RT @JayMan471: The irony being that the only realistic way to curb carbon emissions is with nuclear energy.
The other irony is that the W…
Source date (UTC): 2019-04-20 17:36:40 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1119656139078164482
RT @GWAS_lit: GWAS of brain volume on 54,407 individuals and cross-trait analysis with intelligence identifies shared genomic loci and gene…
Source date (UTC): 2019-04-20 17:36:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1119656084522917889
RT @Scientific_Bird: Genomic-wide association study of brain volume in humans
Latest and largest study on it to date.
As expected, they f…
Source date (UTC): 2019-04-20 17:36:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1119656028197523456
DEVOLUTION HAS BEGUN: “THE ROT STARTS AT THE TOP”
(Why? It’s not complicated.)
“IQ DECLINE AND PIAGET: DOES THE ROT START AT THE TOP?”
Intelligence, Volume 66, January–February 2018, Pages 112-121
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2017.11.010
Source date (UTC): 2019-04-18 13:25:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1118868161800101888
Um. let’s not descend into crazy territory. Faith is a grammar of faith and faith alone, literature the grammar of literature and literature alone, and reason, law, science, history, and mathematics are the grammar of argument. One does not combine faith and reason honestly.
Source date (UTC): 2019-04-16 14:50:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1118164807608426501
Reply addressees: @LibrarianVee @Ozpin_88
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1118146836609544193
IN REPLY TO:
@LibrarianVee
@curtdoolittle @Ozpin_88 Interesting that you see so much as spin-offs of Christianity. I see why you do, but these spin-offs reject God who makes Himself clear.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1118146836609544193
Dialectic: Philosophical Rationalism (agreement)
Prosecution: Science and law (survival)
Source date (UTC): 2019-04-04 19:17:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1113883310889902080
None. I hadn’t known his name him until this year. (I read science. I mean, almost exclusively, I don’t read opinion pieces, essays, or literary philosophy, or even analytic philosophy unless it’s to debunk it. I’m a post-theology, post-philosophy philosopher: a scientist.)
Source date (UTC): 2019-03-30 13:24:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1111982418049855488
Reply addressees: @voidadvent
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1111976961968992258
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1111976961968992258
November 5th, 2018 10:32 AM THE SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION OF THE SPIRITUAL
—“What do you tell people who have had very spiritual experiences that they attribute to their religion? Tell them they just imagined it? I donât see how thatâs going to work.”— Mitchell Ryan
They had the experience. They felt it. That it was produced by imagination is no different than if they imagine a ghost in the dark, or a car coming around a corner that isn’t there, or an argument with a loved one that didn’t or might happen. We feel all these things. We experience both the imagination of the context, the imagination of what might happen, or is happening, and the feeling of being in it, and we remember it. Our brains work all the time by filling in with memory or prediction the ‘model’ our senses are continuously composing for us out of sense, memory, and prediction, with continuous recursion of the context. Those Experiences existed. The conditions that cause them are either real or imaginary. We possess the ability to predict or forecast. That is the purpose of memory. We can predict all sorts of outcomes and then ‘feel them’ (imagine ourselves in them). The fact that you can imagine yourself in a ‘religious experience’ or imagine yourself as king arthur and feel that experience, is just a matter of context you imagine and practice. Most ‘intense’ experience I ever had was being very ill with a fever, reading a conan novel, and then experiencing myself in his place. it’s STILL the most intense experience I have had. Is it a religious experience, or is a religious experience just a different story in just a different dream? The question is only whether you are an addict reinforcing your addiction or not. Most of us no. Some of us yes. The question is whether you retain your agency (and experience) or retain your addiction in lieu of agency (and experience).
November 5th, 2018 10:32 AM THE SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION OF THE SPIRITUAL
—“What do you tell people who have had very spiritual experiences that they attribute to their religion? Tell them they just imagined it? I donât see how thatâs going to work.”— Mitchell Ryan
They had the experience. They felt it. That it was produced by imagination is no different than if they imagine a ghost in the dark, or a car coming around a corner that isn’t there, or an argument with a loved one that didn’t or might happen. We feel all these things. We experience both the imagination of the context, the imagination of what might happen, or is happening, and the feeling of being in it, and we remember it. Our brains work all the time by filling in with memory or prediction the ‘model’ our senses are continuously composing for us out of sense, memory, and prediction, with continuous recursion of the context. Those Experiences existed. The conditions that cause them are either real or imaginary. We possess the ability to predict or forecast. That is the purpose of memory. We can predict all sorts of outcomes and then ‘feel them’ (imagine ourselves in them). The fact that you can imagine yourself in a ‘religious experience’ or imagine yourself as king arthur and feel that experience, is just a matter of context you imagine and practice. Most ‘intense’ experience I ever had was being very ill with a fever, reading a conan novel, and then experiencing myself in his place. it’s STILL the most intense experience I have had. Is it a religious experience, or is a religious experience just a different story in just a different dream? The question is only whether you are an addict reinforcing your addiction or not. Most of us no. Some of us yes. The question is whether you retain your agency (and experience) or retain your addiction in lieu of agency (and experience).
(FB 1542054692 Timestamp) THE COSTLY SCHOOLING OF THE COCKROACHES OF CRITIQUE —“Curt covering for his ignorance of actual knowledge”– Robert Townsend (ie: This ass-clown: https://www.facebook.com/robert.townsend.1088893) So wait, I made the argument that the knowledge was disbursed and that it was degree of available investment that made possible the experimentation that made the nuclear program eventually yield, and you are saying that one person’s ‘genius’ was more influential that time, place, state of available knowledge, number of people in the field, and funding available for experimentation?. This is the same fallacy of the imbeciles who fear artificial intelligence, when it is not a shortage of calculative power (bayesian account) that is the problem but the time and resources to conduct the experiments necessary to incrementally falsify errors in our theories. I mean, the calculus was developed simultaneously. So were just about every one of the technological and scientific advancements – even Einstein was merely first and heaped with undue praise just like every other. All he brought to the problemw as the frame. And yes it was an innovation but it is also a deterministic one. The same is true for great musicians and artists – a market develops over three generations that produces an outlier (mozart, durer, davinci). I mean, I understand you’re not well read but start with The Gifts of Athena and then for a broader view move back to charles murray, then narrow in on the evolution of copper, bronze, iron, and steel, and then move to writing and language. Genius is the archetype but it is economies and the competition between many people that percolates by market means individual excellences. And it is the ECONOMY THAT MAKES IT POSSIBLE. Why? textual interpretation is cheap, but experiments are costly. the reason we can’t make more progress in physics at the moment appears to be nothing more than we can’t get anyone to put up the 10B it would take to run the next scale of tests…. So I mean, you can use CRITIQUE (sophism) to attempt to position that I have not put forth an argument, but as I have just illustrated, I have both done so and illustrated how childish your ‘hero worship’ is, and how you are YET AGAIN demonstrating the problem of the J-Question’s method of argument by employing Critique against me while ‘heaping undue praise’ on an individual when it is merely the individual who crosses the line first that gets the prize, but it is the CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMPETITIVE RACE IN THE FIRST PLACE that made his achievement possible. So again, please do not waste my time. It is not difficult for me to eviscerate ignorant, pre-rational, sophists like yourself, but it is still a waste of my time. There are many fools like you in the world and the cost of intellectually tarring and feathering you morons is not difficult so much as time consuming. Unfortunately you propagate like cockroaches and you sell your idiotic narratives to other cockroaches, at a rate that defeats our ability to correct you with intellectual insecticide. QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM Thus endeth the lesson.