Random Comments

Started by Astner9,042 pages

Originally posted by Insomniatric

Little did Tony know that the 13 pieces still in play wouldn't suffice to spell either Tony nor Stark.

Originally posted by Astner
Little did Tony know that the 13 pieces still in play wouldn't suffice to spell either Tony nor Stark.

Boom!

Kostabot, in my nano-tech thread you claim that we can transform our minds by will alone.

You realize that the genes you can influence through interaction with your environment (studying, learning, growing a certain way, etc) only comprise 2% of one's DNA - the rest of our body's DNA (thread-like structures composed of twisted parallel strands of complex amino acids) has a far more profound influence on the changes made to your DNA than does lifestyle?

This is the purpose of the human genome project, to cure birth defects, treat cancer, treat alzheimer's, etc.

If we could stop our DNA from degrading, and prevent aging by will alone, then why is every human to date not only aging, but subject to illness, cancer, alzheimar's, huntington's, etc?

Originally posted by Oneness
Kostabot, in my nano-tech thread you claim that we can transform our minds by will alone.

You realize that the genes you can influence through interaction with your environment (studying, learning, growing a certain way, etc) only comprise 2% of one's DNA - the rest of our body's DNA (thread-like structures composed of twisted parallel strands of complex amino acids) has a far more profound influence on the changes made to your DNA than does lifestyle?

This is the purpose of the human genome project, to cure birth defects, treat cancer, treat alzheimer's, etc.

If we could stop our DNA from degrading, and prevent aging by will alone, then why is every human to date not only aging, but subject to illness, cancer, alzheimar's, huntington's, etc?

Its not that we transform our minds, its that the power of the mind is one of the least tapped in to potentials in humans. I believe the mind is what ultimately governs the state of the body. You can worry yourself sick, and you can laugh yourself better (of course these are loose analogies, and Im not saying you can laugh your way out of cancer necessarily). Also, I dont think we have this ability yet, or if we do, we are no wear near being aware of it and learning to control it.

Althogh I'd love to continue this discussion, I think where you and I will struggle to come to a consensus, and ultimately end up just talking in circles, is at our spiritual beliefs. My belief system has a large spiritual component, and will make it difficult for a person who doesn't share my core beliefs to understand or agree with some of my perspectives.

I could either spend pages upon pages trying to summarize my beliefs in a way that may help you understand me better, or I could recommend a book for you to check out which explains the logic behind them. The book is Conversations with God by Neale Donald Walsh. Don;t bother with the movie, just check out the book if you ever have a spare few hours up your sleeve. It's a fascinating read, even if you don't believe what is being written.

Also take a look at the work of Joe Dispenza. Another person who's ideas I find pretty inspirational.

Originally posted by Kostabot
Its not that we transform our minds, its that the power of the mind is one of the least tapped in to potentials in humans. I believe the mind is what ultimately governs the state of the body. You can worry yourself sick, and you can laugh yourself better (of course these are loose analogies, and Im not saying you can laugh your way out of cancer necessarily). Also, I dont think we have this ability yet, or if we do, we are no wear near being aware of it and learning to control it.

Althogh I'd love to continue this discussion, I think where you and I will struggle to come to a consensus, and ultimately end up just talking in circles, is at our spiritual beliefs. My belief system has a large spiritual component, and will make it difficult for a person who doesn't share my core beliefs to understand or agree with some of my perspectives.

I could either spend pages upon pages trying to summarize my beliefs in a way that may help you understand me better, or I could recommend a book for you to check out which explains the logic behind them. The book is Conversations with God by Neale Donald Walsh. Don;t bother with the movie, just check out the book if you ever have a spare few hours up your sleeve. It's a fascinating read, even if you don't believe what is being written.

Homo-sapiens are evolving and changing, yes.

Well in homo-sapiens, epigentics DOES play an immensely vast role in gene expression, more so than these little test subjects:

"Canadian neuroscientist Michael Mineay...showed that newborn rats that were genetically predisposed to be skittish, nervous, and high-strung would develop into calm, exploratory, and stress-resistant adult rats when raised by genetically unrelated, attentive mother rats. Conversely, newborn rats that were genetically predisposed to be calm and stress resistant grew up to be nervous, high-strung, and easily stressed out when they were raised by inattentive, genetically unrelated mother rats. The important point is that although the rats' DNA din not change, the chmical tags that control gene expression did change. The rats' upbringing set in motion a cascade of epigenetic changes that changed their brain chemistry and literally "reprogrammed" their future behavior. Surprisingly, the resistant rats grew up to be attentive mothers to their own offspring."

In this way, humans have changed quite a bit since over-coming the neanderthals and making it through the ice age. However, whether or not this 2% that our interaction with the environment, this nurture portion of the nature versus nurture phenom, is higher than it was, say, 25,000 years ago, is unknown.

If the amount in which nurture affects gene expression has increased by an infinitesimal amount due to lifestyle over thousands and thousands of years of one of the most intelligent mammals on earth, than perhaps it may, in the next 10,000 years - change by a fraction of percent - with a subsequent fraction of a percent decrease in nature's effects on gene expression.

This is, in it's own right, an accelerated rate of change, albeit less extreme, than computerization in Moore's Law. However, this change is very unlikely because it implies that humans have become increasingly efficient with their cognitive faculties, Manthroplogy: The Science of Why The Modern Man Isn't What He Used To Be - gives a myriad of conclusive scientific evidence towards the contrary. Humans have become increasingly dependent on technology - which has itself become increasingly capable.

It has now surpassed your notions of bio-centric epigenetic progressivism - this is why I remain a technoprogressive. It is faster, more pragmatic, easier, and substrate independence offers a far more profound and unlimited existence than does natural biological evolution.

Originally posted by Astner
Little did Tony know that the 13 pieces still in play wouldn't suffice to spell either Tony nor Stark.

I counted 12.

Denistry and fate

I have a toothache that brings us together once again.

Tony could spell Ironman rather than Dark Knight by haveing his queen get taken against his king thereby leaning the queen against the king and spelling Ironman metaphorically.

YouTube video

Everytime i leave this thread gets serious.

intense even

1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, double jab, right, 1, 2, 1 + counter-evade-left-hook.

Slow circling.

55AvV_tgogc&start=15

Counter strikes are important to go for because as someone throws a punch and misses they're leaning right into your hook.

Angry all the time

You shouldn't be

I know.

ABS 😍 😍 😊

Originally posted by AbnormalButSane
I know.
Don't be hard on yourself.. :/

Originally posted by ThorinWoofer
ABS 😍 😍 😊

hiya