Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • Incorrect. it is how the term is used in the literature. So yes it is the same a

    Incorrect. it is how the term is used in the literature. So yes it is the same as left-handedness. It merely suggests that the outcome is probabilistic and modifiable rather than fully deterministic. In other words, ‘the gender issue has spread to all the sciences’ to prevent…

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-10 19:59:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822362249815789804

    Reply addressees: @Re_Own @Saturnus_nine @vincentshauling @WALLABEEDON

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822347896315949150

  • MORE ON GESTATION AND HANDEDNESS Use search engines of research papers, don’t as

    MORE ON GESTATION AND HANDEDNESS
    Use search engines of research papers, don’t assume, or depend on pop science news. There are hundreds of papers on the subject. Here are quotes from a variety of papers (9 papers):

    “Preterm births lead to mixed handedness” (lateralization)
    “Duration of gestation, specifically preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) is associated with less pronounced handedness – especially in girls”.
    “Prenatal stress and (shorter) duration of gestation lead to mixed handedness” (Lateralization)
    “Handedness is weakly heritable” (Handedness has a genetic component)”
    “Studies suggest that the relationship between gestation and handedness by be influenced more by environmental factors than direct genetic links”

    The most common factor across studies is maternal stress during pregnancy that limits the maturation of lateralization.

    Similarly, preterm birth is associated with brain asymmetry – also a consequence of insufficient lateralization.

    Similarly, internal asymmetry of internal development of the brain also can produce more serious results (ADHD, aggression, and ASD).

    I can explain these subjects in extraordinary detail. HOwever, you should not assume that left handedness is indicative of anything OTHER than handedness.

    Gestation is a complicated probabilistic process. 😉

    CD

    Reply addressees: @Re_Own @Saturnus_nine @vincentshauling @WALLABEEDON

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-10 14:55:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822285635723427841

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822263599877836832

  • Technically speaking science consists of the process of producing testifiable te

    Technically speaking science consists of the process of producing testifiable testimony – though explaining that requires a bit of effort. The reason the west developed philosophy and empiricism and science in sequence is almost entirely due to the european political order of individual sovereignty (of at least the warriors), the prohibition on arbitrary authority because of it, the requirement for adversarial debate before ‘juries’ because of that, and the requirement for testimony in those debates.

    Reply addressees: @JorySmith05

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-09 23:58:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822059836361543680

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822058393168679021

  • “It’s surprising that some Christians still follow Curt Doolittle.”– Odd. Let’s

    –“It’s surprising that some Christians still follow Curt Doolittle.”–

    Odd. Let’s examine:
    It’s a question of priorities.
    1. Physical Science (true)
    2. Natural Law (good)
    3. Christian Ethics (virtuous)
    ..are all compatible.
    But only in that order.
    Any other order requires you lie to yourself and others.
    If you claim you are a christian with some other order of priorities, then I question your intelligence, ability, and opinion. And as such your value as a participant in political (formal) rather than personal and social (informal) decisions.
    That does not mean you cannot equally preserve the supernatural heaven, hell, angels and god. It means that you, as directed by St Aquinas, render unto science, render unto law, and render unto god their due.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-09 23:36:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822054256716779520

  • “It’s surprising that some Christians still follow Curt Doolittle.”– Odd. Let’s

    –“It’s surprising that some Christians still follow Curt Doolittle.”–

    Odd. Let’s examine:
    It’s a question of priorities.
    1. Physical Science (true)
    2. Natural Law (good)
    3. Christian Ethics (virtuous)
    ..are all compatible.
    But only in that order.
    Any other order requires you lie to yourself and others.
    If you claim you are a christian with some other order of priorities, then I question your intelligence, ability, and opinion. And as such your value as a participant in political (formal) rather than personal and social (informal) decisions.
    That does not mean you cannot equally preserve the supernatural heaven, hell, angels and god. It means that you, as directed by St Aquinas, render unto science, render unto law, and render unto god their due.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-09 23:33:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1822053744504172545

  • Adam (@Know_More_News) Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it: Two videos for you:

    Adam (@Know_More_News)
    Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it:

    Two videos for you:
    1) The Cause and Crisis of Our Age: the evolution of and institutionalization of the feminine means of sedition, treason, and warfare.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq9cVBEQ53I

    2) The Abrahamic Method of…

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 18:01:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821607747437391985

  • Adam (@Know_More_News) Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it: Two videos for you:

    Adam (@Know_More_News)
    Yes you’re correct. Let’s science it:

    Two videos for you:
    1) The Cause and Crisis of Our Age: the evolution of and institutionalization of the feminine means of sedition, treason, and warfare.
    https://t.co/tp1uOW7HKe

    2) The Abrahamic Method of Manipulation, Deceit, Sedition, Treason as application of the feminine means of sedition treason and warfare.
    https://t.co/rrqkfH8LVA

    It explains the evolution of the feminine means of undermining into a systemic competitor to empiricism, history, philosophy, mythology, by combining masculine systematization (european/greek) with feminine empathy and social construction (semitic/jewish)

    Closing
    I work and our organization works, to produce law that equally suppresses feminine antisociality, undermining, sedition, treason, and war as we have suppressed masculine means

    To do so requires a science and logic of both what it consists of, how it is constructed, and how to outlaw it.

    Thanks for your work on behalf of our people.

    Sincerely
    CD

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-08 18:01:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1821607747223523329

  • Michael (@drmichaellevin) Question: I’m watching the bioelectric theory with cur

    Michael (@drmichaellevin)
    Question:
    I’m watching the bioelectric theory with curious but rationally skeptical interest.
    And while yes, one of the observable evolutionary laws demonstrates that if transportation of information by physical, chemical, or electromagnetic means can occur, it will occur, because evolution exploits every possible opportunity even if it’s a redundancy that later specializes.
    But a simulation that suggests the possibility of information transfer is not the same as demonstration of information transfer.
    And while I would expect some sort of ‘herding’ behavior during development and expect charge differences to encourage it; and while I can see the utility of genetic expression because of it; and possibly spatio-temporal maintenance after maturity – I don’t see the evidence yet, and this paper doesn’t help.
    So what do I need to read or grasp that I yet don’t?
    Thanks

    Reply addressees: @drmichaellevin

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-06 14:45:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1820833619964821504

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1820635397187420481

  • a) Producing quantum effects is not demonstrating USE of quantum effects. The pa

    a) Producing quantum effects is not demonstrating USE of quantum effects. The passage of photons or any other energy manipulates the quantum background. In fact all electrochemical transmission manipulates the quantum background. It’s meaningless unless there is some evidence of information transduction. There isn’t any.

    b) There is no relevance even if so. It would not need to have any impact on consciousness given consciousness is a relatively simple consequence of sufficient hierarchically organized recursive memory. Consciousness turns out to be relatively simple – if you have enough neurons in relation to body size and in enough of a recursive hierarchy.

    Today is another frustrating day, demonstrating why so few public intellectuals participate on social media – because one wastes time debunking nonsense accusations out of mere self defense of one’s posts.

    Reply addressees: @ToadOfYuggoth @DwightExMachina @whatifalthist

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-06 04:04:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1820672149826215936

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1820603848223797481

  • Q: Curt: “Do you know anything about Stuart Hammeroff and the quantum neural int

    –Q: Curt: “Do you know anything about Stuart Hammeroff and the quantum neural interactions?”–
    Of course. And of course, it’s unfounded nonsense. A microtubule in a cell is the equivalent of cartilage in a body – it provides structural rigidity. However because of that, it also provides a rail-line for the direct transport of molecules. Molecules can be ‘walked down’ the tubule. In neurons they assist in the transfer of molecules from the soma across the axon hillock, and down the axon.
    Given that persistence of any form of proto particle to particle depends on isolation from the influence of the quantum background’s fluctuations by quanta, there is no evidence that tubules, or any other biological process responds to quantum fluctuations even if almost anything can respond to anything in the electromagnetic spectrum of particulate energy – and usually that response is disruptive not constructive.
    Unfortunately, most scientists have largely bad ideas. Penrose, has the Laureate’s Curse: that stupid ideas from nobel prize winners are heard, where otherwise stupid ideas aren’t heard at all.
    Cheers
    CD

    Reply addressees: @DwightExMachina @whatifalthist

    Source date (UTC): 2024-08-05 23:12:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1820598796981514241

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1820592719925768303