Dixon lets chat. . .

[Todd]

. . . and show that even though we have two diametric oppose world life outlook views that we can talk without getting at each others throats.

Or calling each other dodoheads.

You up for it?

pick somethign that bothof us can discuss that won't leave either of us alienated. and lets have at it.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Alright, Todd, look...

I actually like you. You respond pretty well to criticism (aside from an occasional foray into martyrdom), you understand the difference between a humorous diss and outright hatred, and, when you're not cut and pasting the board to death you present a decidedly curious outlook and an honest desire for dialogue.

But...

It's no small thing to me that you are unable to accept prefectly sane and sensible arguments about the spurious nature of Creation Science, and that you think humans and dinsosaurs walked the earth together. I find all that bigger than a difference in world views -- I find that foolish in the extreme. And that makes it kind of hard for me to work up any interest in "picking a topic" to discuss with you.

Tell you what -- you pick one, and I'll be happy to lend a non-hostile thought or two, and we'll take it from there.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Hey, in the interest of humanitarianism, I'll pick a topic.

It's an easy one. Okay, so it was the first non-political non-religious non-conspiracist thing I saw over at cnn.com. Still.

Have at it

"I brought some music, some pictures ... and I brought my daughter's little Teddy bear," Claudie Haignere, 44, told France-2 television Sunday before joining cosmonauts Viktor Afanasyev and Konstantin Kozeyev on a Soyuz ride to the orbiting international space station.

The first French woman in space is on her second mission and will be responsible for mooring the Soyuz capsule to space station Alpha on Tuesday.

Whattaya'll think about Space Station Alpha guys?

 

[Problem Child]

They're letting the French in space? Good God, think of the smell!

 

[Mensa]

UGH!!

I liked it better when they called each other dodoheads!

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Yeah, yeah, and MASH was better when Hawkeye hated Hotlips, I understand, you're a purist. LOL

I love the International space station. I say we send up the Taliban...and leave them there.

 

[Laurel]

Re: UGH!!

I liked it better when they called each other dodoheads! [

You would, you dodohead...

 

[April]

And here I thought the correct term was "doodoohead".

No?

 

[Todd]

Yeah, yeah, and MASH was better when Hawkeye hated Hotlips, I understand, you're a purist. LOL

I love the International space station. I say we send up the Taliban...and leave them there.

I too love the idea of International Space station. I think it is a great opportunity for nations to work together

although I would suggest the MIR station for the Taliban just don't let them know we are crashing it down. {Thats next year right? or did I sleep through it already?}

 

[Sparky Kronkite]

How about this for a topic you two (and others too)?????

The concept of a "Perfect, Infinite, Knowledge Base."

A system whereby, "all knowledge," as yet to be learned - or allreadly learned and storeable - becomes an actuallity. A systme to be shared with all - "all people/humans/thinking, living organsims in the entire universe," know it all - know everything.

How might this occur? Can it ever occure in our simple, "human minds?"

(Todd? Would you say that this exists allready? In God? Probably you would. Then - does God have a human mind? But - pretend Todd that God is left out of this question - let's talk about us lowly fucking humans for a change.)

Would this system require, "a machine?" A computer? Beyond a computer?

Is this concept "too much" for the human mind? If not, what physical form (if physical at all) would such a human mind take? Would it be a huge mass of brain flesh? Or might we humans (by then) transend our humble physical frames?

If so - would we then - all be God-like?

What might be the one peice of information - the one (or two or three) bits of knowledge that "opens the flood gates of knowledge and allows vast increases in "what we know?" Would it be the knowledge of magnetism? Would it be knowledge gained once we, our bodies, can travel the speed of light? Would it be once we really do gain the knowledge of an afterlife - if there is one? Or would it simple be a "superior intellegence" from somewhere else - teaching us stuff beyond our, as yet, wildest imaginations?

Will we evern survive as a race - to ever get close to this?

(Pardon my spelling - fuck this dumb ass who hates the concept of spelling - it's the thought that counts and even Todd proves this more than I. Right Todd? You old Spelling Bee winner you.)

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Carl Sagan once wrote a monograph on how it was impossible for the human mind to fully comprehend a grain of salt (because its construction contains more bits of information than a human brain can hold) much less "all that is knowable". I'm afraid that any catlogue of thought will still be 1) prejudiced in content and tone by the writer's perspective, and 2) undecipherable.

Besides, we already have "Jeopardy".

 

[CelestialBody]

 

[Mensa]

Space to let.

Carl Sagan once wrote a monograph on how it was impossible for the human mind to fully comprehend a grain of salt (because its construction contains more bits of information than a human brain can hold) much less "all that is knowable".

With all due defrence to the late Carl Sagan, I must take issue with his contention. More information than the human brain can hold? I don't think so!

We use approximately ten percent of our brains. The acquisition of knowledge has been an ongoing process for millennia. In this past century alone, we have expanded our knowledge beyond all that we've accumulated since we became sentient beings. It is claimed that we now double the sum total of all knowledge every six months and are increasing exponentially.

Yet we still only use ten percent of the human brain!

I contend that the capacity of the human mind is unknowable, it's potential has barely been scratched. We are capable of more than we imagine, more than we could imagine. If we can do all we have done by using so little of the mind, imagine the possibilities if we ever succeed in tapping into that unexploited resource!

 

[Todd]

Infinite capacity of a finite container???

Is that the gist of what your getting at Sparky? Oh well if it isn't thats what I am going to mumble my way through an answer for.

Dixon get your books out so you can correc tthe erros and misquotes I am about to present

First so I am not abusive, I toss God out the door, don't worry He had a pad waiting He knew I was going to thorough Him out

Anyways sideways and foreward onto the question on hand.

Apartently from what I have read and seen on TLC show the human brain is curently between 7 and 12 percent in use{7 for learning impaired 12 for the geniuses like einstien and such}. So there is a much larger capacity of the human brain yet untapped.

I have a theory and I am sure http://www.skepticalenquiror.com? will disagree but here it is anyways.

Aparently the human brain I read somewheres emits radio waves. In my theory the more the brain is used its capacity the stronger the waves. I think that down the road, maybe with the use of a computer/machine mechanism that these waves can be fed and connected into one another to form a possible borg like hive mind. Where not one brain contains all knowledge but one brain can access all knowledge collected throughout the hive mind.

Possibly at this time between all brains connected to the hive mind infinity might be proved finite.

Who knows I am a raging looney who needs to be locked up cause that almost makes sense to me.

 

[Mensa]

Re: Infinite capacity of a finite container???

Is that the gist of what your getting at Sparky? Oh well if it isn't thats what I am going to mumble my way through an answer for.

Dixon get your books out so you can correc tthe erros and misquotes I am about to present

First so I am not abusive, I toss God out the door, don't worry He had a pad waiting He knew I was going to thorough Him out

Anyways sideways and foreward onto the question on hand.

Apartently from what I have read and seen on TLC show the human brain is curently between 7 and 12 percent in use{7 for learning impaired 12 for the geniuses like einstien and such}. So there is a much larger capacity of the human brain yet untapped.

I have a theory and I am sure http://www.skepticalenquiror.com? will disagree but here it is anyways.

Aparently the human brain I read somewheres emits radio waves. In my theory the more the brain is used its capacity the stronger the waves. I think that down the road, maybe with the use of a computer/machine mechanism that these waves can be fed and connected into one another to form a possible borg like hive mind. Where not one brain contains all knowledge but one brain can access all knowledge collected throughout the hive mind.

Possibly at this time between all brains connected to the hive mind infinity might be proved finite.

Who knows I am a raging looney who needs to be locked up cause that almost makes sense to me.

You stand alone!

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

First of all we use 100% of our brains. It's quite easy to find out where the 10% myth thing started if you look around at a few of the urban myth sites.

Secondly, Carl Sagan's treatise on a grain of salt was quite scientific. It took into account EVERY bit of information about salt, it's shape, size, chemical make-up, quantum properties, etc., and the sheer volume of individual bits of information is staggering beyond belief, and greatly surpasses the ability of human neurons to process.

The capacity of the human mind is not unknowable. It's finite. We do not double our capacity for knowing things every six months (that we "know" more than Michelangelo, Newton, Franklin or Aristotle is and insult to Michelangelo, Newton, Franklin and Aristotle.) What doubles is the amount of information available to us, not our individual ability to record information in our brain attics, which is vast, but absolutely finite.

I don't know about the brain and radio waves -- you have to remember that many things make "radio waves", but that is a far cry from emitting downloadable information.

 

[Todd]

First of all we use 100% of our brains. It's quite easy to find out where the 10% myth thing started if you look around at a few of the urban myth sites.

Secondly, Carl Sagan's treatise on a grain of salt was quite scientific. It took into account EVERY bit of information about salt, it's shape, size, chemical make-up, quantum properties, etc., and the sheer volume of individual bits of information is staggering beyond belief, and greatly surpasses the ability of human neurons to process.

The capacity of the human mind is not unknowable. It's finite. We do not double our capacity for knowing things every six months (that we "know" more than Michelangelo, Newton, Franklin or Aristotle is and insult to Michelangelo, Newton, Franklin and Aristotle.) What doubles is the amount of information available to us, not our individual ability to record information in our brain attics, which is vast, but absolutely finite.

I don't know about the brain and radio waves -- you have to remember that many things make "radio waves", but that is a far cry from emitting downloadable information.

Well I tried, was it at least semi entertaining attempt?

 

[Mensa]

First of all we use 100% of our brains. It's quite easy to find out where the 10% myth thing started if you look around at a few of the urban myth sites.

Yes, we use 100% of our brains. Different areas of the brain control different functions necessary for our operation. But we don't use 100% of it's potential. It's like saying you use 100% of your computer, and you do, but you don't use all it's functions or all it's memory capacity. Plus the human brain is capable of a "memory upgrade"

Secondly, Carl Sagan's treatise on a grain of salt was quite scientific. It took into account EVERY bit of information about salt, it's shape, size, chemical make-up, quantum properties, etc., and the sheer volume of individual bits of information is staggering beyond belief, and greatly surpasses the ability of human neurons to process.

If we are incapable of knowing all there is to know about said salt grain, then how do we know there is more yet to know? If his contention was that we are incapable of remembering all the information pertinent, then he may have a point. Though the human memory and recall ability is quite remarkable. You can remember and recall a great deal if you train your memory.

The capacity of the human mind is not unknowable. It's finite. We do not double our capacity for knowing things every six months (that we "know" more than Michelangelo, Newton, Franklin or Aristotle is and insult to Michelangelo, Newton, Franklin and Aristotle.) What doubles is the amount of information available to us, not our individual ability to record information in our brain attics, which is vast, but absolutely finite.

We do not double our capacity for knowing things every six months, we double the number of things known every six months. No one yet knows everything we know, we all know some of it, but collectively we know it all. The sum total of human knowledge is what increases exponentially.
The only thing finite about the human mind is the number of things we know at present. The potential knowledge is as great as the universe itself and is slowly being revealed to us daily.
Declaring we know more than Michaelangelo, Newton, Franklin, or Aristotle is hardly an insult. We know more because there is more to know than in their time. Saying we are capable of knowing more than they by virtue of mental agility would be insulting. Given the same bed of knowledge they would still prove remarkable men.

 

[Sparky Kronkite]

Nope guys. Interesting as all this is.....

It is not exactly what I was getting at.

You all are hovering around "current capcity."

I suggested speculation regarding the future of the human brain. The evolution of the human brain. What do you think we will become? Will we still be human?

Shall we say - a million years from now? Maybe two million? (And yes let's just pretend that our race, the human race - has survived all the ways that we have invented to do ourselves in - and have evolved like all other living species.)

When might we do away with these ridiculous bodies? When might we evolve past this ridiculous system of living tissue fed with air and water and nutriants from living plants and other animals? When might we build an improved system for ourselves?

When might, what was once us/human - become pure energy? Do you even think that will ever happen? When?

 

[RonG]

A Brief Return

I do apologize for dropping in on this discussion but thought it would be fun to toss in a few thoughts.

Regarding, brain evolution - of course it has evolved. A long-debated point has been the notion that our bicameral mind is of relatively recent vintage. There is considerable argument that internal communication between the right and left hemispheres has not always run smoothly. The frequent allusions to hearing voices (particularly attributed to Mythological Gods) in Roman/Greek/Hebrew stories, is used to supplement the thought that the support functions of the brain that give us the modern sense of a homogenous mind are still developing. The glial cells that provide this internal translation are particularly weakened in those folks afflicted with mental diseases like schizophrenia.

By the way, in examination of Einstein's brain, the only truly outstanding portion that was unusual was the size and health of his glial cells. It would appear that the trick to fully utilizing the deep thinking part of our brains is to get the support functions working at their best, not mesomorphing on the thinking portions. Basically, you need to make sure that everything "gets with the program". Pretty much the same argument as how to maximize the speed of your internet access.