Evolution - A serious question.

[Dr. Jones]

Sorry, must have missed your question. No, not my find. The Mrs. found a small one years ago, and I hunt one site that yields Late Paleo forms. The one pictured was found in Ohio. Yes, been an artifact hunter for many years. Belong to the American Society for Amateur Archaelogy(ASAA). Dr. "Mike" Gramly's working group. Recently undertook further excavations at the Sugarloaf site in Deerfield, Ma. Gramly considers it the largest Clovis habitation site in North America. The peopling of the Americas is the most exciting frontier in American archaeology at the moment. Now that we know people were here before the people who developed Clovis technology, it has gotten very exciting.

Anyway, I figured if I'm hanging around, needed to remove the Cotton avatar, lol...

Nice. I'm a 3rd generation hunter (back home in Kentucky we called it airhead huntin).
EXTENSIVE collection. Saddleback bannerstones, butterfly banners, 100+ axes, 200+ celts, cases and cases of needles, awls, hairpins, probably 50+ fluted points..

Most came from the Falls of the Ohio area. Now I live in the desert southwest. Tons of stuff but different. Pots, sandals, etc..

 

[Red]

Nice. I'm a 3rd generation hunter (back home in Kentucky we called it airhead huntin).
EXTENSIVE collection. Saddleback bannerstones, butterfly banners, 100+ axes, 200+ celts, cases and cases of needles, awls, hairpins, probably 50+ fluted points..

Most came from the Falls of the Ohio area. Now I live in the desert southwest. Tons of stuff but different. Pots, sandals, etc..

Wow, sounds like a great collection. The trouble with hunting southeastern New England is most all the fields are picked over for generations by now. Years ago, we switched from fields to hunting the shoreline of our bays, Narragansett Bay mostly. Now even those spots are getting played out. Yeah, a whole lot bigger hobby in a place like Ky. We don't even have artifact shows up here. Just not as big as it is elsewhere. SW archaeology and prehistory is something I've always enjoyed. Would love to take my wife out there someday to show her all the great Anasazi ruins I visited in my own youth. Have a couple Hohokom pottery pieces I purchased last year, but 90+% of our collection are personal finds.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Wow, sounds like a great collection. The trouble with hunting southeastern New England is most all the fields are picked over for generations by now. Years ago, we switched from fields to hunting the shoreline of our bays, Narragansett Bay mostly. Now even those spots are getting played out. Yeah, a whole lot bigger hobby in a place like Ky. We don't even have artifact shows up here. Just not as big as it is elsewhere. SW archaeology and prehistory is something I've always enjoyed. Would love to take my wife out there someday to show her all the great Anasazi ruins I visited in my own youth. Have a couple Hohokom pottery pieces I purchased last year, but 90+% of our collection are personal finds.

That's cool.
I've never bought, sold, or traded anything.

 

[Red]

Nonsense. You speak with the steadfast confidence of the utterly ignorant.

I majored in History a lifetime ago. In graduate school, I concentrated on the History of Science. My thesis was an examination of the collaboration between Nobel prize winning physicist Wolfgang Pauli, and noted psychoanalyst Carl Jung. Jung's essay "Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle in Nature" was a seminal work, and Pauli recognized that understanding the place of consciousness in nature was a frontier of science that would certainly bear fruit in time. I was a bit ahead of my time. Noted historian of science Arthur Koestler recognized the importance of this collaboration of psychologist and physicist,and took much the same stance I did in his seminal study of Jung and Pauli's collaboration, in his book The Roots of Coincidence.

What you evidently consider nonsense, understanding the place of consciousness in nature, is one of the most important of scientific frontiers. It is people like Richard Dawkins who are destined for the dustbin of history. A failed paradigm called Scientism will join him there....

One of the bottom lines here is quantum physics is revealing a universe that more closely resembles a giant mind, which is in sharp contrast to the "universe as giant machine" that emerges from Newtonian physics. In view of Bronco70's question, I believe my reply to him was somewhat relevant to his inquiry. It bears no relation to the subject of evolution. But it certainly bears a relation to the questions he asked and the observations he was suggesting. If consciousness is something fundamental to creation, that pretty much changes everything as far as how we interpret reality. It is in this realm of study that the most fundamental paradigm shifts will occur. And as Thomas Kuhn observed in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, we can expect the old guard, protectors of the dogma of scientific materialism, to go out kicking and screaming all the way.

Seems like every generation thinks their paradigms are the final ones, nothing new to learn. Meteorite studies a good example of that. In the 18th century, French scientists dismissed reports by peasants that stones had been seen to fall from the sky as the rantings of "uneducated dolts". Science did not have to pay attention to French peasants. Yet, in that instance, the science that said stones cannot fall from a clear sky was very, very wrong. The old guard fights new ideas tooth and nail. Even just 20 years ago, you had better have tenure to suggest people were in the Americas before about 13,000 years ago. Careers ruined for suggesting there were people here before the Clovis hunters. Careers ruined for believing in the truth and suggesting better interpretations of the data. Should not work that way, but, in fact, human nature sees to it that that is exactly how progress is attained: by pitched battles in obscure journals between the New and the Old guard.....

 

[Red]

That's cool.
I've never bought, sold, or traded anything.

I used to supplement our personal finds with stuff from local collections. I did bring a few rare pieces into the collection that way. Other then local stuff, bought a few no brainer authentic fluted points. (And one real good reason to never buy is the great number of fakes out there). In recent years, selling everything but personal finds. Those will never be sold, but kept as a collection. The number of fluted points your family has found is amazing. Some folks have all the fun!

 

[carolinajazz]

As recently as 50,000 years ago, there were at least 4 species of humans on Earth. Ourselves, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and an unknown group. Europeans all have some Neanderthal genes. Australasians have some Denisovan ancestry. Probably better seen as subspecies since Homo sapiens was able to breed with these other human groups....

https://www.sci-news.com/otherscien...-neanderthal-genome-fourth-lineage-01624.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/denisovan-genome/

https://www.livinganthropologically.com/anthropology/denisovans-neandertals-human-races/

50,000 years ago? Who told you this...the evolution "fairy?"

Truly reliable evidence of man’s activity on earth is given, not in millions of years, but in thousands. For example, in The Fate of the Earth we read: “Only six or seven thousand years ago .... civilization emerged, enabling us to build up a human world.”

The Last Two Million Years states: “In the Old World, most of the critical steps in the farming revolution were taken between 10,000 and 5000 BC.” It also says: “Only for the last 5000 years has man left written records.”

The fact that the fossil record shows modern man suddenly appearing on earth, and that reliable historical records are admittedly recent, harmonizes with the Bible’s chronology for human life on earth.

Nobel prize winning nuclear physicist W.F. Libby, one of the pioneers in radiocarbon dating, stated in Science: “The research in the development of the dating technique consisted of two stages—dating of samples from the historical and the prehistorical epochs, respectively. Arnold [a co-worker] and I had our first shock when our advisers informed us that history extended back only for 5000 years. ... You read statements to the effect that such and such a society or archaeological site is 20,000 years old. We learned rather abruptly that these numbers, these ancient ages, are not known accurately.

When reviewing a book on evolution, English author Malcolm Muggeridge commented on the lack of evidence for evolution. He noted that wild speculations flourished nevertheless. Then he said: “The Genesis account seems, by comparison, sober enough and at least has the merit of being validly related to what we know about human beings and their behavior.” He said that the unfounded claims of millions of years for man’s evolution “and wild leaps from skull to skull, cannot but strike anyone not caught up in the [evolutionary] myth as pure fantasy.”

Muggeridge concluded: “Posterity will surely be amazed, and I hope vastly amused, that such slipshod and unconvincing theorizing should have so easily captivated twentieth-century minds and been so widely and recklessly applied.”

 

[DutchJazzer]

As recently as 50,000 years ago, there were at least 4 species of humans on Earth. Ourselves, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and an unknown group. Europeans all have some Neanderthal genes. Australasians have some Denisovan ancestry. Probably better seen as subspecies since Homo sapiens was able to breed with these other human groups....

https://www.sci-news.com/otherscien...-neanderthal-genome-fourth-lineage-01624.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/denisovan-genome/

https://www.livinganthropologically.com/anthropology/denisovans-neandertals-human-races/

partly where racism comes from. some racist ideologies believe race x stems from a superiour form of those pre-humans

 

[Siro]

Very nuanced rebuttal.....

I've run experiments where no "conscious" observer did a thing. A photodetector collapsed the wave function (I'm treating the existence of the collapse as a fact here, which it isn't), a computer recorder the results and made necessary computations. I learned about it the next day when I woke up.

Comrades, we must develop theories about how photodetectors preceded matter. Those so-called scientists and their anti-photodetectorism should get off their high horse and accept what photodetector mystics haven been saying since the start of this post.

Only nuanced rebuttals accepted please.

 

[Siro]

I majored in History a lifetime ago. In graduate school, I concentrated on the History of Science. My thesis was an examination of the collaboration between Nobel prize winning physicist Wolfgang Pauli, and noted psychoanalyst Carl Jung. Jung's essay "Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle in Nature" was a seminal work, and Pauli recognized that understanding the place of consciousness in nature was a frontier of science that would certainly bear fruit in time. I was a bit ahead of my time. Noted historian of science Arthur Koestler recognized the importance of this collaboration of psychologist and physicist,and took much the same stance I did in his seminal study of Jung and Pauli's collaboration, in his book The Roots of Coincidence.

What you evidently consider nonsense, understanding the place of consciousness in nature, is one of the most important of scientific frontiers. It is people like Richard Dawkins who are destined for the dustbin of history. A failed paradigm called Scientism will join him there....

Consciousness is a physical phenomenon no different than any other. It resides in the brain and can be altered and/or removed when the brain is damaged or changed in some ways. The study of the nature of consciousness and other aspects of subjective experience are indeed at the frontier of neuroscience. And why shouldn't they be? Quantum consciousness is at the frontier of talk show hosting and drug-fueled conversation of non-scientist college students. The history of how you read the works of others who agree with you is of no concern.

One of the bottom lines here is quantum physics is revealing a universe that more closely resembles a giant mind, which is in sharp contrast to the "universe as giant machine" that emerges from Newtonian physics. In view of Bronco70's question, I believe my reply to him was somewhat relevant to his inquiry. It bears no relation to the subject of evolution. But it certainly bears a relation to the questions he asked and the observations he was suggesting. If consciousness is something fundamental to creation, that pretty much changes everything as far as how we interpret reality. It is in this realm of study that the most fundamental paradigm shifts will occur. And as Thomas Kuhn observed in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, we can expect the old guard, protectors of the dogma of scientific materialism, to go out kicking and screaming all the way.

The universe as a giant mind? What does that mean? How is the probabilistic nature QM resemble what you see as the workings of the brain (or mind...)? I wouldn't want to challenge mystics talking out of their ***, but it would be nice to give magical context to my thousands of hours actually studying the subject. I'm a big fan of fantasy novels after all!

Seems like every generation thinks their paradigms are the final ones, nothing new to learn. Meteorite studies a good example of that. In the 18th century, French scientists dismissed reports by peasants that stones had been seen to fall from the sky as the rantings of "uneducated dolts". Science did not have to pay attention to French peasants. Yet, in that instance, the science that said stones cannot fall from a clear sky was very, very wrong. The old guard fights new ideas tooth and nail. Even just 20 years ago, you had better have tenure to suggest people were in the Americas before about 13,000 years ago. Careers ruined for suggesting there were people here before the Clovis hunters. Careers ruined for believing in the truth and suggesting better interpretations of the data. Should not work that way, but, in fact, human nature sees to it that that is exactly how progress is attained: by pitched battles in obscure journals between the New and the Old guard.....

There we go again with "you don't know everything, so I must be right" argument. I never get tired of hearing that from people who are very clearly wrong.

In conclusion a lot of words that say nothing. Let's hear an actual, rational, argument on how our understanding of QM necessitates that consciousness is causing the collapse of the wave function.

 

[One Brow]

I was thinking the same thing. Do you have a link? My gut feeling that it's a bit of both. A self-reinforcing feedback mechanism.

I'm sure it's a bit of both. The adaptation with our hands meant we did not need as much strength. My guess would be that our relative weakness was an effect that came in concert with other changes that were advantages, perhaps simply being able to walk upright at length.

I have not compared our common ancestor's putative strength (much of which is dependent on muscle attachment points, to my understanding), and I could easily be wrong. I was making what I thought was a reasoned guess based on the lineage (it seems more likely that one species would be less strong than that four separate groups would all get much stronger in basically the same fashion), but reasoned guesses can still be wrong.

I have more trouble seeing how a strong tool-user has no survival advantage over a weak tool-user. If nothing else, it gives him a better pool of mates, all other things being equal.

 

[Stoked]

I'm sure it's a bit of both. The adaptation with our hands meant we did not need as much strength. My guess would be that our relative weakness was an effect that came in concert with other changes that were advantages, perhaps simply being able to walk upright at length.

I have not compared our common ancestor's putative strength (much of which is dependent on muscle attachment points, to my understanding), and I could easily be wrong. I was making what I thought was a reasoned guess based on the lineage (it seems more likely that one species would be less strong than that four separate groups would all get much stronger in basically the same fashion), but reasoned guesses can still be wrong.

I have more trouble seeing how a strong tool-user has no survival advantage over a weak tool-user. If nothing else, it gives him a better pool of mates, all other things being equal.

Welcome back!!!

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

When I die, I will be extinct

Does that mean you are tinct right now?