Electrons cannot be conscious Sabine Hossenfelder’s view because they cannot change their behavior. Hossenfelder’s impatience is understandable but she underestimates the seriousness of the problem serious thinkers about consciousness confront.
If you liked the raw feed from the debate, you’ll love this cleaned-up version.
Freeman Dyson comments on ID: “My opinion is that most people believe in intelligent design as a reasonable explanation of the universe, and this belief is entirely compatible with science. So it is unwise for scientists to make a big fight against the idea of intelligent design.” (2007)
As we have seen in recent days, Betelgeuse (usually the 11th brightest visible star) has started to climb back up the magnitude scale; right on time for a 420 – 430 day cycle. That suggests that the event since October is likely a superposition of dimming cycles. The long- expected Type II supernova is put Read More…
“Deep phylogenetic incongruence” sounds like journalspeak for “our current phylogenetic tree is a hot mess.”
It goes on and gets way better. You’ll be amazed at the idiocracy that the testing establishment takes for granted and promotes. Read at her site about how one testcrat even administered the same test twice, a fact advertised on the internet… and more. By the way, why don’t we hear much about this from other science writers?
neurosurgeon Michael Egnor talks about how many famous neuroscientist became dualists—that is, they concluded that there is something about human beings that goes beyond matter—based on observations they made during their work.
Schoolbook evolution stories would tell us that the bats evolved that ruse as a random mutation acted on by natural selection—as if it were some kind of a lucky number they might have come up with in 65 million years. Not so fast. It’s a hitherto unknown system that will need a considerably more detailed explanation than that. Evoking “natural selection” as a mantra won’t work like it used to, back when we knew so much less.
From 50,000 years ago? We didn’t even know Denisovans existed before 2010.
Snake species didn’t necessarily evolve venom by a long, slow, process of natural selection acting on random mutations (Darwinism). Some get their venom from a variety of sources and sometimes they change sources (whatever works?) So unfolds a curious tale of a snake that switched suppliers.
In relation to claims about Darwinian natural selection just happening to find that solution
Involving quantum mechanics: In an enormously complicated 165-page paper, computer scientist Zhengfeng Ji and colleagues present a result that penetrates to the heart of deep questions about math, computing and their connection to reality. It’s about a procedure for verifying the solutions to very complex mathematical propositions, even some that are believed to be impossible Read More…
Sure, these are micro or distributed systems. But micro and distributed don’t mean unimportant. If we are still making new discoveries in human anatomy, many questions that we are told are settled are probably not settled. Many lecterns are splintered in vain. Much science education policy is Bad.
Raised cortisol levels have been found in children separated from family for thirty or more hours a week, especially those in substandard care.
Egnor tells us that Tam Hunt offers some good ideas at Scientific American but his dismissal of objectivity is cause for concern.