Group: sci.med.psychobiology
Dialog and news in psychiatry and psychobiology.
Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
a challenge to evolution punks
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Dale: everything you say above is either demonstrably false.
To everyone else: many of you seem to think Dale is a run-of-the-mill
Creationist. He is not. He is a type of Hindu, and should be welcomed
as a change of pace. Variety is the spice of life, even if it's a
variety of nuts.
Kermit
On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Dale: everything you say above is either demonstrably false.
To everyone else: many of you seem to think Dale is a run-of-the-mill
Creationist. He is not. He is a type of Hindu, and should be welcomed
as a change of pace. Variety is the spice of life, even if it's a
variety of nuts.
Kermit
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
I suggest that there is more proof that you're a drug addled junkie
then there is that God exists.
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
I really care deeply about what you suggest, I assure you.
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
No.
On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
I suggest that there is more proof that you're a drug addled junkie
then there is that God exists.
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
I really care deeply about what you suggest, I assure you.
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
No.
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
> No.
Yes
--
Dale
http :// www .vedantasite.org
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
> No.
Yes
--
Dale
http :// www .vedantasite.org
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:38:42 -0500, Dale Kelly wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
>
>> No.
>
> Yes
You don't want to know.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:38:42 -0500, Dale Kelly wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
>
>> No.
>
> Yes
You don't want to know.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 24, 9:38 am, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
> > No.
>
> Yes
Dale, you're improving! This is your most convincing argument to
date. You didn't have to invent any fake definitions to make it so
it's considerably more honest than the way you started this thread.
You should consider sticking to these types of strict antipodal
arguments rather than attempting to contradict well-known long-held
scientific definitions with poorly formulated conditional arguments
based on bogus information.
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
On Apr 24, 9:38 am, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
> > No.
>
> Yes
Dale, you're improving! This is your most convincing argument to
date. You didn't have to invent any fake definitions to make it so
it's considerably more honest than the way you started this thread.
You should consider sticking to these types of strict antipodal
arguments rather than attempting to contradict well-known long-held
scientific definitions with poorly formulated conditional arguments
based on bogus information.
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 24, 7:38 am, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
> > No.
>
> Yes
>
The subconscious is not the keystone of evolution, so no.
On Apr 24, 7:38 am, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty wrote:
> > No.
>
> Yes
>
The subconscious is not the keystone of evolution, so no.
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty
<Greyguy3@hotmail,com > wrote:
> On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> > the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
> >
> > even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> > because they have emergent behavior
> >
> > emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> > called the subconscious
> >
> > we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> > supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
> >
> > I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> > a mysterious subconscious
> I suggest that there is more proof that you're a drug addled junkie
> then there is that God [sic] exists.
From: Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net >
Subject: too low of doses
Newsgroups: alt.drugs.psychedelics
Message-ID: <_sSdnV3yQ6yBGQXYnZ2dnUVZ_rDinZ2d@comcast,com >
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 21:46:36 -0600
if people think cough syrup and weak cacti are the same thing as
LSD, they have never really done LSD or they have done too small
of a dose, you really need to do around $50 worth of acid to trip
as opposed to $5, that would be around 5-10 blotters or microdots
(500mcg or better)
--
http :// desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"I've hired myself out as a tourist attraction." -- Spike
On 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, Scooter the Mighty
<Greyguy3@hotmail,com > wrote:
> On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> > the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
> >
> > even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> > because they have emergent behavior
> >
> > emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> > called the subconscious
> >
> > we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> > supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
> >
> > I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> > a mysterious subconscious
> I suggest that there is more proof that you're a drug addled junkie
> then there is that God [sic] exists.
From: Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net >
Subject: too low of doses
Newsgroups: alt.drugs.psychedelics
Message-ID: <_sSdnV3yQ6yBGQXYnZ2dnUVZ_rDinZ2d@comcast,com >
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2006 21:46:36 -0600
if people think cough syrup and weak cacti are the same thing as
LSD, they have never really done LSD or they have done too small
of a dose, you really need to do around $50 worth of acid to trip
as opposed to $5, that would be around 5-10 blotters or microdots
(500mcg or better)
--
http :// desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"I've hired myself out as a tourist attraction." -- Spike
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
Op Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, schreef Scooter the Mighty:
> On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
[..]
>> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is
>> of a mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest that there is more proof that you're a drug addled junkie then
> there is that God exists.
I would say that in normal, straight thinking people, LSD would not have
the effects that Mr. Kelly is suffering.
Psychedelic drugs can be useful and interesting for people who want to
explore the depths of their minds: psychonauts.
I tried acid a few times when I was young (around 20), but I certainly
never became a creationist as a result. I do remember one episode in
which I started to feel very connected to everything around me. It was an
outdoor trip and I felt very much "one with nature". Everything around me
felt like "family" - for lack of a better word. It was truly a very
interesting & profoundly moving emotional experience, even if a bit
frightening.
I may want to repeat that experience some day. It wasn't bad.
Op Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:27:59 -0700, schreef Scooter the Mighty:
> On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
[..]
>> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is
>> of a mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest that there is more proof that you're a drug addled junkie then
> there is that God exists.
I would say that in normal, straight thinking people, LSD would not have
the effects that Mr. Kelly is suffering.
Psychedelic drugs can be useful and interesting for people who want to
explore the depths of their minds: psychonauts.
I tried acid a few times when I was young (around 20), but I certainly
never became a creationist as a result. I do remember one episode in
which I started to feel very connected to everything around me. It was an
outdoor trip and I felt very much "one with nature". Everything around me
felt like "family" - for lack of a better word. It was truly a very
interesting & profoundly moving emotional experience, even if a bit
frightening.
I may want to repeat that experience some day. It wasn't bad.
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 23, 10:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
Provide proof that you are a sapient life form or shut up, goddidit
punk.
Will in New Haven
--
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
On Apr 23, 10:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
Provide proof that you are a sapient life form or shut up, goddidit
punk.
Will in New Haven
--
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
Utterly bogus and specious
On Apr 24, 3:26 am, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
Proove it!
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Utterly bogus and specious
On Apr 24, 3:26 am, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
Proove it!
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Date: 25 Apr 2007, 01:34
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Dale - did you know that God is a hippie? God is LOVE and goodness.
Anything else is not God.
IMHO God evolved just like every other living thing did.
WOMP WOMP
Tom
On Apr 23, 7:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Dale - did you know that God is a hippie? God is LOVE and goodness.
Anything else is not God.
IMHO God evolved just like every other living thing did.
WOMP WOMP
Tom
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 23, 9:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
Hey Dale, you are, uh, blithering again . . . .
Here, let me wipe that off your chin for you . . . . .
===============================================Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Author:
"Deception by Design: The Intelligent Design Movement in America"
http :// www .redandblackpublishers,com /deceptionbydesign.html
Creation "Science" Debunked:
http :// www .geocities,com /lflank
On Apr 23, 9:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
Hey Dale, you are, uh, blithering again . . . .
Here, let me wipe that off your chin for you . . . . .
===============================================Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Author:
"Deception by Design: The Intelligent Design Movement in America"
http :// www .redandblackpublishers,com /deceptionbydesign.html
Creation "Science" Debunked:
http :// www .geocities,com /lflank
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 23, 9:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
No response to any of the poster's on talk.origins by the post's
creator. Hmmm. Provide proof of Dale Kelly or shut up.
On Apr 23, 9:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
>
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
>
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
>
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
>
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
No response to any of the poster's on talk.origins by the post's
creator. Hmmm. Provide proof of Dale Kelly or shut up.
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
On Apr 23, 10:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
>
(snip)
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
You provide proof of the subconscious, if you are so interested in
it. And what's an "evolution punk?"
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Eric Root
On Apr 23, 10:26 pm, Dale Kelly <dale.ke...@comcast,net > wrote:
>
(snip)
>
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
>
You provide proof of the subconscious, if you are so interested in
it. And what's an "evolution punk?"
> --
> Dale http :// www .vedantasite.org
Eric Root
Re: a challenge to evolution punks
In article <pan.2007.04.24.02.28.15@comcast,net >, dale.kelly@comcast,net
says...
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
Cite please.
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
See above
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
Cite please
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
Proof of God? So you have no faith?
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
Data please
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
Fuck you hippie!
>
>
--
Advice when in a crowd of creationists:
"If you act like a dumbshit, they'll treat you as an equal"
J.R."Bob" Dobbs
In article <pan.2007.04.24.02.28.15@comcast,net >, dale.kelly@comcast,net
says...
> the modern definition of life is emergent behavior
Cite please.
> even plants with no minds or free will are considered to be alive, just
> because they have emergent behavior
See above
> emergent behavior in consciousness depends on the mysterious intermediary
> called the subconscious
>
> we do not communicate directly with the central nervous system, we
> supposedly use an intermediary, the mysterious subconscious
Cite please
> I suggest there is more proof of God as an intermediary than there is of
> a mysterious subconscious
Proof of God? So you have no faith?
> more so, I suggest that when we will our bodies to act, they act with an
> intermediary of God, not the subconscious
Data please
> provide proof of the subconscious or shut up, evolution punks
Fuck you hippie!
>
>
--
Advice when in a crowd of creationists:
"If you act like a dumbshit, they'll treat you as an equal"
J.R."Bob" Dobbs
