Artificial Intelligence Intelligent Design Mind Neuroscience

Winston Ewert explains why the mind is not a computer

“An abstract mathematical device cannot experience qualia or consciousness. If they could, we would expect mathematical formulas like the quadratic formula or the area of a sphere to experience consciousness. But that seems absurd, so we must conclude that a computer cannot exhibit consciousness. Put another way, consciousness is not a form of computation.”

Intelligent Design Peer review Psychology

Darwinian Jerry Coyne makes a good point about the social science hoaxes

The distinction is that low-quality papers might happen to fall through the cracks now and then and a cherry picker could gin up an indictment of a whole field unjustly. BUT when a number of hoax papers get accepted by various journals, that points to deeper systemic rot. Especially when the social science profs are enraged rather than ashamed

agit-prop, opinion manipulation and well-poisoning games Correcting trollish fallacies Darwinist rhetorical tactics Defending our Civilization Selective Hyperskepticism

“If it fits into a nutshell . . .”: on, the error of demanding arbitrary, rhetorically loaded brevity

I noticed that the objection of dismissal on length (without substantial consideration) has come up here at UD yet again. I think it appropriate to note its fallacious character where considerable reflection is required. (And BTW, a quote from a serious source is a legitimate approach as I will shortly exemplify.) Accordingly, let me headline Read More…

Culture Intelligent Design Psychology

Portland U prof who hoaxed social science journals to prove a point is punished

The rap is “research misconduct,” of all things. Oh and get this: “An academic journal is continuing to sell a viral article on “rape culture” and “queer performativity” in Portland dog parks despite expressing concerns about the veracity of the research. Veracity? It was a genuine hoax, that’s what kind of veracity it had.

Darwinism Intelligent Design Plants stasis Stirring the pot (tentative thoughts/explorations)

Researchers: Photosynthesis may be a billion years older than thought … But WAIT!

“Dr Cardona also suggests that this might mean oxygenic photosynthesis was not the product of a billion years of evolution from anoxygenic photosynthesis, but could have been a trait that evolved much sooner, if not first.” So when did the billions of years of Darwinian evolution that “gradually evolved” photosynthesis happen?

Evolution Intelligent Design stasis

They didn’t find the parenting switch…

They didn’t find anything like a “parenting switch” that applied across frog and mouse species, they noted. But parenting behavior, however caused, may be very much older that we used to think (the rise of amphibians about 360 million years ago?). And yet many later life forms don’t care for their offspring. The more evolution becomes a history, the more it features puzzling complexities that can’t be resolved by a fatuous appeal to an “ism”.