Wilberforce Unbounded
While the Mencken and Yglesias tumult roils on about six inches down that way, how about something non-controversial?
How About Something Non-Controversial? You Know, Like the Creation/Evolution Debate? (Bumped Again)
By Mark Noonan at 03:36 PMWe seem to still be having fun with this, so I’ve pushed it back up.
Mark Noonan over at Blogs For Bush has been flogging it sore again — ‘it’ in this case being his theory on why humans never evolved and Earth has no life on it.
Where does a thought come from? How much does it weigh? What is its physical makeup? It is these quesitons which demonstrate that the neo-Darwinist “its all blind, evoutionary chance” school of thought is, well, insufficient: The two major flaws in evolutionary theory are that it can’t explain how life arose from lifelessness, and it can’t explain how my material brain plays host to my immaterial mind (or thoughts, if you like).
We think the first one has something to do with monomer formation, then polymerization of nucleotides, creating ribozymes and forming primordial soup — which became primordial Mulligatawny, and then chowder, and eventually Phở or Cioppino. This takes us to the Cambrian, owing to the presence of crustaceans. And if Mark wants to know the rest of the story, hey Mark — here’s a quarter, call Paul Harvey!
As for the brain playing host to the thoughts, and so forth:
If we are all the result of inexorable evolutionary processes, then I shouldn’t be able to have any thought which does not immediately coincide with the last thought in my brain…
This is easily addressed by the observation that none of Mark Noonan’s thoughts coincide with the last thought in his brain.
I could not, as it were, think one second about space flight and the next about a cheese sandwich.
Which certainly challenges all the data on morphological and molecular homology. More frighteningly, it might be an accurate illustration of Mark’s normal train of thought.
As for my views: I simply don’t know. God (literally) knows how it all got started and I’m not terribly interested in that subject, in and of itself…I am, however, greatly interested in the need for us to allow human reason to move forward. To shut off parts of human inquiry because they don’t agree with preconceived notions is to prevent the consummation of human thinking – which is to take data and organize it into a coherent answer to whatever question occupies it. The problem is not with the theory of evolution, but the fact that this theory is considered Holy Writ and may not be questioned.
‘Holy Writ!’ is phonetically similar to what this paragraph made me say, in the moment just before I gave up on all human endeavor and cored my brain out with a melon baller.
if Mark Noonan is the indeed the product of a deity, then indeed, the gods must be crazy
It is these quesitons which demonstrate
Dammit, I misplaced all my Big Science Books. Is a quesiton like a proton? Or a positron? I really need to know, since apparently this phenomenon single-handedly renders insufficient the blind evolutionary chance of the neo-Darwinist (if I’ve got Noony’s grammar straightened out).
The problem is not with the theory of evolution, but the fact that this theory is considered Holy Writ and may not be questioned.
Not terribly familiar with the scientific method, is he? Well, there’s a surprise.
When Tommy Franks called Douglas Feith the “fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth” did all the other wingnuts think he was launching a competition?
It’s the era of Zoolander conservatism.
“The two major flaws in evolutionary theory are that it can’t explain how life arose from lifelessness, and it can’t explain how my material brain plays host to my immaterial mind (or thoughts, if you like).”
Which is funny, because it TRIES to do neither.
Under Noonan logic, gravity does not exist, because it does not provide proof for WHY there is gravity.
“If we are all the result of inexorable evolutionary processes, then I shouldn’t be able to have any thought which does not immediately coincide with the last thought in my brain…I could not, as it were, think one second about space flight and the next about a cheese sandwich.”
… It’s just … so… stunning in its complete and totally bullshittery. I can’t even come up with a good analogy that would adequately capture just how retarded that is. I guess the best one could be, “circular saws, by their name in proof, can only cut in circles.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFbYe-MJ3K4&mode=related&search= with emphasis on 0:15 to 1:10.
Oh! Here we go! “Evolution is this extension cord’s power plug, and free thought is this avocado.”
Hehehe. Mellon baller. It’s so deliciously double entandre!
This should cheer everyone up:
Atlas Pam in the Bathroom with Clock and Condom.
To shut off parts of human inquiry because they don’t agree with preconceived notions is to prevent the consummation of human thinking – which is to take data and organize it into a coherent answer to whatever question occupies it.
Ladies and Gentlemen, there it is, cosmological proof of the absence of God. That this sentence could come from HIM without the earth opening to swallow him or lightning striking him dead is comprehensive evidence that cosmic justice, either as impersonal forces or a conscious agent, does not exist. If it did, after telling a whopper like that he would not still be drawing breath.
TY, Lesley…the “OMG, I’m on this!” line is outstanding
Omg, here’s a youtube mocking Althouse’s interview and her drunken American Idol vlogging. Hysterical.
I have to admit, evolution does not explain Mark Noonan!
evolutionary theory… can’t explain how my material brain plays host to my immaterial mind (or thoughts, if you like).
Nor, indeed, can it explain why my breath reeks of whisky. The only alternative is that the alcohol in my bloodstream was inserted there by Divine intervention. OK, officer?
Shorter Noonan: “If you conveniently ignore the fields of cognitive science and neurobiology its all a big fucking mystery. Ergo, Jeebus done it.”
Seriously, we need a global treaty to ban this kind of weaponized stupidity.
Watch out for the falling straw men!
They’re very dangerous when they reach the end of their shelf-life.
Test.
This is just a test.
I have a theory that Retardo doesn’t read the comments for S/N posts unless he’s the author of the post.
No fair going off and telling him I’ve posted this test here, OK, guys?
And Retardo, if you do respond, you know, just to prove me wrong? I’ll be expecting pointers to at least five reasonably recent threads where you’ve been an active participant in S/N discussions not attached to your own posts.
And yeah, for the rest of you, I just wasted 20 seconds of your life. I’m totally sorry about that, and I’ll happily buy you lunch sometime to make up for it.
I feel better now. When I see my newly deceased grandmother staggering around in my kitchen trying to fix me a healthy meal of fried eggs and turnip greens, I’ll know its God talking.
ZOMG, grampaw, you mean that all members of a group blog might not read/respond to all threads posted by all the members of that group blog? Well, that certainly proves…. something.
While I might, on principle, admire your willingness to put your ‘theory’ to the test by direct experimentation, I’d humbly suggest that your petty wankerishness is sufficiently established.
Some theory!
Evolutionary theory can’t answer the phone either.
Maybe Noonan is on to something here.
Established!
If Retardo doesn’t respond, then it proves that global warming doesn’t exist.
(Bet you can’t tell that from GENUINE conservative reasoning. Most of Thomas Sowell’s columns are constructed from similar material.)
Since the theory of evolution cannot explain the existence of HTML Mencken’s comments on Gavin-created threads we must conclude that God is a dirty namestealer.
It’s probably why she made turnip greens instead of chard. My REAL grandmother KNOWS I prefer chard.
Noted:
5 references not provided.
Hanx fer playing, Retardo. YHL. HTH. You really couldn’t cite five reasonably recent posts you’ve contributed to other than your own, eh?
Look, the point of the test was that I’ve never experienced anything near the hatefucking Retardo has given me in S/N posts he didn’t author.
My point, and it is a minor one, is that Retardo is less a member of the S/N community than many of the regular commenters. I do like to think this reveals something about his perception of and relation to his own audience, but let’s not get distracted from the main issue, here: arguments at least trying to appeal to fact and reason vs. “GRAMPAW IS HORRIBLE POO-TROLL HAW HAW HAW POO.”
For your ‘theory’ to carry any freight at all you would have to be able to show a consistent pattern of Brad posting comments to Gavin’s threads, Gavin commenting in Seb’s threads, Travis commenting in Mencken’s threads, etc, etc. which is simply not the case.
Instead, you evidently started with what you wanted to be true (that Mencken’s behavior is somehow distastefully different that the other front-pagers) and concocted a ‘theory’ to ‘prove’ it to yourself. Nearly as I can tell, you form your political views by the same process.
Careful Gav, a melon baller is a terrible thing to waste.
grampaw, whatever valid gripe you may or may not have had with Mencken/Montalban at some point, nowadays you’re just acting like a belligerent wanker. Please stop.
See also here or here.
Socrates: Let us now suppose that in the mind of each man there is an aviary of all sorts of birds — some flocking together apart from the rest, others in small groups, others solitary, flying anywhere and everywhere.
Theaetetus: Let us imagine such an aviary — and what is to follow?
Socrates: We may suppose that the birds are kinds of knowledge, and that when we were children, this receptacle was empty; whenever a man has gotten and detained in the enclosure a kind of knowledge, he may be said to have learned or discovered the thing which is the subject of the knowledge: and this is to know.
Noonan:Then by calling the right birds, it is possible for me to think one second about space flight and the next about a cheese sandwich!
Theaetetus: Socrates, your theory does not seem to apply to Noonan.
Socrates: True, my analogy has broken down. The head of Noonan appears to be stocked with giant black bats, swooping and diving.
HDB:
An excellent philosophical analogy.
Although it seems to me that Noonan’s thoughts are more like a group of shrimp, always milling around aimlessly underwater, feeding off the bottom, waiting to get eaten by a whale.
I think evolution does explain Mark Noonan. He is from the wingnut branch of a dying tree that ends up stuck in tar pit like the Brachiosaurs of old.
How much does a color weigh? Why is it that I can put crayons in a box and there is no discernable progression between adjacent colors? I can put burnt sienna next to silver, next to mulberry, next to cerulean, next to yellow-orange, for example. How do the Darwinists explain that?
My point, and it is a minor one, is that Retardo… er… is that I just wasted 20 seconds of your life. I’m totally sorry about that, and I’ll happily buy you lunch sometime to make up for it.
grampaw, you troll on out of here and we’ll call it lunch.
Actually, “King,” since my theory, as you’ve conveniently overlooked, was that Retardo is less a member of the S/N community than many of the commenters, all I’ve got to do is show that Retardo tends to comment only in his own posts, while some number of regular commenters tend to contribute to posts by a variety of authors.
And then I can throw in the fact that Brad and Gavin tend to update the posts of other S/N editors, while Retardo does not.
The fact of the matter is that Retardo treats the site as more of a bully pulpit whereas the other editors treat it more like a clubhouse. This is of course evident in Retardo’s rhetorical style, but I am trying here to point out that it is also evident in his pattern of participation in the wider conversation on the site— particularly in discussions where he does not have the luxury of setting the agenda.
Mulberry and cerulean crayons?! This must be the Junior Interior Decorator box. I hope it also contains Taupe, Puce and Reseda.
No wonder I’m so confused lately: my head’s full of flocking birds!
Wish I could get the flocking bird crap out of my brain…
I do have to wonder how, exactly, the good Mr. Noonan imagines his blogs-postings reach us.
Does he imagine some vast network of monoatomic internet filament stretching from shore to shore, with each link in each single-atom chain firing deterministically at the behest of its neighbor?
I might just be the product of an elite liberalist education here, but I seem to remember there being a lot more complication, and, well, randomness in the behavior of electrons in communications circuits.
And that’s not even getting into information theory as opposed to the details of the communications mechanism conveying the information…
…say, Mark Noonan, how much does your blog post weigh? What is its physical makeup? And do you think your blog posts would still get to your readers if they were simply impelled by your divine will, instead of, say, conveyed via PCs and ethernet and routers and other stuff you’ve never heard of and/or can’t/won’t understand?
Herr Doktor, what the buggery bollocks is Reseda? I’m familiar with Taupe and Puce, as of course every female is born with the ability to recognise Taupe (and its applicability to shoes). I could even raise you things like Chartreuse, if you want to be tart about it.
But Reseda, I’ve never heard of that. Please to enlighten moi…?
And what about algebra, eh? That’s not a Goddish creation, it’s the fault of those damn’ Arabs. So decent honest God-fearin’ folks should do without it, and all its hellish spawn.
algebra can’t answer a phone either…
Does it truly exist only to terrorize high school students?
I gotta agree with Quetesh and her assessment of Algebra. Pure EVIL…
My goodness, now everyone is as drunk as I am am.
Don’t get me started!
Good question, Q. What is Reseda? A dull smoggy brown, with hints of dull smoggy yellow, I’d guess, if it’s anything like the portion of the San Fernando Valley that bears the same name. And thank all that you hold dear that you’ve never been near it, or heard of it.
The fact of the matter is that Retardo treats the site as more of a bully pulpit whereas the other editors treat it more like a clubhouse. This is of course evident in Retardo’s rhetorical style…
Who cares? Why don’t you get out of our face?
Nope, reseda is a “dull grayish-green.” Still describes the location of the same name, though.
Gramps, your dentures are slipping out again.
Why does Noonan think that thoughts are life forms?
I can debunk Intelligent Design in two words.
Mark Noonan
toe funk.
obstetric fistulas
gangreneous diabetic extaneous digits
including the r
Mark Noonan’s Substance Dualism for Dummies
authoritarian followers
Grampaw, some of your observations are vacuously true. Now hush.
Wait, doesn’t evolution provide a (possible) explanation as to how we have random/unrelated thoughts? Isn’t it adaptive to have random thoughts? After all, the survival of the species depends on eating AND fucking AND protecting ourselves from danger AND getting along with others in the social grouping. So, we need to think about all of those things. Plus, since our big brains are our main tool (unlike, say, the tiger, who doesn’t need to think about much), the more it wanders around, the more it’s going to happen on some ideas that will make us safer, like, say antibiotics.
Oh, Christ, is this what the “Meditations” lead to? This fucking hack denying the science I gave my life to building from something other than Jesuit teaching?
Just read my mathematics and physics– I hereby renounce my dualistic philosophy.
My favorite thing though, was the commenter over there who said, if evolution is real, why don’t we see it happen, except for in bacteria, because he believes in evolution for small stuff. Right, and remains of australopithius skeletons, and fossils, and DNA evidence, and geology indicating that the earth is billions of years old. But there’s no proof!! Especially hilarious coming from someone whose argument is a 1500-year-old book written by goatherders.
To shut off parts of human inquiry because they don’t agree with preconceived notions is to prevent the consummation of human thinking
I think this is a description of every Noonan column–ever.
I demand a Tugboat picture everytime Noonan is mentioned!
And I thought that The-grand-unseen-annie-hand-angel-paw bot only afflicted Brad’s posts?
Herr Doktor,
No fair using the genesis of ALL WESTERN CIVILIZATION (Hellenic culture: I’ve written dozens of books about it, doncha know, especially the battle-y bits) to show that the Right has crazy on the mind. If you do true research like me (at San Diego State) you’d know that deep analysis of Athens and Sparta reveal why the West is in Decline at the present and why Jimmy Carter is evil and the root of all Islamic fundamentalism. Was there ever a massacre at Plato’s academy? Of course not, because Plato did NOT allow PC anti-Western bullshit to fly in his lectures. Or Persians, who are from the East just like Korea. Orientals, all.
Evolution and processes of the brain? I leave you with Galen’s commentary, as that is all we need to know:
1) Since feeling and voluntary motion are peculiar to animals, whilst growth and nutrition are common to plants as well, we may look on the former as effects of the soul and the latter as effects of the nature. And if there be anyone who allows a share in soul to plants as well, and separates the two kinds of soul, naming the kind in question vegetative, and the other sensory, this person is not saying anything else, although his language is somewhat unusual. We, however, for our part, are convinced that the chief merit of language is clearness, and we know that nothing detracts so much from this as do unfamiliar terms; accordingly we employ those terms which the bulk of people are accustomed to use, and we say that animals are governed at once by their soul and by their nature, and plants by their nature alone, and that growth and nutrition are the effects of nature, not of soul.
2)And how is propulsion by the veins impossible? The situation of the kidneys is against it. They do not occupy a position beneath the hollow vein [vena cava] as does the sieve-like [ethmoid] passage in the nose and palate in relation to the surplus matter from the brain; they are situated on both sides of it.
“Was there ever a massacre at Plato’s academy? Of course not, because Plato did NOT allow PC anti-Western bullshit to fly in his lectures.”
AND Plato had no gun control laws at all, either. Take that, liberals!
How much does a color weigh? Why is it that I can put crayons in a box and there is no discernable progression between adjacent colors? I can put burnt sienna next to silver, next to mulberry, next to cerulean, next to yellow-orange, for example. How do the Darwinists explain that?
I seriously hope that this philosophical examination becomes a required text in all university art and art history courses across the country.
In other bits of crazy, from Noonan’s commenters:
There are believers and non-believers; I’ll accept that. However, as the believers far outnumber the non-believers, I have to follow the lib model and play the “consensus” card. Playing that card, the conclusion is that God created the heavens and the earth, and the proof is undeniable.
Yet another inconvenient truth. Case closed.
BTW: non-believers are morons…
So global warming is real because more people believe it?
While I’ll admit that beliefs in things without any tangible reality–nations, gods–certainly are strong enough that they create cultural realities strong enough to shape (and end) human lives in great numbers, not to mention that whole scientific Schroedinger’s Cat thing about observation making reality, this is one of the stupidest arguments I’ve ever read.
So … when the consensus among humans (gatherers, say) was that trees and rocks and streams contained spirits, then trees and rocks and streams actually contained spirits? And when those same people regarded the world as a flat construction, because they were the dominant consensus at the time, then the earth really wasn’t yet a sphere?
Come to think of it, there was never a massacre at Plato’s Retreat either.
Smotes Durston: well of course the earth was flat, until the consensus swung around the other way. Must have been a trying time for the earth, I must say, discerning just who had the upper hand, or upper brain.
And, of course, since now a vast majority of humankind believe that the US is The Great Satan, and George W Bush is the boil on Satan’s bottom, why, then, boil he must be. QED.
By the way, that doofus who decided that belief == proof must be a lot of fun. I wish he’d been around when I was at university, I could have had some marvellous drunken arguments.
Now I’m off: I’ve got a date with Schroedinger’s cat. I think.
Wait….wasn’t Plato infected with Teh Ghey?
neo-Darwinist “its all blind, evoutionary[sic] chance� school of thought is, well, insufficient
Oddly enough, I find “I simply don’t know. God (literally) knows how it all got started and I’m not terribly interested…” to be, well, insufficient.
“I shouldn’t be able to have any thought which does not immediately coincide with the last thought in my brain” is a pretty ludicrous assertion from someone who doesn’t know beans about evolution, neurology, physics, beans, etc.. Question evolution all you want, but don’t pretend that chaotic or random thought jumps disproves it. But I have to admit, his buttressing of his complaint that evolution is treated as “Holy Writ” even though it doesn’t explain everything to his satisfaction by quoting a letter from the pope rocks my world.
Nonsense! He was a manly man, just like the Spartans who certainly didn’t have instituted knob-gobbling as part of the upbringing of any young man of good family. But they did so strut their stuff in nothing but leather speedos and red capes, come rain or shine. It’s true ’cause I’ve seen it.
(the above was a reply to teh logos, not tigrismus, in case you were wondering)
Because Bistroist knows I’m objectively pro leather speedos on hawt Spartan dudes.
I’ve got a date with Schroedinger’s cat. I think.
You won’t know until you’ve looked in the box.
I love the way creationists always come up with some dazzlingly simple flaw in evolutionary theory and then proclaim that they have disproven evolution. As if no scientist had ever heard it before, and they’ll all see the error of their ways once the creationist publishes the proof on his blog.
I also love the way people who can’t cope with the concept that the mind is what the brain does have to completely ignore brain pathologies to sustain their belief system. It would be a whole lot easier to believe that some immaterial soul was causing our thoughts if people who have damaged brains didn’t also lose mental faculties.
That last post was me. My sock puppetry days are over.
“…evolutionary theory are that it can’t explain how life arose from lifelessness.”
Sorry but when I read something like that, I have no reason to read further because this statement shows the writer has no idea what they are talking about.
Evolution does not explain “how life arose from lifelessness”, evolution explains how life forms evolve over time. How life started is not a concern to evolution. Abiogensis is the science pertaining to the origin of life and is a completely different field of study than evolution.
The anti science people love to make what sounds like rational statements, but they are rational as long as the audience has little or no understanding of science.
The two major flaws in evolutionary theory are that it can’t explain how life arose from lifelessness, and it can’t explain how my material brain plays host to my immaterial mind (or thoughts, if you like).
Evolution says nothing about Abiogenesis, the origin of life. Evolution only describes the mechanism that led to biodiversity. You can quibble with the current theories of Abiogenesis if you want, but if you claim you are quibbling with current theories of Evolution while so doing you appear stupid.
I’m not sure how the mind/body dichotomy plays into theories of evolution on any level. Again, Noonan just looks stupid.
If you prefer a silly mythology unsupported by any factual evidence whatsoever to a well-developed scientific understanding of the mechanisms of evolution and natural selection, fine. But don’t come out here and try to tell the big kids “I gotcha! You’re wrong and I can prove it”. Because if you do you’re going to look stupid. Much like that limpydick guy trying to argue climate science. Get your degree(s). Get your grant. Do your research. Write peer-reviewed papers. Then come back and claim to be an authority. No, go ahead. I’ll wait…
mikey
mikey
Come to think of it, there was never a massacre at Plato’s Retreat either.
I believe Plato’s Retreat was a massacre of nearly unprecedented proportions, if you count each wasted spermatozoon as a life destroyed.
Ew. I’m sorry everybody.
Its not “blind chance” !
see this is the problem with creationists, you comment and denounce something you dont even have a feeble grasp of. evolution is the NON-random selection by random mutation. and its base level is the gene.
spend some time learning about genetics before you open your mouth to the world and embarass yourself in front of intelligent people….
M. Bouffant: I used to live in Reseda. Your description ain’t half bad.
BTW, I lived in Reseda until we got clobbered by the Northridge Earthquake of ’94, whose official epicenter was five blocks from our house. So we fled to New Orleans. Result: Hurricane Katrina. Where does Mark Noonan live? I want to move there next.
Speaking as someone with a BA in Philosophy:
BWAAHAHAHAHAHAH! AH-HAHAHAHAHA! AAAH-HAHAHAHA. [gasp! choke! lying on the floor on my back with my feet kicking in the air, pouning the carpet with my fists]
That may be the funniest parody of horseshit clueless freshman philosophizing I’ve ever read.
Right, and remains of australopithius skeletons, and fossils, and DNA evidence, and geology indicating that the earth is billions of years old. But there’s no proof!!
Ha, I love how Noonan will completely ignore such things even when he’s having his nose shoved in them.
“There’s no such thing as a transitional fossil!”
“Actually, Noonan, here are some transitional fossils.”
“I see…well…there’s no such thing as a transitional fossil!”
A lot of people think Noonan is a spoof; I don’t, but when he gets going on creationism, I really start to wonder. I mean, it must be hard to maintain that sort of stupidity–unless it’s all an elaborate joke.
Also, his commentariat is certainly very special, isn’t it? It’s sort of the icing on the wingnut idiocy cake.
Not terribly familiar with the scientific method, is he? Well, there’s a surprise.
It’s not that. The problem is not with the scientific method, but the fact that this method is considered Holy Writ and may not be questioned.
I believe Plato’s Retreat was a massacre of nearly unprecedented proportions, if you count each wasted spermatozoon as a life destroyed.
Yeah, didn’t Paedrus massacre Plato’s butt at some point?
Once again, sorry….
J: There you’re wrong, though it may look that way to the uninformed. Everything about science, including the scientific method itself, has been rigorously tested by generations who have understood that the best way to test something is to try to find what’s wrong with it, not what’s right. The scientific method is accepted only because of centuries of unsuccessful attempts to make it fail.
The reason why it “may not be questioned” is not that it Holy Writ, but that doing so would be a waste of time. It would be like asking an animal biologist to establish, once and for all, beyond reasonable doubt, that a healthy dog has four legs and a tail. Uhhh, that was settled a long time ago. Can’t we spend our time and energy on something worthwhile?
Steve, while I can’t presume to speak for J— here, I doubt he was expressing his own sentiment, but rather riffing on the Noonan column and Smiling Mortician’s comment above…
How precisely does one determine whether it’s time to change the litter in Schrodinger’s catbox?
How precisely does one determine whether it’s time to change the litter in Schrodinger’s catbox?
I don’t know. I asked Heisenberg, but he was uncertain.
How precisely does one determine whether it’s time to change the litter in Schrodinger’s catbox?
I don’t know. I asked Heisenberg, but he was uncertain.
Einstein said it was relative, but Alan Guth said just wait for the Litterbox Inflation…
mikey
It’s the ignorant arrogance that really gets me. Here’s this guy, without a basic middle-school level understanding of the subject, much less any expertise, yet he feels qualified to make statements about evolutionary theory, and (here’s what really irks me) declare that all the scientists are wrong and they are arrogant.
BTW – why doesn’t the cat count as the observer in the Schrodinger’s Cat thought experiment?
BTW – why doesn’t the cat count as the observer in the Schrodinger’s Cat thought experiment?
Just ask him.
This made Alan Greenspan cry.
So in wingnut land, “genetics” can be used to explain their racist belief in one superior race (like when they talk about how the Brown Arabs can never be as civilized as our dear Noonan). BUT, if you say the flower with the genes most well suited for its environment is more likely to live and pass them on, then genetics goes out the window.
And, all evolution says is that if a certain mutuation is advantageous for a particular organism in its current environment, it is more likely to be passed on. Thus, if have consciousness was advantageous for survival, it would be passed on. If being able to put two disparate and seemingly unrelated thoughts together was helpful, it would most likely be a trait that proliferated. If believing in God made an organism less likely to kill iteself, then the theory of evolution states that a brain inclined towards that belief is more likely to be have offspring and proliferate. In fact, Evolution explains the belief in God much better than a belief in God can explain evolution.
Its like arguing about the best car with a dog, but dogs probably know more about cars than Noonan does science.
I had a really dumb dog once. He had a completely flat head from chasing parked cars…
mikey
Seems kinda like hubris for Noonan to assert that he had two thoughts. It’s not evident in his writing.
if we are all the result of inexorable evolutionary processes, then I shouldn’t be able to have any thought which does not immediately coincide with the last thought in my brain…
Maybe you will… in 6 or 7 million years.
Shorter Noonan: I think not, therefore I am not.
Oh and Grampaw, I’ll have a BLT on wheat.
Everytime Grampaw’s around, I smell cheetos and basement must.
sniff, sniff…
“Hey Grampaw- yell upstairs and tell your mom I want a Reuben made with Smoked Tomato Field Roast! And tell her not to skimp on the ‘kraut.”
Oh, and BTW-
Noonan wins this round, because I just wasted 15 minutes of my life reading reasonable people rebut someone with a sixth grader’s grasp on reality. The one in the corner who breathes through his mouth all the time and puts crayons on top of the radiator ’cause he likes the smell…..
How precisely does one determine whether it’s time to change the litter in Schrodinger’s catbox?
That’s an easy one. The act of observation changes the litter.
It also collapses the probability waveform, which often annoys the cat.
[…] witness one of the most mysterious events in the natural world. Naively, I read Sadly, No’s latest foray to the lifeless alien world that is Blogs for Bush, where they found strange, glowing piles of […]
Mark Noonan makes William Jennings Bryan look like Richard Dawkins. Noonan and his kind possess vestigial tails in their cortices.
Gee. And, here I always had it chalked up to stylistic differences.
Silly me.
Well, dayum, honey, who isn’t?
Reading Noonan causes pain. Did he graduate high school? Scratch that, did he complete the 8th grade?
Ahem: