Yale Scientist abanding Darwin's Evolution

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by iamthat

Thanks for the links. They were quite amusing, especially when you consider that the heaviest known stones in the Great Pyramid are estimated to weigh 50-80 tons. Certainly, the smaller pyramids may have been built using such methods, but the Great Pyramid is on a completely different scale.

At a conservative estimate there are 2.3 million stones in the Great Pyramid weighing on average 2.5 tons each. Supposedly the Great Pyramid took 20 years to build. If they worked around the clock for 20 years then each stone would have been put in place in under 5 minutes. If they only worked in daylight then it would have been one stone every 2.5 minutes, all just using ropes and sleds and timber cranes. For me at least, these "facts" do not make sense. But that is the orthodox view because there was supposedly no other technology available. Any alternative possibilities mean revising our understanding of human history.
Peace

Instead of placing one stone every 2.5 minutes, they could have placed, let's say 100 stones at once. Using your calculations, this would take 250 minutes. Wikipedia claims "It is estimated that 5.5 million tonnes of limestone, 8,000 tonnes of granite (imported from Aswan), and 500,000 tonnes of mortar were used in the construction of the Great Pyramid." If you noticed the tonnage for limestone and the tonnage for mortar, there is almost 100 times more mortar then limestone. There are recent studies that have claimed a lot of the Great Pyramid was casted.

[EdmundJohnstone]

Hi

Yes, I agree that science cannot detect the immaterial, but can we be sure that immaterial is fact?

Nor can science detect fairies or the easter bunny. So those "beings" as well can't be proven nor disproven, but most people would agree that they reside just in the imagination of the thinker, it might be the same for spirits, but yes, unfortunately the current scientific model accepts that consciousness is a byproduct of the brain activity, regardless of what someone might wish.

In the end the easiest theory is that the Big bang happened, the Universe was created, Planets were created, life emerged in marine environment and due to evolution by natural selection by adaptation, here we are today

Originally Posted by iamthat

You have said it yourself. Science cannot detect the immaterial. When we consider the bond between physical atoms and consciousness we are in the realms of etheric matter which is currently beyond scientific measurement. One day science will catch up.

Peace

Originally Posted by iamthat

You have said it yourself. Science cannot detect the immaterial. When we consider the bond between physical atoms and consciousness we are in the realms of etheric matter which is currently beyond scientific measurement. One day science will catch up.

Peace

Are you familiar with the Penrose/Hameroff Orch OR hypothesis on consciousness?

[EdmundJohnstone]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Are you familiar with the Penrose/Hameroff Orch OR hypothesis on consciousness?

Hi
Yes, I am familiar with their work, unfortunately is just a theory, nothing more, it hasn't been proved

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

Hi
Yes, I am familiar with their work, unfortunately is just a theory, nothing more, it hasn't been proved

Not even a theory, just a hypothesis but fascinating nonetheless. By the way, there's even less in the way of hypothesis on consciousness being an emergent quality of the brain, hence The Hard Problem.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

In the end the easiest theory is that ...

The easiest theory is that Life is just a flash in some pan. Yup!

[EdmundJohnstone]

Originally Posted by davidsun

The easiest theory is that Life is just a flash in some pan. Yup!

I guess it's just easier to assume that everything is physical, once you add those mystical fantasy beings, things start to get less credible, it might be the case for spirits. There is not even proof that Jesus was alive, the same as Hercules or Easter Bunny myth

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

I guess it's just easier to assume that everything is physical, once you add those mystical fantasy beings, things start to get less credible, it might be the case for spirits. There is not even proof that Jesus was alive, the same as Hercules or Easter Bunny myth

Yah, not being absolutely 'sure' can be unnerving (to some).

[EdmundJohnstone]

Originally Posted by davidsun

Yah, not being absolutely 'sure' can be unnerving (to some).

Yes, unfortunately wishing does not make something to happen.
No matter how much a person might want something (imaginary/fantasy) to be true, it won't happen. No matter how much children will want to see the Easter Bunny they won't see it outside their imagination, or in movies (unless someone is costumed as it).

Many spiritualists take scientists' work and assume it is something related to spirituality when it's not, those are labeled as pseudoscientists. Compared to spiritualism, science tries to find proof, whereas spiritualists who are more inclined to the artistic side, just hope and wishful thinking

People will say Energy can not be created nor destroyed, but it changes form. Where does the Energy go from the Candle that stops burning? It dissipates as heat. What about the light from the lightbulb when the electricity is switched off? It doesen't go amywhere. Unfortunately it might be the same with spirit after human death.

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Are you familiar with the Penrose/Hameroff Orch OR hypothesis on consciousness?

I wasn't familiar with it. I just had a quick look, although many of the terms are beyond my understanding. It postulates that consciousness originates at the quantum level inside neurons, rather than the conventional view that it is a product of connections between neurons.

My personal view is that consciousness has its origins way beyond anything physical, and that includes the quantum level.

Peace