Rejecting evolution with science...

[Swa]

sigh ... you cant converse equally WRT to neuroscience.

First lets start with the basics. Define the type of evidence you want unfortunately the brain doesnt work on languages it works on chemical messengers so first reformulate your question WRT to neurochemistry

Oh just shut up please. You NEVER bring any evidence to the table and only resort to red herrings and non sequiturs. You have just accepted that there can't be anything more to reality than the photons picked up by the eye. That is not a conclusions reached through any experiment it is your metaphysical assumption.

Actually, I reported you for telling Riax to shut up

And then act like you have no idea what's going on and change what the conversation said. Well done in illustrating your deceptive tactics.

 

[RiaX]

you know i did a MALDI-TOF spectrum analysis on the rat brain it has over 800 000 proteins D: ... proteomics is a pain

 

[Splinter]

And then act like you have no idea what's going on and change what the conversation said. Well done in illustrating your deceptive tactics.

What are you babbling about? I responded to you telling Riax to shut up, mused upon whether I should report you, had a good laugh at you stating that Riax never brings any evidence to the table (oh the irony), reported you and then came back later to find all these posts deleted.

And then queried said deletions. So what, exactly, is duplicitous about that? Other than you demonstrating your parrot behaviour again and mimicking my earlier accusation against you for deceitfully claiming you did not "know" empirex in PD.

I'd block you like most but you are far to entertaining in your ridiculousness

 

[RiaX]

Yeah you will eventually get tired of his nonsense

 

[Swa]

And then queried said deletions. So what, exactly, is duplicitous about that? Other than you demonstrating your parrot behaviour again and mimicking my earlier accusation against you for deceitfully claiming you did not "know" empirex in PD.

So you have a problem with supposedly deceitful behaviour yet engage in it yourself. Hypocrisy is thy name Spunkywunky.

 

[Sherbang]

sigh ... you cant converse equally WRT to neuroscience.

First lets start with the basics. Define the type of evidence you want unfortunately the brain doesnt work on languages it works on chemical messengers so first reformulate your question WRT to neurochemistry

I want evidence for the claims you made (your claims were not formulated WRT neurochemistry).
But OK. Please give me evidence of the mechanism or process by which neurochemical activity 'becomes' or 'manifests' thought, consciousness, awareness and self awareness. Please give evidence that the relationship between neurochemical activity and consiousness is more than correlation (i.e. back up your claim that consiousness is caused by, or is a manifestation of, neurochemical activity.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

I want evidence for the claims you made (your claims were not formulated WRT neurochemistry).
But OK. Please give me evidence of the mechanism or process by which neurochemical activity 'becomes' or 'manifests' thought, consciousness, awareness and self awareness. Please give evidence that the relationship between neurochemical activity and consiousness is more than correlation (i.e. back up your claim that consiousness is caused by, or is a manifestation of, neurochemical activity.

1) Consume LSD
2) Observe change in neurochemical makeup of the brain, and thereafter the change in conscious experience

 

[Splinter]

So you have a problem with supposedly deceitful behaviour yet engage in it yourself. Hypocrisy is thy name Spunkywunky.

Hehehe. You are so funny come on, tell me what deceitful activity was I involved in. I look forward to your ludicrous construct or avoidance of answering this question.

 

[Sherbang]

1) Consume LSD
2) Observe change in neurochemical makeup of the brain, and thereafter the change in conscious experience

Have done. Please give evidence that the relationship between neurochemical activity and consiousness is more than correlation.

 

[porchrat]

1) Consume LSD
2) Observe change in neurochemical makeup of the brain, and thereafter the change in conscious experience

Dr. Walter Bishop... is that you?

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Have done. Please give evidence that the relationship between neurochemical activity and consiousness is more than correlation.

I think we're having the same discussion in the other thread. But anyway, how is this different from ingesting cyanide and then dying as a result? Is that also only correlation?

Dr. Walter Bishop... is that you?

I.. uh.. Oh dear. Peter! Peter! I want to go home...

 

[Techne]

I want evidence for the claims you made (your claims were not formulated WRT neurochemistry).
But OK. Please give me evidence of the mechanism or process by which neurochemical activity 'becomes' or 'manifests' thought, consciousness, awareness and self awareness. Please give evidence that the relationship between neurochemical activity and consiousness is more than correlation (i.e. back up your claim that consiousness is caused by, or is a manifestation of, neurochemical activity.

I think the idea that the brain and the mind (thoughts and consciousness) are numerically identical have been refuted.
The Immaterial Aspects of Thought are pretty well defended as well.

 

[Techne]

I think we're having the same discussion in the other thread. But anyway, how is this different from ingesting cyanide and then dying as a result? Is that also only correlation?

At best it demonstrates that human thought and consciousness are dependent on a functioning brain (i.e. a material substrate). It does not demonstrate that these processes are not immaterial.

 

[JonnStar]

That's because you're not really listening to the counter arguments. Granted that's because of one particular group on here.

I lived at least counter argument for a long time

Well that's just it, you don't have trouble seeing it because that's what you believe. But none of that is based on evidence but on numerous assumptions that have been made. It all comes down to having faith no matter which view you have.

How much evidence would you like!!?? hahaha

No listen I am really not interested in trying to find words to describe the difference. Like 1 + 1 = 2 vs quantifying something no one is even sure exists.

There are plenty of non-religious counter arguments. Why is this such a hard reality to accept? If God exists it is a very real possibility. Just shrugging it off seems more like personal incredulity.

Because the foundation of it already begins with a big assumption and then builds from there. The foundation of the theory of evolution begins with an observation.

If the two are mutually exclusive (which they may not be) and we side with the one that has no sort of merit towards credibility or proof or observation whatsoever then really for the life of me I give up.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

At best it demonstrates that human thought and consciousness are dependent on a functioning brain (i.e. a material substrate). It does not demonstrate that these processes are not immaterial.

Indeed. Except the immaterial is by definition imperceptible, so how will we ever know if something is really immaterial or not? One can make anything up, as Deepak Chopra gleefully does, and just claim it to be beyond our human senses.

 

[Techne]

Indeed. Except the immaterial is by definition imperceptible, so how will we ever know if something is really immaterial or not? One can make anything up, as Deepak Chopra gleefully does, and just claim it to be beyond our human senses.

Our definitions probably differ. Anyway, I think it is probably better to distinguish between senses and the intellect.

Senses, I would agree, are capable of sensing anything that is corporeal i.e. material or physical and not what is immaterial. The intellect, on the other hand, is capable of discovering or at least approximate the essence or nature of something. And I think a good argument can be made that that is an immaterial operation.

 

[Swa]

I lived at least counter argument for a long time

I can't make out what you're saying here.

Because the foundation of it already begins with a big assumption and then builds from there. The foundation of the theory of evolution begins with an observation.

If the two are mutually exclusive (which they may not be) and we side with the one that has no sort of merit towards credibility or proof or observation whatsoever then really for the life of me I give up.

The foundation of the theory of evolution begins with the assumption that there was a blob of genes that changed into all the complexity we see today. Now even ignoring the problem that no essential part of this process has ever been witnessed and would go against what is actually observed, what you are still left with is based entirely on misconception. Science says "if common descent then pattern" and not "if and only if common descent then pattern." As hard as it may be for you to believe what we see is what we expect to see if all organisms were made in their current forms. The presence of a pattern is not indicative of common descent and it's not a valid scientific conclusion.

The evidence you speak of requires interpretation and with two conflicting world views to start with there are two ways to interpret it. Your observation rests on an assumption of "if". Don't make the mistake of assuming that since you can examine common descent it makes it the valid position.

 

[RiaX]

I want evidence for the claims you made (your claims were not formulated WRT neurochemistry).
But OK. Please give me evidence of the mechanism or process by which neurochemical activity 'becomes' or 'manifests' thought, consciousness, awareness and self awareness. Please give evidence that the relationship between neurochemical activity and consiousness is more than correlation (i.e. back up your claim that consiousness is caused by, or is a manifestation of, neurochemical activity.

Woah these arent easy questions to answer. However you speak as if the brain has a secondary mode of action. For example when an individual is in love there is an increase in oxytocin within the body. This release is ordered by the brain. Your brain controls EVERYTHING and it does so with chemicals.

Various chemicals like monoamine neurotransmitters (dopamine, 5-HT and so on) and these are the feel good hormones and increase in them boosts the pleasure centers with the brain. (cocaine works by blocking the reuptake of these (it also blocks NA))

Consciousness is caused by neurochemical activity. Everything is, right down to your breathing. The master gland in the brain is responsible for every hormone in your body. For you to fall asleep the brain needs to send a signal for the body to release melatonin.

Unfortunately I cannot provide the details that you satisfy you. You see the brain is probably the most complex object known to science, naturally its secrets will not be easy to unlock nor will the detailed science be such a simple task that a lay man can understand - that includes me. Im reminded everytime I see a neurologist's textbooks.

However to say that anything the brain does that is not caused by neurochemical activity is simply .... nonsensical. Even generating action potentials is done this way. The brain works on its own accord there is no spiritual power behind it, it will even augment your taste to ensure you are providing the correct nutrients for it. If anything with the complexity of the brain, its more likely the brain is capable of creating god than god is creating a brain.

How do you think the brains works ?

I wonder if there is anyone here who specializes in neurophysiology

 

[Techne]

Woah these arent easy questions to answer. However you speak as if the brain has a secondary mode of action. For example when an individual is in love there is an increase in oxytocin within the body. This release is ordered by the brain. Your brain controls EVERYTHING and it does so with chemicals.

Various chemicals like monoamine neurotransmitters (dopamine, 5-HT and so on) and these are the feel good hormones and increase in them boosts the pleasure centers with the brain. (cocaine works by blocking the reuptake of these (it also blocks NA))

Consciousness is caused by neurochemical activity. Everything is, right down to your breathing. The master gland in the brain is responsible for every hormone in your body. For you to fall asleep the brain needs to send a signal for the body to release melatonin.

Unfortunately I cannot provide the details that you satisfy you. You see the brain is probably the most complex object known to science, naturally its secrets will not be easy to unlock nor will the detailed science be such a simple task that a lay man can understand - that includes me. Im reminded everytime I see a neurologist's textbooks.

However to say that anything the brain does that is not caused by neurochemical activity is simply .... nonsensical. Even generating action potentials is done this way.

Even if all the physiological aspects of the brain are understood, it still won't demonstrate that the intellectual operation of thought is or is not an immaterial operation.

The brain works on its own accord there is no spiritual power behind it, it will even augment your taste to ensure you are providing the correct nutrients for it. If anything with the complexity of the brain, its more likely the brain is capable of creating god than god is creating a brain.

Language matters. The brain is capable of generating thoughts about everything you can think of. Whether God exists or not, it cannot create God unless you have some interesting definition of God. What is it btw? You haven't provided your understanding of the concept of God or faith.

Also, have you had some time to ponder whether evolution is random or not?

 

[RiaX]

No I have not ... sorry.

Language doesnt matter, you are mistaken in that aspect. Just because you think in your native tongue that does not mean the brain is working in your language ... again the brain only has two cards to play, chemical and electrical

this is why the brain cant feel pain