Post reply

Reply to the message by David Turell

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> > dhw: [i] I only repeated it because of your continued refusal to focus on the process whereby the initial thought (“kill from distance”) would come from the smaller brain, and the implementation of the initial thought would expand the brain, so that the FIRST artefacts would only appear once the brain had finished expanding. [b]You only focus on the fact that artefacts and bigger brains are found together[/b].[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID:[i] The bold is the only fact we have. You have totally invented a wishful thought that the previous smaller brain was able to conceive of the design of a new artifact but had to wait for or force the expansion of a bigger brain to get it manufactured.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: The bold fact does not explain why the brain expanded! I am not wishing; I am looking for an explanation. We have another fact: the modern brain changes in response to “hard thinking”. You never answer my next question: why is it illogical to propose that the ancient brain may also have changed in response to “hard thinking”? 
> 
> I have answered without you responding that I can remember. Older brains are the antecedent forms and may well have some complexification ability resulting in slight enlargement of designated areas as our very special advanced brain does.
> 
> >dhw: Your attempt to reproduce my theory is off the mark as usual. [b]A dualist would say that the soul of the homo with the smaller brain (the materialist could say the thinking part of the brain) was able to conceive – not the design but the basic idea of a new artefact (our example: some means or other of killing from a distance). The brain doesn’t wait for or force an expansion to get it manufactured. The soul (or thinking part of the brain) then begins the process of developing the idea, the design, and the manufacture[/b].This process CAUSES the brain to expand. And we know that in the modern brain, hard thinking CAUSES the brain to respond by complexifying.  
> 
> A complete distortion of how our brain reacts to deep thought. First we know it shrank 150 cc from more concentrated thought as we learned how to use our brain over the past 35,000 years. And we know that the complexification mechanism causes that shrinkage by enlarging  tiny special highly efficient areas to handle the new concepts. Applying this, to invent a way that ancient brains enlarged, in not only wishful thinking, it is a distinct distortion of what we know as fact, and enters the woolly area of supposing 'anything suggested is possible'. Remember the comment above. Our special brain undoubtedly represents similar processes from the past.
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]A very inventive tortured invention of a theory, allowed to appear by you only because the actual cause of brain expansion is never discussed in archaeological articles, and you hide behind that. What archaeologists accept/think is obvious. Bigger brain =s better artifacts.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: I don’t hide behind anything. The cause of expansion is not known, and the articles don’t offer an explanation. For the umpteenth time, yes bigger brain = better artefacts. But that doesn’t tell us why the brain got bigger in the first place! I shan’t repeat the point about the FIRST artefacts being the cause, because you will simply go on ignoring it, while you also distort the process I keep describing (as bolded above).
> 
> I ignore nothing. Your contorted imagination is seeking a natural way for brains to enlarge without God having anything to do with it. Your distorted mechanism is an invention not supported by any factual evidence. And your frantic complaints that I ignore your theory are untrue frantic complaints. I fully  understand how wrong it is and have explained my reasons over and over. You are simply stating 'anything I can think of can be true'. That can apply to anyone who thinks!!!  Proof??? Remember, your strange position of recognizing design exists and avoiding a designer. Try leaving it at that, accepting a designer, without identifying him, as ID does. You are a perfect ID candidate