THINKING 101: FROM THE SINGULARITY

This topic is listed in Off Topic. It has been viewed 3,201 times and 261 replies have been made.

<< Prev  
cwang50LEVEL 55

Reply by cwang50GOLD

IT'S THAT TIME AGAIN IF YOU ARE INTERESTED!!!

VOCAL CREATIONS MONTHLY CHALLENGE

CLICK HERE: http://www.singsnap.com/karaoke/forum/topic/ad17d836?lastPage=9b1c6#last

TELL A FRIEND TO TELL A FRIEND, ITS THAT TIME OF MONTH TO MAKE A VOCAL CREATION

cwang50LEVEL 55

Reply by cwang50GOLD

Although most have been exposed to alternatives to their social constructed account of Homo sapiens to date, their exposure was in a setting that only required memorization to a test after which the knowledge exposed was put in the waste basket of the mind as it was not on a repeated path for retention. The path of all life on earth from the first self replicating gene is well explained as most probable. Below are two very good presentations of an account of Homo sapiens and their social constructs of race in 2 parts... Enjoy should you have time

cwang50LEVEL 55

Reply by cwang50GOLD

ONE MUST PICK AND CHOOSE WHEN PRAYER IS REVELANT

PRAYER BACKFIRED

LIGHTNING STRIKE!

>

> Diamond D's brothel began construction on an expansion of their building to increase their ever-growing business. In response, the local Baptist Church across the street started a campaign to block the business from expanding -- with morning, afternoon, and evening prayer sessions at their church. Work on Diamond D's progressed right up until the week before the grand reopening when lightning struck the whorehouse and burned it to the ground!

>

> After the cat-house was burned to the ground by the lightning strike, the church folks were rather smug in their outlook, bragging about "the power of prayer."

> But late last week Jill Diamond, the owner/madam, sued the church, the preacher and the entire congregation on the grounds that the church ... "was ultimately responsible for the demise of her building and her business -- either through direct or indirect divine actions or means."

> In its reply to the court, the church vehemently and voraciously denied any and all responsibility or any connection to the building's demise.

>

> The crusty old judge read through the plaintiff's complaint and the defendant's reply, and at the opening hearing he commented, "I don't know how the hell I'm going to decide this case, but it appears from the paperwork, that we now have a whorehouse owner who staunchly believes in the power of prayer, and an entire church congregation that thinks it's all bullshit!"

cwang50LEVEL 55

Reply by cwang50GOLD

How did skin color evolve?

The eyes are for seeing, however many will think falsely that the eyes can depict truth, where it can only aid in depicting outcomes. What does your eyes tell your brain when you see one from another culture, specifically, the largest organ of that Homo sapiens, the outer skin? Your social rearing probably has given you an outcome that soothes the brain and holds to familiarity in repetition. Surely the differences in skin hue should dictate the race of the individual seen. Most accept that each culture is a different and separate race of humans. Some of the titles given to describe the perceived human races are black man, white man, red man, yellow man, brown man etc. If you are one that agreed with the statements above, you are in error and many thinks as you, never being exposed or retained the scientific explanation, which from the evidence is deemed and accepted as the most probable account. It is true that human skin color varies around the world, It ranges from a very dark brown among some Africans, Australian Aborigines, and Melanesians to a near yellowish pink among some Northern Europeans. There are no people who have true black, white, red, or yellow skin.
The acceptance of those descriptive terms are from social constructs and not of biological reality (which further demonstrate that we live in a tangible world from intangible perspectives), as there is no such thing as race other than the taxonomy “human race” encompassing every human dead or alive as the same species.
The reason for skin differences lies in our DNA. Tracing DNA lines, scientists have been able to figure out when the human ancestors began moving out of Africa into different climates. Once the migrations had begun, the human ancestors had to adapt to other varying climates. UV(ultraviolet) rays are known mutagens and can change the DNA of a species over time. UV rays triggers the DNA to produce melanin, a dark skin pigment that helps block UV rays. Therefore, individuals that live nearer the equator have darker skin colors all the time, while individuals living the higher latitudes on Earth may only produce significant amounts of melanin in the summer when UV rays are more direct. No matter your skin color, it can be traced back to human ancestors that once lived on the continents of Africa and Asia. Natural Selection determines which skin color is the most favorable and over time will weed out the unfavorable skin colors. Through migration and Natural Selection, these skin colors changed and adapted over time to produce what we see now. This is true for most types of coloration in plants and animals, darker colors tend to be more prevalent in a blending of traits in skin color than lighter skin colors are.
“Skin color is due primarily to the presence of a pigment called melanin, which is controlled by at least 6 genes. Both light and dark complexioned people have melanin. However, two forms are produced—pheomelanin, which is red to yellow in color, and eumelanin, which is dark brown to black. People with light complexioned skin mostly produce pheomelanin, while those with dark colored skin mostly produce eumelanin. In addition, individuals differ in the number and size of melanin particles. The latter two variables are more important in determining skin color than the percentages of the different kinds of melanin. In lighter skin, color is also affected by red cells in blood flowing close to the skin. To a lesser extent, the color is affected by the presence of fat under the skin and carotene, a reddish-orange pigment in the skin. Hair color is also due to the presence of melanin. Nature has selected for people with darker skin in tropical latitudes, especially in non-forested regions, where ultraviolet radiation from the sun is usually the most intense. Melanin acts as a protective biological shield against ultraviolet radiation. By doing this, it helps to prevent sunburn damage that could result in DNA changes and, subsequently, several kinds of malignant with prolonged exposure to the sun. Some Northwest Europeans have substantially lost the ability to tan as a result of relaxed natural selection. Their skin burns and peels rather than tans. This is due to them producing a defective form of a skin protein Mc1r (melanocortin-1 receptor) which is necessary for the production of melanin. They are at a distinct disadvantage in tropical and subtropical environments. Not only do they suffer the discomfort of readily burning, but they are at a much higher risk for skin cancer. The same is true of albinos (complete or partial absence of pigment in the skin, hair and eyes.)”

cwang50LEVEL 55

Edited reply by cwang50GOLD

A HARD PILL TO SWALLOW

It took a long time for me as well to get to this point that the poster did...so glad I have and repeat this message as often as I can in as many ways that I can

I don't really fear or even dread death because I think it will be exactly the same as before we were born...a non-existent status ....a total lack of consciousness. Probably, the closest we come to this condition while alive is when we're under general anesthesia or when we're in a very deep sleep.

And why should we should we fear returning to the void from which we came anyway. As Mark Twain said, " I was dead for billions of years before I was born and I wasn't the least bit inconvenienced by it".

I DO feel bad, however, that I won't be around to enjoy events to come. The future holds many surprises and pleasures and it pains me to know I'll miss them. And I DO dread the process of dying, but not the idea of death itself.

Sure, like everybody, I'd dearly love to see my parents and friends again, but I have to be intellectually honest with myself and admit there is no evidence that consciousness survives death, NDEs notwithstanding.

Neuroscience is very convincing on the subject. The living brain generates consciousness by unknown and yet to be understood biochemical reactions, but when its cells die...when its neurons stop firing and communicating, your awareness, your consciousness most certainly comes to an end, also. There is no empirical evidence that awareness supersedes physical death.

That's a bitter pill to swallow. We all resist the idea that everything will end someday. That fear, that dread is one of the driving forces behind the invention of religion. As someone once said, a belief in the afterlife is for those who are afraid of the dark. But, as much as I’d like to be comforted by a belief in life after death, I’m convinced that the truth is, it doesn’t exist.

And that makes it all the more important to make the best of the time we have in this, our only life.
Doug Hullander (and like minded people)

cwang50LEVEL 55

Edited reply by cwang50GOLD

In the US there is much conversation about the Nevada incident. I captured the below comment as a response, very intriguing.

commenter: "The irony of religious stupidity: a crowd of people in Las Vegas sing God Bless America and then moments later a gunman opens fire killing them. We must conclude God was thinking, um no, fuck you and fuck America, or that God doesn't exist."

My response: " Which one of the 1500+ would take credit for this,, it doesn't matter, its followers will make excuses for it with one of their many repeated slogans , any will suffice, just choose one, they all will fit quite intangibly well."

The expansion is very real in all directions and possibilities. The ability to get news/info keep increasing. Once it was non verbal only, then on to verbal, then documentation through progressive means and now it is delivered in hours and in some cases a matter of minutes and it will continue to increase, allowing fingers to be pointed instantly, and judges and jurys are impatient in waiting for facts (Trevon Martin case). The expansion is very real in all directions and possibilities.

cwang50LEVEL 55

Edited reply by cwang50GOLD

DNA

The discovery of the DNA was made by the Swiss physician Friedrich Miescher. It was first called as a “nuclein” because it resides in the nuclei of a cell. This reconstruction of the first ever model of the DNA molecule contains some of the original parts used by Crick and Watson in 1953. Their breakthrough made it possible to finally understand both how organisms pass on their genes, and how the workings of cells are governed. This now-familiar structure is still at the heart of huge scientific endeavours.
And with genome sequencing becoming ever cheaper, we’re only going to become more familiar with it.

cwang50LEVEL 55

Reply by cwang50GOLD

What are social constructs

Science: Social constructionism or the social construction of reality (also social concept) is a theory of knowledge in sociology and communication theory that examines the development of jointly constructed understandings of the world that form the basis for shared assumptions about reality. The theory centers on the notions that human beings rationalize their experience by creating models of the social world and share and reify these models through language.

Lay person: Its what humans do when they don't know what the hell they talking about because they don't wanna admit not knowing, so they make up shit. OR one could say that because we live in a physical (tangible) world we operate from intangible perspectives until means supersede once held perceptions, utilizing our mediator between the two, the evolved/evolving mammal brain.

Perhaps you have your own define, care to share it?

cwang50LEVEL 55

Edited (at 3:45 PM) reply by cwang50GOLD

Is it morally defensible to say that there is only one god without making a head count first?

Belfast-boy

Reply by Belfast-boyPATRON

True friends are there for you - Others are there for themselves.

Is it morally defensible to say that there is only one god without making a head count first?cwang50

Is it morally defensible to say there is NO God without making that same head count?

ImaChristian2LEVEL 100

Reply by ImaChristian2GOLD +2

Is it morally defensible to say that there is only one god without making a head count first?cwang50

Is it morally defensible to say there is NO God without making that same head count?Belfast-boy

Moral values and duties are objective, providing moral grounds for believing in God. if your like me, and believe God exists, then the objectivity of moral values, moral duties, and moral accountability is secured, if your adamant God does not exist, you can still decide to be good and kind, and....for those of us who chose to believe, moral values and duties are objective, this provides moral grounds for believing in God. So the answer is always somewhere if you Google. Unless you search for, "why doesn't Belfast-boy get off the street, out of the storm, since he has no reason to be working. He doesn't need the money, because, paying for my SingSnap Gold would not have been so affordable. (He Said, anyway) Aw well. I can't convince him, the harm, He can go stay out in Ophelia, and play with Mother Nature and hope Father time doesn't nail him for being a stubborn , man. Maybe he likes it when he needlessly worries me. Well I won't be around for the head count. Bye

<< Prev