[MD] A Tiny Hominid With No Place on the Family Tree

[MarshaV]

I am happy to have Paul back too.  I had no knowledge of Buddhism 
when he was here before so I'm sure I had no inkling of what he was 
saying.  Since then I have stumbled through my understanding of 
Buddhism with many tears and much uncertainty, and a feeling that 
Kali is missing.



At 04:54 AM 4/29/2009, you wrote:
>Yes, yes Marsha,
>
>I think I've said several times that all sorts of "why" questions that
>appear to expect purposeful (or simply causal) answers are undermined
>by the fact that time itself is a weird pattern - to say the very
>least - as an answer, even evolution is not immune from that problem.
>(On reason why it is good to have Paul back on line ... alternative
>views on causation, and hence time.)
>
>Regads
>Ian
>
>On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM, MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> > Ian,
> >
> > OMG!  Isn't evolution just the institutionalization of time?   And isn't
> > time a static pattern of value that spins off other 
> patterns?   Something is
> > strange with this picture...   Time???
> >
> > It seems too late and too silly to worry about winning arguments, and maybe
> > I can learn to be content with the wind as my friend, at least 
> the colors of
> > the wind, and all that dust in the wind is endlessly fascinating.
> >
> >
> > Marsha
> >
> >
> > At 04:14 AM 4/29/2009, you wrote:
> >>
> >> I consider that very wise Marsha.
> >>
> >> I call your "There are not the resources to chase down all anomalies
> >> and alternative hypotheses"
> >> The "Life's too short" hypothesis, but it doesn't win me any friends
> >> or arguments ;-)
> >> Ian
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 9:37 AM, MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Greetings Ham,
> >> >
> >> > You seem dangerously naive  to me because of the ease with which you
> >> > overlay
> >> > an idealized science onto a working science.  There are not the
> >> > resources to
> >> > chase down all anomalies and alternative hypotheses.  And the answers
> >> > reached are often guaranteed by the method, questions and instruments
> >> > used
> >> > for evaluating a theory.  How long did it take to correct Newton's
> >> > physics?
> >> >  How many hundreds of years to make that correction?  From what I've
> >> > read
> >> > there were plenty of anomalies along the way.  (In my mind, it is better
> >> > to
> >> > see time and space as static patterns of value, conceptually
> >> > constructed.
> >> >  It is a better perspective.)  And I hardly think that science as a tool
> >> > of
> >> > politics, profit and the military make it an exalted institution.
> >> > Science
> >> > needs to work better.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Marsha
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > At 12:51 AM 4/29/2009, you wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Marsha and Platt --
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> [Platt]:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The Darwinists are hard pressed to explain hobbits.
> >> >>> The theory is now challenged from within.
> >> >>> Wonders never cease.
> >> >>
> >> >> [Marsha]:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Intelligent Design is not credible science.
> >> >>> My concern is that science is blindly followed without an
> >> >>> understanding of its danger points, and I am relieved
> >> >>> that it is being challenged.  It should be properly
> >> >>> evaluated and monitored by all citizens.
> >> >>
> >> >> Intelligent Design is not Science at all.  It is an intellectual
> >> >> perspective of reality based on man's sensibility to symmetry and
> >> >> order.
> >> >>  When we say that the universe is intelligently designed, by whose
> >> >> "intelligence" are we judging its design?   Human beings are rational
> >> >> creatures who impute their own intelligence to the objective world
> >> >> because
> >> >> of its value (high-quality) to them.
> >> >>
> >> >> The "wonder" is that you don't realize scientific anomalies like the
> >> >> newly
> >> >> discovered  hobbit skeletons are constantly being challenged.  The
> >> >> method of
> >> >> Science is: investigate - test - confirm.  When you read the entire
> >> >> article,
> >> >> you see that paleontologists, biologists, and archeologists are
> >> >> currently in
> >> >> the "testing phase", ruling out possible explanations, such as early
> >> >> migration of a more primitive species, reversion to an ancestral
> >> >> lineage,
> >> >> genetic mutations or pathological disorders, or island dwarfing.
> >> >>  Eventually
> >> >> they will have the evidence they need to confirm a conclusion.  Until
> >> >> then,
> >> >> unlike armchair speculators and journalists, they withhold any official
> >> >> pronouncement.
> >> >>
> >> >> As Stony Brook's anatomist, speaking for the research team, said, their
> >> >> investigation has entered "a period of wait and see.  ...Someday people
> >> >> [will ask], why was everyone so puzzled back then - it's plain to see
> >> >> where
> >> >> the little people of Flores came from."  That's the way Science works.
> >> >>  If
> >> >> Science depended on the "evaluation and monitoring" of uninformed
> >> >> citizens,
> >> >> reaching objective conclusions would be about as rare as it is on this
> >> >> forum.
> >> >>
> >> >> --Ham
> >> >>
> >> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >> >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >> >> Archives:
> >> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >> >> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >> >
> >> > .
> >> > _____________
> >> >
> >> > Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the
> >> > stars.........
> >> > .
> >> > .
> >> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >> > Archives:
> >> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >> >
> >> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >> Archives:
> >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >
> > .
> > _____________
> >
> > Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
> > .
> > .
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >
>Moq_Discuss mailing list
>Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>Archives:
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

.
_____________

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.