Idgaf.
Edgy!
No, that's not what I meant. But then you knew that, you're just being a scamp for funsies. Rather, I meant it isn't a force in the physics sense, like electromagnetism or gravity. It's a process.
It seems I still haven't made my argument clear. A log of wood burning is a process too. A chain reaction of dominos falling over is a process. But they increase entropy. Evolution doesn't. It falls upwards. It does the opposite of what the rest of the universe does. It causes order and complexity. Unlike the burning log or the dominos or a growing crystal, the underlying principle is not explained or modeled easily with the known laws of physics.
How am I supposed to know that about you in advance?
You weren't. You could have, but I didn't expect you to have read my blog, that's why I told you because I had the impression you are not used to not being the only smart guy in the room.
Yes, procedural generation on computers is artificially contrived. However, this does not mean it cannot naturally occur. Humans sometimes artificially produce crystals. Does this mean crystallization cannot naturally occur?
I said nothing of the sort. It seems I have not made my argument clear. I am saying that it is not implausible or absurd to suggest that a crystal of such kind and beauty and perfection and size might point to a different origin than mere chaos and static noise, since naturally occurring crystals emanating from such chaos usually have different qualities. I'm pointing out the the objective difference between a sequence from the Mandelbrot set and a Waterhouse painting.
It can do this because the 'rule set' generating the complexity can be simple enough that it can come about in an emergent way, for example the interplay between animals, their environment, and heredity.
I don't disagree with that. I only postulate that the original rule set might be the result of something different than a meaningless coincidence.
That's a rather small sample size. You've also left out Earth, an extant example of a planet where life arose.
There is no similar overt example of the supernatural we can all look at, nod and agree exists. It isn't additional examples of the supernatural you're searching for, but any.
I'm not searching for any, I find life itself supernatural enough as it is; meanwhile, I have the impression that no example I give you would satisfy your own high standard for supernaturality, as you would insist in each instance that it's either a fraud or a misunderstanding, unwilling or unable to at least entertain the thought or to reserve some doubt. Where I am gladly willing to say "I know that I don't know", you already know, and I will not waste your or my time trying to change your mind or sway your world view. Maybe you'll do so out of your own accord one day, when you experience yourself a phenomenon so mind-blowing that it defies all cartesianism. Or you don't and remain convinced you've always been right. Fine with me either way.
Can you define the Problem of Interaction for me?
Isn't that this philosophical problem mind-matter dualists are concerned with?
What I meant when I said that they laughed at Columbus, but also Bozo, is that the fact that certain historical luminaries were mocked in their day does not mean every guy with an unpopular idea is an uncelebrated genius destined to be recognized as such by future generations.
Another instance where I have seemingly not made my argument clear enough.
I never said or implied that every guy with an unpopular idea is an uncelebrated genius destined to be recognized as such by future generations.
Man, I suck at English, it seems.
I said (or meant to say) it's dumb, idiotic, stupid, unwise, the opposite of smart and intelligent, a disservice to knowledge, enlightenment and the pursuit of scientific insight, to join the chorus of laughter at every guy with an unpopular idea, since some of them have historically proven to be geniuses, some in their lifetime, others by future generations.
Youtube is full of guys like this with "free energy magnet motors", "water powered cars", and various supposed antigravity devices. You don't need a crystal ball to predict with near perfect accuracy which of them is onto something, just a highschool level physics education.
A believer could make the same argument. History is full of "Piltdown Men" and alchemists claiming they could produce the Philosopher's stone, and dinosaur museums are full of skeletons made entirely of plastic, imaginations allegedly extrapolated from tiniest bone fragments invisible to the public, and the 20th century is full of an entire species of scientists preoccupied with building ever larger particle accelerators and spaceships piercing deeper into the empty vastness of space, but so caught up in the fantasy universe of their own creation that they have become unable to communicate what it is exactly what they are trying to find or to achieve, what they have found and how it can be applied to help mankind on earth get any closer to a better world tapping into the potential for peace, health, abundance, prosperity and justice.
You don't need a TV to predict which of them is onto something, just an open eye to see and a heart to feel.
I'd like to see some repeatable demonstrations of the supernatural. Not to other supernaturalists but to scientists in lab conditions.
So do I, so do I.
Another comparable gamble would be betting on the specific Nigerian nobleman who has mailed you about helping him move his fortune out of the country being legit, where all the others were frauds.
Sure, there have been a lot of guys like him who were all scam artists. But what if this one isn't?? What if he's legit?? The reward is so great, surely it's worth the risk? Just gotta keep trying until we hit on an actual Nigerian prince with an actual fortune he's looking to share.
Just gotta keep building bigger particle accelerators and bigger space rockets, the answer to the question about life, the universe and everything awaits right around the corner! These alchemists surely are legit, unlike those of the centuries before!
Your sword cuts both ways, handle it carefully.