Monthly Archives: January 2012

Homer Smith on direct and indirect perception

See:

http://adoretheproof.blogspot.com/2012/01/indirect-perception-ii.html?spref=fb

Homer says: Self symbolizingness is so big, that to date, no one knows about it.

Forget global warming

See:

Click Here

Article reads: Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

The Gyromodel, and a letter to Dr Andrulis

 Hi Dr Andrulis

 I am trying to understand your paper (http://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/2/1/1/pdf), and I am running into difficulty.
 
First, I like the idea of gyre. It is a lot like the holon idea introduced by Arthur Koestler. I like the idea of oscillation around a singularity, as the gyre reaches to high and low energy states. I understand the second law of thermodynamics to be two-sided, meaning that the equivocation of “reprensentation” and “recognition” is the only way to foolishly return to something one-sided; that is, yes the 2nd law hides a metphysical singularity. 
 
But I don`t understand Figures 1 and 2. In fact, its is unclear how the philosophy of the gyremodel relates to the biochemistry (which I am not an expert). Moreover, one may describe the philosophy more generally before trying to integrate the model back into the biochemistry. One is led to a possible conclusion that your paper is another spoof that follows the style of Alan Sokal. But I want to show your theory more grace than that, if only because Lovelock`s Giai theory is probably correct, as well as a neo-vitalism, and panpsychism, all of which may be agreeable with the gyremodel.
 
I have my own Trinitarian vitalism, or theory, that I would like to reconnect to a chemical hierarchy and pattern of emergence, even by starting with the elementary particles. Mapping out this emergence in detail would convince a lot of non-believers. I thought just maybe that you have done this?
 
See some of my papers:
 
Thank you for your consideration.
 
Sincerely, Stephen P. Smith, author of Trinity: the scientific basis of vitalism and transcendentalism

Negative reaction to new gyromodel theory

See:

Click Here

Opinion reads: I could easily go into more specifics (very easily—I’ve got lots of notes), but it’s clear that there’s nothing in the paper that much resembles science. (Though there’s always the chance that I’m just not smart enough to see the model’s brilliance.)

Gyromodel: a neo-vitalism, almost Trinitarian

See:

http://truthdive.com/2012/01/27/Planets-water-proteins-and-DNA-are-alive.html

Article reads: The basic idea of Dr. Andrulis’ framework is that all physical reality can be modeled by a single geometric entity with life-like characteristics: the gyre. The so-called “gyromodel” depicts objects-particles, atoms, chemicals, molecules, and cells-as quantized packets of energy and matter that cycle between excited and ground states around a singularity, the gyromodel’s center.

The singularity represents a space-holder for a middle-term, according to Trinitarian thinking!

Global warming is incontrovertible?

See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html

article writes: Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now. This is known to the warming establishment, as one can see from the 2009 “Climategate” email of climate scientist Kevin Trenberth: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” But the warming is only missing if one believes computer models where so-called feedbacks involving water vapor and clouds greatly amplify the small effect of CO2.

Quantum mechanics linked to precognition, emotion

See:

Click Here

Article reads: The effect of emotions would be falling right out of these speculations. Belief is emotional and emotional belief is strong. Belief is what we hold against all reason, based on emotions.

Review of Chalmers’s new book

See:

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/what-consciousness-is-not

Review says: From the outset, there has been another strange consequence of Chalmers’s extension of the “easy” problems of consciousness to encompass activity that would seem to be inseparable from experience: the idea that consciousness extends in some sense to the entire universe, or that all matter is conscious. Known as panpsychism, it was this idea that earned Chalmers the scorn of John Searle.

The Marc Hauser disgrace

See:

http://www.thenation.com/article/165313/disgrace-marc-hauser?page=full

Article reads: Three years after the seizure of materials from Hauser’s lab, the Boston Globe leaked news of a secret investigating committee at Harvard that had found Hauser “solely responsible” for “eight counts of scientific misconduct.”

Landon finds a terrible judgment on science

See:

Click Here

Landon writes:  Wallace correctly saw that the brain seems to have evolved/enlarged, not soley as an adaptation, but in manner that created a potential, more than just a functionality. That is a strong hint that there is a directional component in its evolution. It is remarkable that that the whole of scientific biology cannot manage to assess this falsifying insight of Wallace over a century after his critique of Darwinism. It is a terrible judgment on science.