Origins Thread

[Tiger]

Imagine a world where your genes don't dictate your destiny. This isn't science fiction; it's the remarkable reality of developmental plasticity.


Enter C. elegans, the humble roundworm, whose remarkable developmental plasticity throws a fascinating wrinkle into the neo-Darwinian narrative.

Neo-Darwinism emphasizes the heritability of traits for successful adaptations to be passed on. However, developmental plasticity involves non-heritable changes. This challenges the idea that all adaptations require genetic mutations to be selected for in future generations.

Developmental Plasticity: A Worm's Eye View

Imagine a world where your genes don't dictate your destiny. This isn't science fiction; it's the remarkable reality of developm...

neodarwinianreview.blogspot.com

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

The universe is twice as old as anyone thought

The universe might be almost twice as old as we believed, being 26.7 billion years old instead of 13.7 billion.

The new theory suggests that the universe might also be made of completely different material from what most scientists previously believed.

The universe is twice as old as anyone thought, study suggests

The universe might be almost twice as old as we believed, being 26.7 billion years old instead of 13.7 billion years old.

uk.yahoo.com

 

[clarke-connolly]

The universe is twice as old as anyone thought

The universe might be almost twice as old as we believed, being 26.7 billion years old instead of 13.7 billion.

The new theory suggests that the universe might also be made of completely different material from what most scientists previously believed.

The universe is twice as old as anyone thought, study suggests

The universe might be almost twice as old as we believed, being 26.7 billion years old instead of 13.7 billion years old.

uk.yahoo.com

Does that make me twice as old ? !

 

[Fishalt]

The "story" of Jesus is written down in four contemporary or near contemporary accounts and is corroborated, not in every respect admittedly, by about two seperate Jewish and two Roman historians. These accounts are similar to any modern day eye witness accounts and are not remotely similar to Nordic myths.

This is disingenuous when you dig into it. There is little information about the existence of Jesus in Roman records, but it more or less just states he was executed during the reign of Tiberius. It appears that the described followers of Christus were regarded as a kind of minor nuisance and cult originally.

Tactius wrote:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."

Now, I will say that the Romans knew time was long, and were notorious for editing history for purposes of future historical perspective. Their Depictions of the celts in both words and art are more or less pure propaganda. The celts were reasonably developed as a civilization. Certainly they were not the mindless savages Roman art would have people believe they were.

 

[Tiger]

This is disingenuous when you dig into it. There is little information about the existence of Jesus in Roman records, but it more or less just states he was executed during the reign of Tiberius. It appears that the described followers of Christus were regarded as a kind of minor nuisance and cult originally.

Tactius wrote:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."

Now, I will say that the Romans knew time was long, and were notorious for editing history for purposes of future historical perspective. Their Depictions of the celts in both words and art are more or less pure propaganda. The celts were reasonably developed as a civilization. Certainly they were not the mindless savages Roman art would have people believe they were.

While it’s true that Romans employed propaganda to shape their historical narratives, it’s a stretch to suggest that Tacitus’s account of Jesus falls into this category.

Tacitus was a respected historian known for his accuracy and impartiality, and his mention of Jesus and the early Christians in the context of Nero’s persecution aligns with other historical accounts and archaeological evidence. Additionally, Tacitus’s primary aim was not to create propaganda but to record historical events as accurately as possible. Tacitus’s account aligns with the biblical account, an account of which he would never had read.

It’s also worth noting that the Jews who despised Christ don’t even deny Him in their Talmud.

Here’s another Tacitus quote:

"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also."

Do we discount all of Tacitus’s work or just the bits that mention Jesus?

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

Do we discount all of Tacitus’s work or just the bits that mention Jesus?

Did Tacitus say he rose from the dead after being killed?

 

[Tiger]

Did Tacitus say he rose from the dead after being killed?

He did not, not that it would make any difference to you if he did. Tacitus was a neutral commentator who didn’t discuss Christian beliefs or teachings, but focused on the spread of Christianity in Rome and the persecution faced by its adherents under Nero’s reign.

Early Christians believed the testimony of eye witnesses that discovered the tomb of Jesus was empty, despite it being sealed with a large stone and guarded by Roman soldiers.

The opponents of Jesus, such as the Jewish religious leaders and the Roman authorities were not able to produce the body of Jesus to silence the growing group of Christians. Their silence on this matter is noteworthy given the controversy surrounding His death and alleged resurrection.

 

[Hermit]

The opponents of Jesus, such as the Jewish religious leaders and the Roman authorities were not able to produce the body of Jesus to silence the growing group of Christians. Their silence on this matter is noteworthy given the controversy surrounding His death and alleged resurrection.

Interesting...can you recommend a good video on that sort of history/evidence of Jesus?

 

[Tiger]

This is an interesting perspective from a famous detective. He uses his detective prowess to investigate the historical record of Jesus.

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

That's nearly an hour long Sir.

What was his conclusion?

 

[Tiger]

That's nearly an hour long Sir.

What was his conclusion?

He went from being an atheist who wouldn’t even use the AD calendar (he used the term ‘common era’ or CE) to being a Christian.

 

[Tiger]

Worth a watch

 

[Tiger]

Scientists just discovered a new way cells control their genes — it's called 'backtracking' - Sahana Sitaraman

https://www.livescience.com/health/...s-control-their-genes-its-called-backtracking

Scientists have discovered that, when a DNA-reading enzyme moves backwards along a gene, it may do so to help control when the gene is turned on. (Clearly, this stuff did not all arise by natural selection acting on random mutation.)

 

[Tiger]

Fascinating discussion here with MIT scientist Professor - Rosalind Picard who converted to Christianity through logic discussing her reasoning with Lex Fridman.

 

[scolairebocht]

Is that Lamarkian then, Tiger?

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

Fascinating discussion here with MIT scientist Professor - Rosalind Picard who converted to Christianity through logic discussing her reasoning with Lex Fridman.

excellent, will watch this later today. Many such cases of course. intelligent people, true skeptics (not vapid fan boys), will always come to the correct conclusion

 

[Tiger]

Is that Lamarkian then, Tiger?

No, this discovery does not support Lamarkian theory.

 

[Tiger]

A question:

What are the odds of a marine endoparasitic tapeworm to be trapped in tree resin, be fossilised and discovered almost 100 million years later by a scientist?

What about a marine baby ammonite in the same type of amber?

Could the taphonomic hypothesis of floating vegetation mats increase the odds?

Ancient Marine Tapeworm Found Encased in 99-Million-Year-Old Amber | Sci.News

Paleontologists have found a partial body fossil of an ancient tapeworm preserved in mid-Cretaceous Kachin amber from Myanmar.

www.sci.news

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

Worth a watch

16 minutes Sir.

What's the gist of his argument?

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

A question: What are the odds of a marine endoparasitic tapeworm to be trapped in tree resin, be fossilised and discovered almost 100 million years later by a scientist?

What about a marine baby ammonite in the same type of amber? Could the taphonomic hypothesis of floating vegetation mats increase the odds?

None of that makes any sense to the average reader Tiger.

 

[Mad as Fish]

Fascinating discussion here with MIT scientist Professor - Rosalind Picard who converted to Christianity through logic discussing her reasoning with Lex Fridman.

She makes much of the idea that scientists don't, as a rule, appreciate that there is knowledge beyond that which can be measured. A sweeping generalism and quite unfair to many I am sure. She appears to have taken her own realisation of this rather mundane fact and inflated it to a pitch to impress her audience rather than quietly absorb it as another milestone in life's journey.

 

[Mad as Fish]

A question:

What are the odds of a marine endoparasitic tapeworm to be trapped in tree resin, be fossilised and discovered almost 100 million years later by a scientist?

What about a marine baby ammonite in the same type of amber?

Could the taphonomic hypothesis of floating vegetation mats increase the odds?

Ancient Marine Tapeworm Found Encased in 99-Million-Year-Old Amber | Sci.News

Paleontologists have found a partial body fossil of an ancient tapeworm preserved in mid-Cretaceous Kachin amber from Myanmar.

www.sci.news

It should be born in mind that all sorts of weird preservations will have occurred over the billions of years that life has been around and we will only experience a miniscule fraction of them. The ones that do pop up therefore appear remarkable, but there will be plenty more that have been destroyed by natural prrcesses or will remain hidden from our view.

 

[Mad as Fish]

Worth a watch

A few minutes in and I am already wanting to poke a stick through his spokes.

He makes much of the propostrousnous of the big bang in supporting theism, yet science itself is now questioning that very theory, so one plank at least is knocked from the platform upon which he stands.

He is also determined to set up the argument as two distinct camps and we must choose one or the other. This I find to be even more preposterous as it gives no credit to the notion that in fact there might be some middle ground, a third, fourth or infinite number of alternative theories.

From what I have seen so far he is simply saying that because we don't know everything, and maybe can't know everything, there must be a god. That is no argument, it's just a proposisition that has yet to be proven, scientifically or otherwise.

 

[Tiger]

She makes much of the idea that scientists don't, as a rule, appreciate that there is knowledge beyond that which can be measured. A sweeping generalism and quite unfair to many I am sure. She appears to have taken her own realisation of this rather mundane fact and inflated it to a pitch to impress her audience rather than quietly absorb it as another milestone in life's journey.

While it’s true that not all scientists adhere strictly to materialism or scientism, the prevalence of these perspectives within scientific discourse cannot be overlooked.

This scientist decided to grapple with existential questions in a way most don’t and never will. Her journey is a testament to people’s capacity for growth and intellectual humility.

 

[Tiger]

It should be born in mind that all sorts of weird preservations will have occurred over the billions of years that life has been around and we will only experience a miniscule fraction of them. The ones that do pop up therefore appear remarkable, but there will be plenty more that have been destroyed by natural prrcesses or will remain hidden from our view.

The odds of such events happening by random chance are astronomically low (past the point of statistical probability). The odds are infinitesimal.

The process of fossilisation is highly complex and requires specific conditions to occur. For instance in the case of the tree resin entrapment, not only must the organism come into contact with the resin, but it must also avoid decomposition and undergo burial and mineralisation to become fossilised.

The absence of evidence for similar occurrences has to be considered too.

 

[Tiger]

A few minutes in and I am already wanting to poke a stick through his spokes.

He makes much of the propostrousnous of the big bang in supporting theism, yet science itself is now questioning that very theory, so one plank at least is knocked from the platform upon which he stands.

He is also determined to set up the argument as two distinct camps and we must choose one or the other. This I find to be even more preposterous as it gives no credit to the notion that in fact there might be some middle ground, a third, fourth or infinite number of alternative theories.

What suggestions do you have for a ‘middle ground’?

From what I have seen so far he is simply saying that because we don't know everything, and maybe can't know everything, there must be a god. That is no argument, it's just a proposisition that has yet to be proven, scientifically or otherwise.

I don’t think this is an accurate representation of his talk.

He simply scrutinised the contrasting worldviews of naturalism and theism, emphasising how each framework addresses fundamental aspects of existence. He argues that theism, positing the existence of a transcendent deity, offers a more comprehensive explanation for phenomena like the universe’s origin, fine-tuning, consciousness, morality and human dignity. Conversely, he critiques naturalism for its inability to account for these facets of human experience, highlighting the limitations of materialism, determinatism, and scientism in providing satisfactory explanations.

To quote John Lennox…

“If the atheists are right, the mind that does the science is the product of a mindless unguided process. Now, if you knew that your computer was the product of a mindless unguided process, you wouldn’t trust it. So, to me atheism undermines the rationality I need to do science.”

 

[Tiger]

Hot off the press, this interview with an Astrophysicist is fascinating.

He explores the fine tuning of nature and the universe, focusing on earths unique composition and formation. He highlights how Earth’s abundance of specific elements, its stable magnetosphere, and its protection from cosmic radiation are all conducive to life, showcasing the precision of celestial events that contributed to Earth’s habitability.

Beyond astronomy, the conversation reflects on the broader trend of scientific inquiry, where deeper exploration consistently reveals layers of complexity across various disciplines.

 

[Mad as Fish]

The odds of such events happening by random chance are astronomically low (past the point of statistical probability). The odds are infinitesimal.

The process of fossilisation is highly complex and requires specific conditions to occur. For instance in the case of the tree resin entrapment, not only must the organism come into contact with the resin, but it must also avoid decomposition and undergo burial and mineralisation to become fossilised.

The absence of evidence for similar occurrences has to be considered too.

The odds of anything happening by random chance are witheringly low.

 

[Mad as Fish]

What suggestions do you have for a ‘middle ground’?

I don’t think this is an accurate representation of his talk.

He simply scrutinised the contrasting worldviews of naturalism and theism, emphasising how each framework addresses fundamental aspects of existence. He argues that theism, positing the existence of a transcendent deity, offers a more comprehensive explanation for phenomena like the universe’s origin, fine-tuning, consciousness, morality and human dignity. Conversely, he critiques naturalism for its inability to account for these facets of human experience, highlighting the limitations of materialism, determinatism, and scientism in providing satisfactory explanations.

To quote John Lennox…

“If the atheists are right, the mind that does the science is the product of a mindless unguided process. Now, if you knew that your computer was the product of a mindless unguided process, you wouldn’t trust it. So, to me atheism undermines the rationality I need to do science.”

I am drawn to one truth above all else and that is there is far more out there than we will ever know and we haven't the mental capacity to grasp. We therefore find ourselves flopping around in the shallows thinking that one day the mysteries of the deep will all be revealed to us, if we really really think about it. Yet we are simply not equipped to explore it so we content ourselves with the invention of entities that are responsible for the great unknown.

It may be that this is the correct explanation, but I see it as a cop out, it's just too easy an answer and lets us off the hook of having to look for answers that many will find uncomfortable. Perhaps there are energies that science hasn't recognised and measured, maybe such notions as telepathy and the afterlife are real things, perhaps the universe is an intelligence in its own right.

Could mankind cope with these sort of truths?

 

[clarke-connolly]

The odds of anything happening by random chance are witheringly low.

If anything gets virtually un-limited opportunities, then it can happen ~ ~ I suppose the question is ~ ~ What gives virtually un-limited opportunities for anything to happen ? !

 

[Tiger]

Can we all pause for a moment to wish Jimbo Jambo a happy Easter. He’s in exile at the moment over on the Isle, however we all know how much he misses this thread, his most favourite thread in the whole wide world. He can’t take his eyes off it.

Happy Easter James!

 

[Mad as Fish]

I am drawn to one truth above all else and that is there is far more out there than we will ever know and we haven't the mental capacity to grasp. We therefore find ourselves flopping around in the shallows thinking that one day the mysteries of the deep will all be revealed to us, if we really really think about it. Yet we are simply not equipped to explore it so we content ourselves with the invention of entities that are responsible for the great unknown.

It may be that this is the correct explanation, but I see it as a cop out, it's just too easy an answer and lets us off the hook of having to look for answers that many will find uncomfortable. Perhaps there are energies that science hasn't recognised and measured, maybe such notions as telepathy and the afterlife are real things, perhaps the universe is an intelligence in its own right.

Could mankind cope with these sort of truths?

Even the bible says as much -

And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding,

Philippians 4:7

 

[Tiger]

This video is an exploration of the complexity of DNA and its implications for the argument of ‘fine tuning’. The speaker explains the concept of DNA coding and splicing using clear analogies, illustrating how DNA contains instructions for creating various proteins.

This video emphasises the sophistication of genetic coding and challenges the notion of naturalistic explanations for such complexity.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

View: https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1774570273561337985

 

[clarke-connolly]

View: https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1774570273561337985

Dawkins was always very arrogant ~ ~ He is wise-ing up as he gets older.

He at least he is able to, Work Out How Dangerous Islam is.

 

[Tiger]

The blue and green haired atheist debates with the ability you might imagine a multicoloured haired eejit would debate.

 

[Tiger]

 

[Tiger]

View: https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1774570273561337985

Dawkins is a charlatan. A charlatan that frequented Epstein’s island.

End of story.

 

[Tiger]

I am drawn to one truth above all else and that is there is far more out there than we will ever know and we haven't the mental capacity to grasp. We therefore find ourselves flopping around in the shallows thinking that one day the mysteries of the deep will all be revealed to us, if we really really think about it. Yet we are simply not equipped to explore it so we content ourselves with the invention of entities that are responsible for the great unknown.

It may be that this is the correct explanation, but I see it as a cop out, it's just too easy an answer and lets us off the hook of having to look for answers that many will find uncomfortable. Perhaps there are energies that science hasn't recognised and measured, maybe such notions as telepathy and the afterlife are real things, perhaps the universe is an intelligence in its own right.

Could mankind cope with these sort of truths?

As humans, we must acknowledge the limitations of our understanding when confronted with the vastness and complexity of the universe. It’s humbling to recognise that there are aspects of existence that may elude our comprehension, regardless of our efforts to grasp them.

However that should not limit our ability to question the conventional wisdom on certain theories that are full of holes.

 

[Tiger]

Uh oh, Jimbo has been released from his lunatic asylum and it looks like he’s spent most of his time away looking like this.

Expect zero debate and lots of pointless mud slinging to return to this site. Our holiday from him is over.