Of course, there’s the detail of actually finding any extraterrestrial life forms before we all fight viciously for the right to represent them as their agents and, if they are intelligent (but not especially so) get them to sign long-term contracts … 😉
Silicon Valley tried to produce a mind but couldn’t. Why?
Quantum computers will not solve Silicon Valley’s problem. Quantum computers play by the same rules as digital ones: Meaningful information still requires an interpreter (observer) to relate the map to the territory.
Theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder is being labelled “anti-science”
Also, let this sink in: Despite believing in determinism, Hossenfelder believes we should “decide” against a new particle collider… We can decide? On that account, to other naturalists, she is “anti-science.” Naturalism is weird like that. Eats its own.
Another argument as to how a complex metabolism “may have” self-assembled
The critical question is, why isn’t life originating from nothing all around us then?
New human salivary glands discovered
Because no one knew these glands existed, we haven’t had to hear a lot of just-so stories about how they evolved. Evolutionary biologists will need to make up for the lost time … 😉
UFOs don’t go to heaven because, you see, they never die
And their existence is never really confirmed either.
How is that project of reintroducing lost species coming?
The interesting part will be to see whether—if both the animals and the environment have changed—reintroduction or recreation from advanced genomic techniques produces a viable independent species or a species that humans must indefinitely maintain.
There, that’s it! Environment changes made humans more adaptable
Hey, this is a good theory as to why people needed to branch out and develop more networks. But we’re overlooking a key issue here: Humans could only do that if something already differentiated us from hyenas… It wasn’t just the environment.
Crabs evolved separately at least five times
At Popular Mechanics: It’s not just superficial shape that unifies the five evolved crab forms. The paper details neurological commonalities, shared circulatory systems, and more, while also detailing the organ and systems that differ in shape and size.
The Immense Negative Impact of External Physical World Theory
[ETA: The OMG TOO LONG I don’t know if I wanna read all that teaser: I have said before it’s impossible to deny the value of the external physical world theory. In one sense it’s true – we have made a lot of scientific progress under that model. However, in comparison to what MRT could Read More…
Rob Sheldon on those curious DNA circles in the human body and the death of Common Descent
This little toolkit looks designed for horizontal gene transport (HGT), but there wasn’t anything similar to it for eukaryotes. Then came this article. And apparently humans (a rather sophisticated eukaryote) have circular DNA as well, it just was overlooked for 30 years.
New genes required for the Cambrian explosion?
Paper: “The genetic factors of bilaterian evolution,” has found that 157 new genes were required during the Cambrian explosion to account for the origin of bilaterians (animals with bilateral symmetry)
Free will makes more sense of our world than determinism—and science certainly allows for it
Scientists weigh in on both sides but accepting free will allows us to avoid some serious problems around logic and personal freedom.
One of those rare instances where science is self-correcting … Ioannidis is vindicated
Hey, that’s good news. But what about all the people whose lives were turned upside down by the herd of stampeding buffalo otherwise known as our moral and intellectual superiors?
Some researchers arrive at an important truth about “consensus science”
Researchers: “When individuals are fully independent, even under highly unfavorable circumstances a consensus provides strong evidence for the correctness of the affirmed position. This no longer remains the case once dependence, polarization, and external pressure are introduced. With such interventions, the probability of a false consensus increases dramatically.
” “Shut up, he explained” is not consensus, it’s false consensus.