You must be really annoyed by me. While I'm rather chilled.
The 2 last replied I had with you over there (not here) was your weird "God is simple" thing there it was:
You "God is a remarkably simple entity."
_Entity_ is not really a precise term there, but buzzword or slogan. OF COURSE phrases like "God" are flat and simple. It is a similar term like "TASTY!" - an emotional expression if you like some food. Just in your case if you see some complex thing you say "God" instead of "TASTY!"
You "As a non-physical entity,"
Slogans are physical as neuronal clusters - with brain insuries, amnesia or dementia such slogans can be forgotten...like names and events, too.
You " a mind is not composed of parts,"
Strange that different drugs and narcotics are capable to distort all known minds by observation.
You "and its salient properties, like self-consciousness,"
Self-consiciousness is a feeling of time duration (linked before but ignored) - that is why differents stages are experienced in being awake states, dream states incl. lucid dreaming as becoming selfaware in a dream.
You "rationality, and volition, are essential to it."
Chains of thoughts/thinking processes are brain processes. Willpower is realization by having chains of thoughts about situations and problems in the already existing universe. There are no thinking processes nor is there any willpower about anything without a timespace continuum for the same reason that there is no proper atmosphere to sing a song on the moon.
You " In contrast to the contingent and variegated universe with all its inexplicable quantities and constants, a divine mind is startlingly simple."
Because the term _divinity_ shall be re-defined as simplistic, because the defense does not work otherwise, as we see with the sophistry (inconsistent one you propose here).
You "Certainly such a mind may have complex ideas—it may be thinking,"
The term mind is defined by its traits/characteristics... like the active performance of processes like thinking aka several sequences of one thought after another - it is not a thing for itself detached from its own traits.
You " but the mind itself is a remarkably simple entity"
Slogan/buzzword is the term you search for, not "entity". ;-)
Indeed a term like "God" remains a remarkably simple (and meaningless) phrase.
AND
For your other weird claim that cells (modern ones not the first cell) would be built as factories.
My reply was in the context of your answering me with a video adressing replication of already established cell T-DNA. This was also again with the
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK6360/
publication you ignored.
Where you just went on and on with more and more off-topic stuff (backpaddling and goal moving).
The original topic you tried to bury under more and more new ones was cells as they are today - to be fabricated and not born/mitosis results.
Then you switched to abiogenesis topics(LUCA) not cells in general - Because you wanted to suggest it is:
molecules swirling around - just 1 step - LUCA. (but jumped away from this strawman as it got too hot there)
THEN copy and pasted more stuff which was either about condition restrictions or that you want a specific pathway to have only 1 specific result but no other variations and a lot more topics from
You Quote: "https://******************************/t1279p75-abiogenesis-is-mathematically-impossible#7309"
Your whole doing of jumping from topic to topic was performing poetry in disguise. Poetry "appearing as scientific" or as a discussion between 2 people (me and you) as only 1 topic.
(While it was alone 4+ topics or so)
Like someone would "talk" together with another person about reflection, refraction and dispersion of light in water droplets appearing as rainbows and you would just copy and paste scientific problems with light bending effects (ignoring all known solutions), while claiming the "Pot of Gold" at the end of the rainbow is still never touched by any publication about rainbows.
While "the Pot of Gold" is and remains a detached myth the defender artifically "poetizes" onto the topic as a foreign body.
The Pot of the Gaps
You do the same with cell machinery/proteins and the God of the gaps.
That is why in the youtube debate Dapper Dino asked you several times why you demand omniscience from other human beings/scientists and you did not really wanted to get to it - (fully on purpose)
By not demanding omniscience from scientists would basically be an admission by your side about your own dogmatic bias to push your weird poetry like a parasite on any given publication and opportunity you see.
Like you also reply to all comments with off-topic and topic overjumping copy&pasting your monologues, too.
They stil remain poems in a confusing only in disguise as "On-topic meaningful or insightful replies".
You should think about changing your career and be open as a modern art poet rather than a "debater", "missionary" or whatever you see yourself.
Last edited:
