to the formation from dead matter of physical systems capable of such evolution. The more we learn about the intricacy of the genetic code and its control of the chemical processes of life, the harder those problems seem.
Again: with regard to evolution, the process of natural selection cannot account for the actual history without an adequate supply of viable mutations, and I believe it remains an open question whether this could have been provided in geological time merely as a result of chemical accident, without the operation of some other factors determining and restricting the forms of genetic variation. It is no longer legitimate simply to imagine a sequence of gradually evolving phenotypes, as if their appearance through mutations in the DNA were unproblematic—as Richard Dawkins does for the evolution of the eye. 4 With regard to the origin of life, the problem is much harder, since the option of natural selection as an explanation is not available. And the coming into existence of the genetic code—an arbitrary mapping of nucleotide sequences into amino acids, together with mechanisms that can read the code and carry out its instructions—seems particularly resistant to being revealed as probable given physical law alone"
Just been listening to a conversation about new legislation changes in Queensland that will basically prevent doctors from having an alternative view to the state health authorities. If you see a doctor now, you are seeing an agent of the state who will enforce the will of the state. And if that state is under the control of the UN/WEF then we really are under a global tyranny.
Oct 6, 2022·edited Oct 6, 2022Liked by Winston Smith
I am somewhat of an expert on this topic, IMHO, because I have watched a lot of Star Trek episodes, where "God" is always a highly evolved being with seemingly supernatural powers. But really these seeming powers are really just the biological-being equivalent of what technology often seems: the paranormal becomes normal once we understand it and can create magical technology. I can transmit my voice anywhere in the world by talking into the "magic box" called a cell phone. The highly evolved alien "Q" on Star Trek the Next Generation often tormented Captain Picard with the Being equivalent by simply snapping his fingers and doing any magical thing we could imagine God could do, because godlike Q understood His infinite mind and could do all things. Well, that is the story, and fiction conditions the mind better than so-called evolutionary science, because thorough evaluation of the science shows it is nonsense.
So, I guess evolution DOES make sense, as in non-sense. Here is s good document to blast some of the false science: https://theoriginofgod.com/Evolution%20Cruncher.pdf and yes if you read that domain from the beginning (https://theoriginofgod.com) you will read more than you want to know about my combo of science philosophy (that is really what evolution is---religion for the atheist) and Bible philosophy. The site is nice and short and can probably be read and digested in a few years. Hey, Einstein said time is relative....in the context of eternity, a few years is just a few nanoseconds. :-) I take a story form approach, and hopefully that is appealing to some readers.
A Strong Delusion version 548927187666787665.12 might be a better title though, because Mandela effect has changed the Bible so much, it will blow readers' minds to consider it, if you are not aware. My site will pop up a blurb to introduce readers to this proven true phenomenon.
Just a note on the title - I intend to write a lot of articles on various topic under the series A Strong Delusion - so 1.0 is just the intro to the first topic, 2.1 would be the first article in the second topic. I wasn't suggesting something like 1.0 is the first iteration of a delusion.
Irreducibly complex is a phrase I have long been comfortable with. I am no scientist, but I know enough about science to understand that most pretensions toward scientific certainty are full of shit. Physics is another great place where we understand next to nothing, but act like we know it all. Covid especially has revealed the religiosity and abject fraud pervading science.
Intelligent design answers no questions just like darwinism.
It ignores the question of how did the designer or the blueprints get created in the first place?
I suppose to believe in intelligent design, you must assume that consciousness/ information exists outside of the physical. Hmm, yeah, I'm not sure of that. Got any proof? Nobody does.
Whatever,
My view is that given enough time, anything becomes probable.
Yes, even the penny can land on it's side 10 times in a row once in a trillion billion tries.
But I'm not saying that is the answer. But it is the idea that assumes the least.
McGilchrist said that it's the left brain that thinks it's figured out the truth.
Darwinism and intelligent design are no different than thinking than some guy in the sky made us to be this way.
I'm happy not knowing. Trying to know something that is unknowable leads to crazy bullshit.
Those that see intelligent design are asking different questions that those who see evolution (Darwinian or otherwise) as a force behind our presence on earth.
I would think that believing in an enchanted world must influence our study of the universe, and how we interpret the evidence. If you think that evidence for intelligent design is all around us, I have no doubt that you will find it, and use it to better understand the designer (and his/or her intentions). This turns from being purely a scientific question to one including other disciplines (such as theology, etc.).
I remember watching a lecture by Robert Sapolsky "the biology of religion" which he admits that believing in a higher power has it's psychological benefits.
I used to believe in a created order. I still believe that nature, a complex dynamical system, has a "logic"/life of it's own.
But I cannot say nature was created by another intelligence... It is.
Nowadays, I find non-anticipation a better practice.
The mind tries to see patterns or meaning in things that it barely knows anything about, like the universe, or nature.
On the extreme of this, schizophrenics see patterns and meanings all over.
It gives great motivation, but when can one know that their belief is steering their perception to not see what doesn't match the ideal?
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence.”
Many years ago while holding my firstborn and when I was feeling very ignorant, 1980 and before Internet, I asked God to give my son understanding. The still, small voice said, "How is he going to get understanding if you don't have it to give to him." I immediately asked for myself and in a short time the floodgates opened and I met the man Bab Roberts and his writings which he put under the name of Delamer Duverus, an Identification which loosely translates to mean, from the sea, mother or giver, or truth. Bab was a prophet and walked with God all of his days until our government silenced him.
The only way we will escape mass psychosis is to turn to God and gain His understanding. John 16:7-8, 13. Delamer Duverus writes about the Speciel Mind, how we arrived on this Penal Colony we call Earth, and He explains how we can evolve. The problem is our enemies know more about us than we do. "The Golden Reed" is the first book he wrote, and I daresay if all the inmates in a prison were to read it, it would empty the prison out in time.
Another great essay Winston. I think the evidence for intelligent design is all around us. I do believe in evolution but not Darwinian evolution with it's random nonsense. It seems to me that evolution is further proof of intelligent design, as if further proof were needed considering what can be observed. The idea that all of existence is some type of random accident is a delusion. Everything fits together from micro to macro. One or a few small changes and there would be nothing.....if nothing was even a possibility, which it seems it isn't.
I had an intelligent design conversation this past summer. Someone observed that the beans in my garden climbed and sent tendrils out sideways a foot or more towards where they could grab poles. I commented that I didn't understand how some people deny intelligent design when it's observable. That sparked a lengthy discussion about intelligent design.
I think the denial of intelligent design is part of the dis-enchantment of life/existence wherein everything is a collection of stupid objects disconnected from each other --- the belief that there isn't a Larger Whole.
When my first child was born decades ago there had been many complications. On the day he was born it was obvious that all was well and that I had witnessed a miracle. I went outside the hospital to pray in the freezing cold. With my knees on the seat part of a picnic table I looked up at the morning star. As tears streamed the only words that I could muster was, "How can they deny what's real?"
I feel sorry for those who imagine they live in a dis-enchanted world. They are missing so much.
Eric Metaxas and Stephen Meyer have a free-wheeling discussion of science, faith, and God during a special episode of "Socrates in the City" taped live at the 2022 Westminster Conference on Science and Faith in the greater Philadelphia area in April 2022. Meyer is author of "The Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries that Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe." Eric Metaxas is a radio talk show host and author of "Is Atheism Dead?"
Thanks Yurek. I've read Meyer, his capacity on this topic is miles above my own, so I'm approaching this from a 'layman's' perspective - will be a fun ride nevertheless.
You are being modest. I’ve been enjoying your thoughtful views on the predicament of our human condition. It’s been super fun and interesting already! This is my top Substack!
The apparent irreducible complexity of the cell is a strong argument for intelligent design. On the other hand, the fossil record is a strong argument for evolution. It's crucial in my opinion to separate evolution as a phenomenon - meaning the diversification and increasing sophistication of the biosphere's morphological patterns - and the much more specific theory of evolution by natural selection. The latter is a proposed mechanism, and it is the latter only that has been granted an undeserved dogmatic status.
Also worth pointing out that design was the default position until about two centuries ago. It simply became untenable. Whether the current paradigm is the last word I don’t know but everything I’ve heard about ID appears to be god of the gap with more steps. Happy to be proven wrong tho.
I don't see the fossil record as a strong argument for evolution - it's a big topic, and we will go there further down the track - incredibly compelling arguments on both sides of the fence (which is why this topic is so much fun - well fun for those who don't walk out of the conversation but are willing to hear alternative explanations).
John I'll be fully expecting your input when it comes to cosmology!
You have to define what you mean by 'evolution', though. I'm using it in the broadest possible sense: the phenotypic change of organisms over time. This seems to me to be very clearly attested to in the fossil record.
Even even worser: Read The Naked Bible, because Mauro Biglino points out the Old Testament sure reads like it's documenting the genetic manipulation and creation of humans by an old dead space ailien.
Subscription just upgraded; If there is one thing that really grates my nerves, it is reading or listening to assumptive lines like "we evolved to..." in order to advance an argument.
Look forward to this series, and hope it leads to more dogma challenges as well. Thanks
Virtually everything we were "taught" aka "indoctrinated" was a lie. The Propaganda Game is the most impactful documentary I've viewed in the last 10-years. One begins thinking "How can the North Koreans be this stupid," to understanding, "Oh. My. God. It's no different here in the West."
Yep. I mean how disillusioned are we becoming about the West? Then I think, "hey I don't want to fall for that Hegelian-inspired-Marxist ploy to hate our system to the point of revolution in an attempt to 'synthesise' a utopia!" And then I think, "Nope, it really is all bullshit and the system is out to oppress us, if not kill us, and we are living under a complex lie."
My husband (who is an engineer and nobody's fool) has a great thought experiment for demonstrating the folly of Darwinism: If you put all the parts required to make a Rolls Royce into a box, and shook the box for a few million years, when you open the box, do you think you will have a fully assembled, functional car?
Hardcore Darwinian Evolutionists would say "yes"... "given enough time" - which is why the first topic on genetic entropy is an important place to start the conversation - the parts of the car break down and even the box falls apart.
As they always do. All we can ask is for the metaphor to paint a simplistic picture. Unfortunately, people don't always understand that many things cannot be described using something as inaccurate as 'words'...
"... doubts about the reductionist account of life go against the dominant scientific consensus, but that consensus faces problems of probability that I believe are not taken seriously enough, both with respect to the evolution of life forms through accidental mutation and natural selection and with respect to the formation from dead matter of physical systems capable of such evolution. The more we learn about the intricacy of the genetic code and its control of the chemical processes of life, the harder those problems seem.
Again: with regard to evolution, the process of natural selection cannot account for the actual history without an adequate supply of viable mutations, and I believe it remains an open question whether this could have been provided in geological time merely as a result of chemical accident, without the operation of some other factors determining and restricting the forms of genetic variation. It is no longer legitimate simply to imagine a sequence of gradually evolving phenotypes, as if their appearance through mutations in the DNA were unproblematic—as Richard Dawkins does for the evolution of the eye. 4 With regard to the origin of life, the problem is much harder, since the option of natural selection as an explanation is not available. And the coming into existence of the genetic code—an arbitrary mapping of nucleotide sequences into amino acids, together with mechanisms that can read the code and carry out its instructions—seems particularly resistant to being revealed as probable given physical law alone"
From Mind and Cosmos
Thomas Nagel
It won't matter when this happens.....
https://2ndsmartestguyintheworld.substack.com/p/psyop-22-update-australia-bill-opens?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=400535&post_id=76673039&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
and
https://sheldonyakiwchuk.substack.com/p/heading-to-very-dark-places?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=447842&post_id=76650895&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
I don't visit any doctors for even a check up, fthem.
Either do I but it will not be a choice to not be vaccinated......is what it seems.....
At the last minute flee, they will find someone else to exploit.
I am staying and fighting....I have to.....
Also, this will be all over...all WEF countries for sure.....
Yeah those issues are a bit of a worry.
Just been listening to a conversation about new legislation changes in Queensland that will basically prevent doctors from having an alternative view to the state health authorities. If you see a doctor now, you are seeing an agent of the state who will enforce the will of the state. And if that state is under the control of the UN/WEF then we really are under a global tyranny.
So, basically what's happened in California, too..... all WEF "Global Leaders" will make this a reality, I assume.....
I am somewhat of an expert on this topic, IMHO, because I have watched a lot of Star Trek episodes, where "God" is always a highly evolved being with seemingly supernatural powers. But really these seeming powers are really just the biological-being equivalent of what technology often seems: the paranormal becomes normal once we understand it and can create magical technology. I can transmit my voice anywhere in the world by talking into the "magic box" called a cell phone. The highly evolved alien "Q" on Star Trek the Next Generation often tormented Captain Picard with the Being equivalent by simply snapping his fingers and doing any magical thing we could imagine God could do, because godlike Q understood His infinite mind and could do all things. Well, that is the story, and fiction conditions the mind better than so-called evolutionary science, because thorough evaluation of the science shows it is nonsense.
So, I guess evolution DOES make sense, as in non-sense. Here is s good document to blast some of the false science: https://theoriginofgod.com/Evolution%20Cruncher.pdf and yes if you read that domain from the beginning (https://theoriginofgod.com) you will read more than you want to know about my combo of science philosophy (that is really what evolution is---religion for the atheist) and Bible philosophy. The site is nice and short and can probably be read and digested in a few years. Hey, Einstein said time is relative....in the context of eternity, a few years is just a few nanoseconds. :-) I take a story form approach, and hopefully that is appealing to some readers.
A Strong Delusion version 548927187666787665.12 might be a better title though, because Mandela effect has changed the Bible so much, it will blow readers' minds to consider it, if you are not aware. My site will pop up a blurb to introduce readers to this proven true phenomenon.
Just a note on the title - I intend to write a lot of articles on various topic under the series A Strong Delusion - so 1.0 is just the intro to the first topic, 2.1 would be the first article in the second topic. I wasn't suggesting something like 1.0 is the first iteration of a delusion.
Irreducibly complex is a phrase I have long been comfortable with. I am no scientist, but I know enough about science to understand that most pretensions toward scientific certainty are full of shit. Physics is another great place where we understand next to nothing, but act like we know it all. Covid especially has revealed the religiosity and abject fraud pervading science.
I'm in for A Strong Delusion, the series.
Glad to have you onboard. Fasten your seat belt, put out that cigarette, and in the case of an emergency, sorry there is not escape.
I'm interested. I like it when an intelligent being admits he doesn't know anything about something. Too many varying variables!
I changed the natural selection idea to natural succession. Hahaha!
Intelligent design answers no questions just like darwinism.
It ignores the question of how did the designer or the blueprints get created in the first place?
I suppose to believe in intelligent design, you must assume that consciousness/ information exists outside of the physical. Hmm, yeah, I'm not sure of that. Got any proof? Nobody does.
Whatever,
My view is that given enough time, anything becomes probable.
Yes, even the penny can land on it's side 10 times in a row once in a trillion billion tries.
But I'm not saying that is the answer. But it is the idea that assumes the least.
McGilchrist said that it's the left brain that thinks it's figured out the truth.
Darwinism and intelligent design are no different than thinking than some guy in the sky made us to be this way.
I'm happy not knowing. Trying to know something that is unknowable leads to crazy bullshit.
Ah Rob of universe c137... I guess you're not on this journey with us? That's OK, I've other things to interest you :-)
"It ignores the question of how did the designer or the blueprints get created in the first place?"
I don't think intelligent design ignores the question. I think those who observe intelligent design are in awe of the question.
Those that see intelligent design are asking different questions that those who see evolution (Darwinian or otherwise) as a force behind our presence on earth.
I would think that believing in an enchanted world must influence our study of the universe, and how we interpret the evidence. If you think that evidence for intelligent design is all around us, I have no doubt that you will find it, and use it to better understand the designer (and his/or her intentions). This turns from being purely a scientific question to one including other disciplines (such as theology, etc.).
Yep, beliefs limit what one sees.
I remember watching a lecture by Robert Sapolsky "the biology of religion" which he admits that believing in a higher power has it's psychological benefits.
I used to believe in a created order. I still believe that nature, a complex dynamical system, has a "logic"/life of it's own.
But I cannot say nature was created by another intelligence... It is.
Nowadays, I find non-anticipation a better practice.
The mind tries to see patterns or meaning in things that it barely knows anything about, like the universe, or nature.
On the extreme of this, schizophrenics see patterns and meanings all over.
It gives great motivation, but when can one know that their belief is steering their perception to not see what doesn't match the ideal?
“Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence.”
― Robert Anton Wilson
I'm a proponent of semi-intelligent design.
LOL
I will remember that line
Either that or High-As-Fuck Design.
How else do you explain the platypus and nipples for me?
I've always thought that giraffes were evidence of a sense of humor
Giraffes! Yeah, they go in there too. HAFSID FTW
Is that like being half pregnant? 🤣
More like intentionally getting pregnant by a schizo crackhead alien-human hybrid, but close.
I would have expected any supreme being to treat this project as more than the equivalent of a high school science project...
Oh it is much, much more than that.
It's indistinguishable from cosmic horror mashed up with comedia del arte.
Many years ago while holding my firstborn and when I was feeling very ignorant, 1980 and before Internet, I asked God to give my son understanding. The still, small voice said, "How is he going to get understanding if you don't have it to give to him." I immediately asked for myself and in a short time the floodgates opened and I met the man Bab Roberts and his writings which he put under the name of Delamer Duverus, an Identification which loosely translates to mean, from the sea, mother or giver, or truth. Bab was a prophet and walked with God all of his days until our government silenced him.
The only way we will escape mass psychosis is to turn to God and gain His understanding. John 16:7-8, 13. Delamer Duverus writes about the Speciel Mind, how we arrived on this Penal Colony we call Earth, and He explains how we can evolve. The problem is our enemies know more about us than we do. "The Golden Reed" is the first book he wrote, and I daresay if all the inmates in a prison were to read it, it would empty the prison out in time.
Another great essay Winston. I think the evidence for intelligent design is all around us. I do believe in evolution but not Darwinian evolution with it's random nonsense. It seems to me that evolution is further proof of intelligent design, as if further proof were needed considering what can be observed. The idea that all of existence is some type of random accident is a delusion. Everything fits together from micro to macro. One or a few small changes and there would be nothing.....if nothing was even a possibility, which it seems it isn't.
I had an intelligent design conversation this past summer. Someone observed that the beans in my garden climbed and sent tendrils out sideways a foot or more towards where they could grab poles. I commented that I didn't understand how some people deny intelligent design when it's observable. That sparked a lengthy discussion about intelligent design.
I think the denial of intelligent design is part of the dis-enchantment of life/existence wherein everything is a collection of stupid objects disconnected from each other --- the belief that there isn't a Larger Whole.
When my first child was born decades ago there had been many complications. On the day he was born it was obvious that all was well and that I had witnessed a miracle. I went outside the hospital to pray in the freezing cold. With my knees on the seat part of a picnic table I looked up at the morning star. As tears streamed the only words that I could muster was, "How can they deny what's real?"
I feel sorry for those who imagine they live in a dis-enchanted world. They are missing so much.
Looking forward to this🫶
Thank you Winston,
Yes…it’s quite fascinating. Iain McGilchrist has always maintained that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
For those interested, Stephen Meyer takes a run at this as well.
https://youtu.be/n3aoQircZeQ
Eric Metaxas and Stephen Meyer have a free-wheeling discussion of science, faith, and God during a special episode of "Socrates in the City" taped live at the 2022 Westminster Conference on Science and Faith in the greater Philadelphia area in April 2022. Meyer is author of "The Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries that Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe." Eric Metaxas is a radio talk show host and author of "Is Atheism Dead?"
Thanks Yurek. I've read Meyer, his capacity on this topic is miles above my own, so I'm approaching this from a 'layman's' perspective - will be a fun ride nevertheless.
You are being modest. I’ve been enjoying your thoughtful views on the predicament of our human condition. It’s been super fun and interesting already! This is my top Substack!
Eric Metaxas as an "authority" on the Big Questions re the nature of Reality - oh puleez!
Re Eric Metaxas why not check out this take-down on him.
http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2018/04/1995-eric-metaxas.html
The apparent irreducible complexity of the cell is a strong argument for intelligent design. On the other hand, the fossil record is a strong argument for evolution. It's crucial in my opinion to separate evolution as a phenomenon - meaning the diversification and increasing sophistication of the biosphere's morphological patterns - and the much more specific theory of evolution by natural selection. The latter is a proposed mechanism, and it is the latter only that has been granted an undeserved dogmatic status.
Also worth pointing out that design was the default position until about two centuries ago. It simply became untenable. Whether the current paradigm is the last word I don’t know but everything I’ve heard about ID appears to be god of the gap with more steps. Happy to be proven wrong tho.
I don't see the fossil record as a strong argument for evolution - it's a big topic, and we will go there further down the track - incredibly compelling arguments on both sides of the fence (which is why this topic is so much fun - well fun for those who don't walk out of the conversation but are willing to hear alternative explanations).
John I'll be fully expecting your input when it comes to cosmology!
It's all three, adaptation, alteration, and evolution. Beware of either/or thinking, it's one of those monkey-mind biases that gets us jammed up.
You have to define what you mean by 'evolution', though. I'm using it in the broadest possible sense: the phenotypic change of organisms over time. This seems to me to be very clearly attested to in the fossil record.
I await each new chapter with bated breath!
Permission to come aboard, captain.
(Also, check your email.)
More than welcome Mark - window seat for you (over the wing in case we crash!).
Thanks - I'll check the mail.
It's even worse!
"The fastest observed rate of mutation fixation is too slow to account for the genetic divergence between any two species."
-Meme from this https://voxday.net/tag/evolution/
Even even worser: Read The Naked Bible, because Mauro Biglino points out the Old Testament sure reads like it's documenting the genetic manipulation and creation of humans by an old dead space ailien.
Subscription just upgraded; If there is one thing that really grates my nerves, it is reading or listening to assumptive lines like "we evolved to..." in order to advance an argument.
Look forward to this series, and hope it leads to more dogma challenges as well. Thanks
Thanks Skeptical1 - Appreciate your support and looking forward to your engagement.
Virtually everything we were "taught" aka "indoctrinated" was a lie. The Propaganda Game is the most impactful documentary I've viewed in the last 10-years. One begins thinking "How can the North Koreans be this stupid," to understanding, "Oh. My. God. It's no different here in the West."
Yep. I mean how disillusioned are we becoming about the West? Then I think, "hey I don't want to fall for that Hegelian-inspired-Marxist ploy to hate our system to the point of revolution in an attempt to 'synthesise' a utopia!" And then I think, "Nope, it really is all bullshit and the system is out to oppress us, if not kill us, and we are living under a complex lie."
Most of what we hate about the West, isn't.
My husband (who is an engineer and nobody's fool) has a great thought experiment for demonstrating the folly of Darwinism: If you put all the parts required to make a Rolls Royce into a box, and shook the box for a few million years, when you open the box, do you think you will have a fully assembled, functional car?
Hardcore Darwinian Evolutionists would say "yes"... "given enough time" - which is why the first topic on genetic entropy is an important place to start the conversation - the parts of the car break down and even the box falls apart.
I would expect to find nothing but (small) particles of the all the materials used to build a Rolls-Royce... But I may be wrong.
But it seems that this though experiment starts with the premise that we are nothing more than a (luxury) vehicle, which seems somewhat insulting.
True, the metaphor breaks down on many levels (no pun intended).
As they always do. All we can ask is for the metaphor to paint a simplistic picture. Unfortunately, people don't always understand that many things cannot be described using something as inaccurate as 'words'...