BookTalk.org

Flann, what do you mean when you write "neo darwinism"?

Is this distinct from the theory of evolution?

Hi Johnson,
I mean the popular version.The neo darwinian synthesis.

The theory predicts certain things not found in the fossil record.
Diversity should lead to disparity according to the theory but the Cambrian fossils show the opposite.Early disparity in the Cambrian leading to the later diversity we find today.
A big problem is the whole question of how genetic information itself can evolve successfully by mutation and natural selection. Here's a link to a response by Stephen Meyer to Charles Marshall which I think highlights the problem.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/10/to ... 77541.html

I am not endorsing anything deepak has said.

Youre be8ng condescending

The measurement problem and misunderstanding of quantum uncertainty are the things that make Deepak famous, allowing him to dribble out pseudoscience with the same language you're using. There's nothing here ant. You can insult me for using google scholar to learn about these things, but that shows your own foolishness. Why don't you research them? Why take the false position? Why not educate yourself? Figure out the truth here. What is the measurement problem? How did it originate? Is there modern science that re-examines the problem? There are answers to all these questions, and you insult me for digging for the answers? What's really going on here is you want to be right without doing any homework.

Here's a start. Daisy chain by scanning down to the references and googling them.
http://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0509/0509042.pdf
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quantum_collapse

From rationalwiki: "New Agers usually believe this interpretation, and may not even be aware that it is not the scientific consensus. The idea that consciousness causes collapse is one basis for quantum woo and quantum healing, which may both be summarized as "the universe does that which conscious minds expect it to."

The role of consciousness in determining reality has not been determined.
Anyone that says it has or implies that it is not needed for the unfolding of reality is overstating what theoretical physics has to say at this point.

Ok Deepak. As conscious agents, our role in determining the future is massive. But not because of quantum woo. Quantum collapse as a photon hits the eye doesn't mean our consciousness induced the effect magically. Everywhere we've ever searched, we've found naturalistic answers, but you still fall back on the veiled argument from ignorance that supernaturalism hides behind the mystery of quantum collapse. Or is it consciousness? Or the combination of the two? Where are you hiding ant?

The videos i posted also deal with exactly what the measurement problem is, where it comes from, and why it can't be escaped.

IF you had watched the videos, which i recommend to everyone, you wouldn't bray such nonsense with such zeal, Ant.