Disqus - Latest Comments for Gregory

Re: Richard Dawkins DELUSION

Gregory — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 14:29:44 -0000

"Only the one which was made to BELIEF that receives painkiller produced â€œbrain painkiller".

Yes, it's called the Placebo effect, which I mentioned above. Why are you repeating this? It's not like this effect hasn't been known for a long time. There are many, many studies regarding it. It's not like it's a new discovery... I learned about it when I was in high-school!

I also addressed that in the comments above.

"We can not argue the science".

And I'm not. No-where have I. I'm disputing the conclusions you are coming to that are based on that science. They are illogical, which is fine when you're making a faith based decision, but not when you claim to have scientific or logical methods to prove your hypothesis.

"I think that you must revise the way you are understanding some of the concepts".
I would argue the same about you. We cannot talk about a scientific proof, or logical deduction, when you are deviating from the methods of scientific analysis and/or logic.

"Just start from the point that all concepts are conscious creations and are serving the conscious understanding."
So I should start by assuming you are right... to prove that you are right? Do you see the foolishness of that? You need to prove this statement before you can build any further argument.

"There is no such thing as time and mathematics out of your conscious."
There is no such thing as maths or time? So without my mind the universe ends? Or yours? Or is it the combination of everyone? There are some huge gaping holes in that idea. Huge.

Again, this is a statement that relies on the previous one, and so the previous statement needs to be proven. I admit it is an interesting philosophical question (what is mind? If our minds create everything we experience, how can we know what is real and what is not? etc...) but it is a philosophical debate, not a scientific one.

Again - you have huge unsupported assertions. You need to provide support for these before you can have anything close to a solid theory, at the moment you barely have a hypothesis, it's more of a conjecture.

Re: Richard Dawkins DELUSION

Gregory — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:06:28 -0000

"If two (or even more) civilizations without any connections created the belief that this world is a dream, would that be a signal to look not only in the white bearded old man as a God?"

No.. no it wouldn't. It would be a sign that some interesting anthropological studies could be done though. Probably relating to cultural similarities (old men as "wise" or "fatherly" for example), and potentially similar ancestral cultures or beliefs.

By that same logic you can say that all conspiracy theories are right (because more than one person, or group of people, that are unrelated, believe them to be true). I'm sure you don't mean to imply that either...

btw - I'm not posting here to be abusive or anything, it seemed to me that you'd like a good logical debate/discussion.

Re: Richard Dawkins DELUSION

Gregory — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:59:47 -0000

Umm.. you do realise that you just have a whole bunch more things to prove right? You haven't finished by a long shot...

"You can argue or accept the first two, but according to the science they are true."
But your conclusions aren't. That's the problem. You seem unable to see the difference.

Examples:

"1) According to the latest study of Dr. Jon-Kar Zubieta, personâ€™s belief can make the brain to produce its own painkillers which is scientific proof that the mind can affect and control the matter."
The brain, which is a collection of matter, produces the chemicals. Matter affecting Matter.

The scientific argument would in fact be quite the reverse of what you've said - that the matter (the brain) creates what we know of as the mind.

"2) All miracles where person is cured are argued with auto-suggestion (the person cured himself)
Still that is proof that consciousness affects the matter."
See above, this is basically the same point as 1, and both are demonstrations of the Placebo effect. An effect I'm sure Dawkins is aware of, and one that is very well researched and documented.

"3) Although Time is a component of the Universe it is relative only to the consciousness."
BZZZT! Unsupported assertion alert!

Time is a measurement, which has nothing to do with consciousness. It is, in fact, a measurement of the period it takes for a certain number vibrations of an atom (cesium I think, but look it up if you want).

"4) Although Space is component of the Universe, it is related ONLY to the consciousness."
Again, an unsupported assertion, and in fact one that can be destroyed in the same manner - space is a measurement. Measurements are mathematical, and have a fundamental root. In terms of distance (ie - spacial measurement) a metre is 1â„299,792,458 of a light-second. That's just one example.

So... your 4 steps are:

1) Unsupported (and Scientifically False) assertion.
2) Same assertion as 1
3) Different Unsupported assertion.
3) Different Unsupported assertion, but one that relies on the same flaw as 3.

So.. um... you were saying?

Re: The Drupal dilemma

Gregory — Thu, 24 Mar 2005 06:20:29 -0000

Surely comments and trackbacks are held in the MySQL as well? So it shouldn't be any harder to port those across than the posts.

I'm sure its probably just a matter of a lot of foreach statements. If I knew the Drupal db structure I'd offer to help!

However - when you work out how to do it - submit it to WP, I'm sure they'd welcome more conversion formats.

Re: The hot thing at Web 2.0 Summit: Photosynth

Gregory — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 17:42:28 -0000

Seems very nice. It comes across as an evolution of some excellent software called that adobe gobbled up and did nothing with. I forget the name now, but it began with a 'C'

I always wanted something more to come of this sort of tech..

Re: Cloverfield Monster Toy Revealed

Gregory — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:59:19 -0000

For those saying "it looks nothing like the monster" I swear you need your eyes checked.

The main problem is: Hasbro posed it wrong - it rarely stands that far up in the film, preferring a more hunched look.

The paint job is a little light, but not that much - the monster was approx the same color as the parasites, and they were a light/mid greyish color. Add in harsh white lights and a white backdrop - and the photos look washed out. That's all.

The sacs are colored wrong tho, that's for sure, and it should be a *little* darker.