How did Intelligent Designer/God do it? How was life created?

Since scientists have not been able to prove or even logically explain the origins of life (abiogenesis) by natural, unguided, gradual processes often referred to as the bottom-up approach, it is conceivable to imply that the process of life origins on Earth could be scientifically explained by the design and creation process often referred to as the top-down approach.The top-down approach is sometimes used by scientists in attempts of recreation of small life forms, like a eukaryotic cell.

I will however apply the top-down approach to the process of the designing and creating of human life Intelligent Designer or God (ID/God) could have used.

In other words, the top-down approach is the only conceivable way of the designing and creating life as even in case of the simplest of cells all organelles and functional structures of a cell have to be present, and at the same time, as they are mutually interdependent, including the cell membrane, for it to function or be alive or stay alive. Without the cell membrane or one of the structures or organelles, the cell stops functioning and eventually dies.

In an attempt to explain how the process of the designing and creating of life could have been achieved by ID/God, I will use the illustration some naturalistic, evolutionary scientists often use to try to explain the process of evolution of life often called descent with modifications, where they refer to an “evolution” or change of one model of the car over the many years.

Since this process itself doesn’t explain how the original car appeared in the first place by slow, unguided processes, (bottom-up) I will use it as an example of what kind of planning, engineering, integration and manufacturing would be necessary for a car to “appear” in the first place, before it could go through the further gradual processes of “descent with modification” or changes over time.

Then I will apply the same methods and principles to the process of the designing and creating of life.

The designer comes up with a general idea and structure for a car and its function

  • The designer decides what functional systems would be necessary for the car to work according to the design
  • Then the designer decides how the individual parts need to work and be integrated into functional systems and functional systems into functional car
  • The designer decides what materials need to be manufactured, such as steel, aluminum, copper, plastic, electrical wires, fabrics etc. for the individual parts to be manufactured he is going to use in order for the functional systems to be assembled, such as an engine, transmission, chassis the body/frame, source of energy and so on
  • Once the design has been experimented with the integration of all the individual parts into systems and systems into the functional car, the final blueprint of the car is ready. The final manufacturing process of all the parts can begin
    Then, all the parts can be assembled into functional systems and the functional systems into a functional car
  • The car has been assembled and is ready to function according to the design
    Then the designer turns on the ignition, puts into the first gear, then he puts his foot on the accelerator and the car moves
  • The idea for a car has become reality. It functions according to the initial idea and the design

Let’s look closer at the materials, such as steel, copper, fabrics, wires etc. They are made of smaller elements; really tiny pieces of stuff. Actually, on subatomic level, they are made up of 3 ingredients: protons, neutrons and electrons.

As a matter fact, as far as we know, the whole matter in the universe is made of protons, neutrons and electrons.

The same applies to life, including human body. Life and human body on subatomic level is made of 3 ingredients: protons, neutrons and electrons.

And this is very important information because on this very fact my whole theory as to How ID/God created life is based.

Just like the car, human body is made of or built of many functional systems, like circulatory system, nervous system, lymphatic system, bones, veins, and so on.

Human body systems are made of integrated organs.

Those organs are made of different types of tissues.

Tissues are made of different types of cells (about 200 types of cells).

Cells are made of different organelles – organized or specialized structures within the living cell. Most types of cells share the same organelles or specialized structures within a living cells but other cells do not. Some of the organelles carry DNA, which is necessary for the process of reproduction of the living organism that non-living things, like a cars, don’t obviously have.

Organelles are made of macromolecules, like carbohydrates, lipids, amino acids, proteins and so on.
Macromolecules are made of chemical elements, like carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and so on.
Chemical elements are made of atoms.

Atoms are made of subatomic elements like protons, neutrons and electrons.

And, as I mentioned earlier, just like the car, on subatomic level is made of protons, neutrons and electrons, so is human body and all life on the Earth.

(Quarks are, as far as we know, the smallest pieces of stuff. There are 6 different types of quarks, and different combinations produce different types of subatomic particles like protons. For simplicity and clarity, I’ll focus on the 3 ingredients or building blocks of all matter: protons, neutrons and electrons as it is just easier to follow what I’m trying to convey.)

If I missed a step or more in the structure of what the human body and life is made of, feel free to correct it but this is not really that important now…

Life and human body on subatomic level are built of only 3 ingredients: protons, neutrons and electrons. While this might be mind-boggling if you think about how complex human body is, especially human brain, this is actually true as far as science has revealed it so far.

While the composition of life and human body is based on the 3 subatomic elements protons, neutrons and electrons, how life and human body function is based on how the three elemental building blocks of life (protons, neutrons and electrons) interact with each other or what their quantum state is; what their interactions or relations are.

Quantum state is simply something that encodes or translates the state of a system; how protons, neutrons and electrons interact with each other to form a state of a system. Behind each quantum state is the information that expresses the quantum state of the subatomic particles.

Here is the most interesting part about quantum state and quantum mechanics (science that is a part of physics) that deals with the mathematical description of the motion and interaction of subatomic particles.

According to quantum mechanics any quantum state of protons, neutrons and electrons that form a system or systems can be transferred or teleported due to quantum entanglement (predicament of subatomic particles) from one place to another, without traveling through any physical medium.

 

Scientists have already successfully teleported photons, which are particles of light as well as small pieces of matter across a short distance.

And this is the most essential part of my theory.

Since scientists have successfully teleported particles and small pieces of matter, who says that humans could not be teleported in the future? While human teleportation is still in theory today, it may very well become reality in the future. It has not been proven wrong at least mathematically.

Let’s just focus on the possibilities of human teleportation.
Since a picture is worth a thousand words here are some videos that explain how quantum teleportation of humans could work:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQHBAdShgYI

I personally like this video at 40 minute mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z8Ma2YT8vY

So, human teleportation in theory seems possible. Whether it will be possible in the future it remains to be seen.

NEXT

So you may wonder; how does human teleportation, whether possible or not in the future, relate to the theme of my post: How did the ID/God create life?

Well, I think it does.
As you may recall on the outset of my post, just like any car is built in the top-down process starting with an idea/design, blueprint etc. all the way down to the elements that are made of subatomic particles, so could human body starting with its blueprint all the way down to the elements that are made subatomic particles; protons, neurons and electrons.
How that could have been done in reality by ID/God, the possibility of human quantum teleportation sheds some light on that.
For human body to be teleported–transferred from one place to another, without actually traveling through any physical medium–the quantum state of each of the subatomic particles that make up the human body to be teleported would have to be extracted (scanned or analyzed) and then teleported or sent exactly to the designated location where the human body is supposed to “arrive” and to be reassembled.
In quantum teleportation, the subatomic particles that make up the original human body are NOT literary sent. No. It’s the information about their quantum state that is sent thanks to the laws of quantum mechanics called quantum entanglement.
Wikipedia–Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently of the others, even when the particles are separated by a large distance—instead, a quantum state must be described.

QE video link???
For human quantum teleportation to happen, 2 entangled chambers containing subatomic particles, protons, neutrons and electrons are needed. The first chamber will act as a “sending chamber” and the second as a” receiving or reassembling chamber”.
Then, a third chamber will be needed that will act as a body scanner or fax machine that will be interacting with the “sending chamber”, while compering the quantum states of each particle that the human body to be teleported is made of.
The process of quantum teleportation involves the scanning or extracting the quantum state of each of the subatomic particles (protons, neurons and electrons) that the body to be teleported is made of and sending it to the receiving chamber that is entangled with the sending chamber.
Because the particles in the “sending chamber” are entangled with the particles in the “receiving chamber”, the “receiving chamber” reads the quantum state of each particles that was extracted from the human body in the scanning chamber and reassembles it into the exact quantum state or the exact human body composition that it was before being teleported.
In quantum teleportation, the subatomic particles that make up the original human body are not sent. It’s the information about their quantum state that is sent thanks to the laws of quantum mechanics called quantum entanglement.
Since according to quantum mechanics, life on the subatomic level equals the quantum state of each the subatomic particles that make up the life form, there should be no difference between the human body that was alive in the scanning chamber and the reassembled human body that is now alive in the receiving chamber.
Since according to quantum mechanics you can’t create 2 exactly the same quantum states of an object, in quantum teleportation you can’t teleport an object without destroying in the process.
Actually, you can’t extract the quantum state of the object to be teleported without destroying it in the process of scanning it.

While there may be some philosophical implications (depending on one’s beliefs on soul and consciousness) that would have to be answered about the process of human quantum teleportation (I can try to answer them later) let’s just focus on the implications that the possibility of human quantum teleportation presents us with when it comes to the process of creation of human life.
While still in theory, human quantum teleportation seems possible, could the human quantum teleportation be done by the ID/God who created the universe and physical laws that govern quantum mechanics and make human quantum teleportation seem possible?
Let’s just ponder this for a moment: Scientist have already teleported small pieces of matter. Could the creator of matter and the physical laws that make quantum teleportation possible teleport bigger pieces of matter?
How about quantum teleportation of a piece of matter that is alive? Is it possible? Would it be feasible for ID/God who knows every detail about quantum mechanics and quantum entanglement that make quantum teleportation possible, including human teleportation?
And if ID/God is able to teleport matter that is alive, like human body, could he have used the same method, the laws that govern quantum mechanics that he created, like quantum entanglement to create life in the top-down approach rather than bottom-up, like abiogenesis or evolution?
Without answering this question now, let’s assume that ID/God could use the physical laws of quantum mechanics, like quantum entanglement and quantum teleportation to create life on Earth, including humans.
Let’s see how that could have been accomplished considering what we have discussed so far about quantum mechanics, quantum entanglement and quantum teleportation.

As I said before, according to quantum mechanics, life on subatomic level equals the many quantum states of subatomic particles-protons, neurons and electrons.
In other words, the composition of life is dependent on the information about the many different quantum states of the particles that form the life form, including human life.
As I mentioned earlier, for human quantum teleportation to happen, 2 chambers with entangled particles protons, neutrons and electrons are needed, as well as a scanning device or chamber that compares the quantum state of particles making up the human body to be teleported with the particles found in one of the entangled chambers that will act as the sending chamber.
The sending chamber containing with subatomic particles protons, neutrons and electrons entangled with the particles in the receiving chamber
The receiving chamber with subatomic particles – protons, neurons and electrons that are entangled with the sending chamber
The scanning device or chamber that acts like a scanner or a fax machine that interacts with the sending chamber and extracts the quantum state of the particles making up the human body to be teleported.

Let’s now apply what has been mentioned so far about the possibilities that quantum mechanics, quantum entanglement and quantum teleportation present us with to the process of creating life.
Could the laws of physics, like quantum mechanics, that govern the universe have been use by ID/ God to create life on earth including humans?
As I mentioned on the outset, the process of the designing and manufacturing the car involves the top-down approach. First an idea for a car, the blueprint, the design of different systems that would make up the car, the parts that would make up the functioning systems, the materials that would be used to manufacture the parts, the elements that the materials would be manufactured from and at the end of top-down method are the subatomic particles that make up the elements that the whole car is made of or built with.
In reality however the whole structure of the car and its function is dependent on the quantum state of the 3 subatomic particles protons, neutrons and electrons. And while in theory today, because of laws of quantum mechanics, the whole car could also be teleported using quantum teleportation method of the 3 chambers mentioned earlier. Scientists have already teleported small pieces of matter. Is it just a matter of time before they teleport bigger, larger ones?
A car to be teleported would have to be scanned in the scanning chamber for the quantum state or the many arrangements of the 3 particles it is made of and reconstructed exactly at the receiving chamber that is entengled with the sending chamber that interacts with the scanning chamber.
???video car teleportation???

Let’s focus now on the creation process of life and humans.
Similarly to the process of the designing and manufacturing the car, the ID/ God comes up with an idea for human life (having already experimented with simpler life forms that had been created before human life); human body and its function.
Starting with a blueprint, first he decides what the human body is going to look like and function, what functional systems are going to be the part of the functioning human, like circulatory system, nervous system, lymphatic system, bones, veins etc. and obviously the reproductive system.
Then he decides what organs are going to be integrated into body systems.
Then he decides on the many different types of tissues that those different organs are going to be made of to perform their many functions.
Then he decides on the many different types of cells (about 200 types of cells) that those tissues are going to be made of.
Then he decides on the many different types of spricialised structures like organelles – organized or specialized structures within the living cell – that the many different types of cells are going to be made of
Then he decides what macromolecules, like carbohydrates, lipids, proteins etc. are going to be used to make up those specialized structures (organelles).
Microelements are made of chemical elements, like carbon, hydrogen, oxygen etc.
The elements, like carbon, hydrogen and oxygen and so on are made of atoms.
Atoms are made of subatomic elements or particles, like protons, neutrons and electrons.
And, as I mentioned earlier, just like a car on subatomic level is made of protons, neutrons and electrons, so is human body and all life on Earth.
Those 3 subatomic particles form all matter in the universe including all known life, like human life.
However, what makes the existence of matter and life possible are the many different quantum states (arrangements) of those 3 subatomic particles or how they interact with each other.
Now, the ID/God has the final blueprint and the design of human body ready.
Now using the same laws of physics that make quantum teleportation possible he encodes (using a big, big efficient quantum computer?) the exact information about the many different quantum states of each of the 3 subatomic particles to form the fundamental elements of the human body like carbon, hydrogen, hydrogen etc. He arranges the many different quantum states of those 3 particles to form a functional human body according to the original blueprint and design.
The process of encoding the information about the many different quantum states into the 3 subatomic particles of life involves foreknowledge and foresight as to how the human body is going to function in the end.
This knowledge requires that the final integration of all systems be encoded in the top-down approach that fully functional human body that is alive is dependent on all functional systems and subsystems that are all present or it can’t function or be alive just like a cell mention earlier.

In other words, the ID/God knows exactly what the entire final quantum state (information) the human body would have to be in for it to function or be alive. So, he encodes this information exactly for the many different quantum states that protons, neurons and electrons would have to be in order to interact with each other to form the many of their quantum states for the elements to form, macromolecules and so on…then the fully functional systems and then he integrates systems to form life and the human body that is alive.
Once all the information about the quantum state of each individual part of the human body is encoded, the process of human creation can begin using the same method that applies to quantum teleportation with one exception of the scanning device or chamber, since no physical human body exists yet to be scanned. It needs to be assembled or materialized first based on the information that has been encoded by ID/God.
In order to create (assemble) the exact human body based on the final quantum state it needs to be in, all the ID/ God needs to do is encode the sending chamber or send the information directly about the quantum state of each of the many particles that the human body is going to be made of.
Just like in quantum teleportation,
the sending chamber (interacts) is encoded with information from the scanning device or chamber about the quantum state of each of the particles the human body to be teleported and reassembled in the receiving chamber,
in human body creation, the sending chamber is encoded directly by ID/God with information about the quantum state of each of the many particles of the human body to be created in the receiving chamber.
The rest of the process of the creation of the human body remains the same as in the quantum teleportation process mentioned earlier.
Based on the information about the quantum state the human body needs to be in to be created, thanks to quantum entanglement, the receiving chamber reconstructs the quantum state of each of the particles based on the information the sending chamber was encoded with or received directly by ID/God.
The human body creation has been accomplished thanks to the possibilities of quantum mechanics, quantum entanglement and quantum teleportation.
So, the process of creation of life, including human life, would involve the already known process that quantum mechanics allows in the quantum teleportation due to quantum entanglement of particles, which is dependent on the information about their many, many quantum states those particles can be arranged into.
(Another possibility would be for ID/God to encode or send the information about the quantum state of each of the particls to form the humand body directly to the receiving/assembling chamber but because scientist can’t do that yet, the more reasonable approach is the use of quantum entagled chambers.)
Use 1 only
Is there evidence or a clue that the process of creation of life (by top-down approach) on Earth including human life that quantum mechanics allows could have been used by ID/God?

Are there any clues that ID/God used the top-down method in the creation of life on Earth, like human life using already existing laws of physics like quantum mechanics?
Let’s see.
The biblical account of creation in the book of genesis tells us that God created life including human life out of the dust of the ground. The Hebrew word for “dust” in Genesis 2:7 is aphar can be translated as clay, earth, mud, ashes, earth, ground, mortar, powder.
How would you describe the process of creation of human life to men few thousand years ago involving quantum mechanics or the many quantum states of subatomic particles forming human body? Would you describe it in the terms physicists use today to explain quantum mechanics? I doubt that.
So, to describe the process of creation that would involve the many quantum states of subatomic particles forming human body to simple man few thousand years ago or even few hundred, the word dust or clay could be appropriately used since all the elements necessary to form human body are available in the ground of the earth. It seem that only 11 major elements are necessary for life.
Wikipedia “Almost 99% of the mass of the human body is made up of six elements: oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus. Only about 0.85% is composed of another five elements: potassium, sulfur, sodium, chlorine, and magnesium. All 11 are necessary for life. The remaining elements are trace elements, of which more than a dozen are thought on the basis of good evidence to be necessary for life. All of the mass of the trace elements put together (less than 10 grams for a human body) do not add up to the body mass of magnesium, the least common of the 11 non-trace elements.”
All these elements are found in the Earth’s crust.
Now, once all the necessary elements were “formed” (the many quantum states of the subatomic particles have been encoded) into the human body, something would have to be needed to make those elements form a living thing or living human body. The account from genesis definitely implies that.
Other translations ??G, of enesis 2:7
“God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being”.
So, just like the designer of the car tuned on the ignition and applied the source of energy for all the systems to start to function, like to start the engine for the car to function, so did the ID/God to make the human body become alive applied the energy sustained by breathing for human body to function.

403 thoughts on “How did Intelligent Designer/God do it? How was life created?”

  1. CharlieMCharlieM

    Patrick: You can express colour all you want in the way of frequency and wavelength but it will not give you the experience and the reality of the colour red. Etheric forces are living forces and if you try to treat them as objects in the way of physics you kill them.

    Color is not killed by defining and measuring it.Your concept of “etheric forces” is still literal nonsense — you can’t define it and you can’t measure it.

    I could define you as so many grams of carbon, so many grams of oxygen, so many grams of hydrogen and continue with all the other elements that make up your body. This would tell me about your physical makeup but it would not even touch upon what you are in essence.

    You are asking me to do the same with the etheric realm. If that is all you want to know about this realm then I have already given the answer. In it’s outer aspect it is the planar, peripheral forces acting towards a point.

  2. CharlieMCharlieM

    John Harshman:
    CharlieM,

    Charlie, that bit of word salad and the quoted, second-hand bit of word salad don’t even seem intended to offer evidence. They just make claims, and unintelligible claims at that. I will just take it all as an admission that you have no evidence and in fact reject the very notion of evidence. Correct?

    It takes a bit of good will on your part to understand what I am saying. I don’t see much of it in evidence.

    How do you explain the pattern on the chrysalis in terms of genetics?

  3. PatrickPatrick

    CharlieM:

    Color is not killed by defining and measuring it.Your concept of “etheric forces” is still literal nonsense — you can’t define it and you can’t measure it.

    I could define you as so many grams of carbon, so many grams of oxygen, so many grams of hydrogen and continue with all the other elements that make up your body. This would tell me about your physical makeup but it would not even touch upon what you are in essence.

    You are asking me to do the same with the etheric realm. If that is all you want to know about this realm then I have already given the answer. In it’s outer aspect it is the planar, peripheral forces acting towards a point.

    That is still nonsense because you haven’t operationally defined “etheric forces” nor have you shown how to measure them. There is literally no reason for anyone to think they, whatever they are, exist.

    Why don’t you start with the physical explanation and then we can discuss the essence. Or do you admit that your analogy with a human being is bogus because humans can be demonstrated to exist?

  4. John HarshmanJohn Harshman

    CharlieM: It takes a bit of good will on your part to understand what I am saying. I don’t see much of it in evidence.

    I think you have confused good will with credulity and understanding with acquiescence to nonsense. I would dearly love to understand what you’re saying. But the evidence suggests that you don’t understand what you’re saying. Disabuse me by showing evidence that there is such a thing as “etheric force”.

    How do you explain the pattern on the chrysalis in terms of genetics?

    I think you’re looking at the wing imaginal disk. How is that evidence for “etheric forces”?

  5. newton

    CharlieM: How do you explain the pattern on the chrysalis in terms of genetics?

      

    How and why does the etheric realm cause the material pattern?

  6. CharlieMCharlieM

    Patrick,

    That is still nonsense because you haven’t operationally defined “etheric forces” nor have you shown how to measure them.There is literally no reason for anyone to think they, whatever they are, exist.

    I have given you a definition but you don’t like it. There is nothing I can do about that.

    President Trump wields a lot of power. Can you show me how to measure it and tell me what units you are using to do so?

    Why don’t you start with the physical explanation and then we can discuss the essence.Or do you admit that your analogy with a human being is bogus because humans can be demonstrated to exist?

    You are asking for me to give a physical explanation for something which is outwith the physical.

  7. CharlieMCharlieM

    John Harshman: I think you have confused good will with credulity and understanding with acquiescence to nonsense. I would dearly love to understand what you’re saying. But the evidence suggests that you don’t understand what you’re saying. Disabuse me by showing evidence that there is such a thing as “etheric force”.

    I think you’re looking at the wing imaginal disk. How is that evidence for “etheric forces”?

    No I am talking about the chrysalis case which forms under the skin of the caterpillar and it takes on the shape of the butterfly which is still to form from the imaginal discs.

    I could also talk about the feather patterns of birds. The pattern on a peacock’s tail is distinct even although it spans several feathers. The feathers grow separately inside a sheath (pin feathers) and unfurl to form the overall pattern. How do you account for this by forces coming from each individual cell?

  8. OMagain

    CharlieM: You are asking for me to give a physical explanation for something which is outwith the physical.

    How do you know about it then?

  9. CharlieMCharlieM

    newton: How and why does the etheric realm cause the material pattern?

    The etheric forces are the means by which the archetype expresses itself in the physical substance.

    Any physical triangle is an expression of the ideal triangle. And any physical organism is an expression of the archetype.

    Our physical senses give us an awareness of butterflies or caterpillars at one moment in time, we can see them. But in order to know their connection, the complete life cycle of lepidoptera, we need more than our physical senses, just as we cannot see the ideal triangle with our physical eyes, our physical senses tell us nothing about this life cycle. For this we need to “see” it with our minds. Our thinking mind becomes a sense organ. This takes us out of the sensible and into the supersensible.

    (I have added this edit because for some reason only the beginning of my original reply made it through so I have had to rewrite it from memory.)

  10. John HarshmanJohn Harshman

    CharlieM: No I am talking about the chrysalis case which forms under the skin of the caterpillar and it takes on the shape of the butterfly which is still to form from the imaginal discs.

    I don’t think there is any such thing. I think you have an incorrect notion of how butterfly metamorphosis works.

    I could also talk about the feather patterns of birds. The pattern on a peacock’s tail is distinct even although it spans several feathers. The feathers grow separately inside a sheath (pin feathers) and unfurl to form the overall pattern. How do you account for this by forces coming from each individual cell?

    What you call etheric forces are simply the developmental process: genetic regulation, cell to cell communication, and such. It’s all purely physical, and as for “etheric forces”, we have no need for that hypothesis.

  11. CharlieMCharlieM

    OMagain: How do you know about it then?

    In the same way as I know about the ideal triangle or the life cycle of lepidopterans.

    The different stages of the life cycle can be observed using our physical senses but these cannot give us the combination which gives us the whole process over time. We can only come to an understanding of this by the means of our thinking minds. The whole is more than the sum of the parts. We see the physical with our eyes, we see what lies above the physical with our minds.

  12. CharlieMCharlieM

    John Harshman: I don’t think there is any such thing. I think you have an incorrect notion of how butterfly metamorphosis works.

    What you call etheric forces are simply the developmental process: genetic regulation, cell to cell communication, and such. It’s all purely physical, and as for “etheric forces”, we have no need for that hypothesis.

    You have taken it on faith that the pattern on a peacock’s tail can be achieved through the developmental processes you mention. You have not explained how it achieves this. This is equivalent to explaining the Mona Lisa by invoking the forces inherent in the movement of the brushes and the constituents of the paint and canvas.

  13. PatrickPatrick

    CharlieM:

    That is still nonsense because you haven’t operationally defined “etheric forces” nor have you shown how to measure them.There is literally no reason for anyone to think they, whatever they are, exist.

    I have given you a definition but you don’t like it. There is nothing I can do about that.

    You have not given a useful definition. Here’s the definition of operational definition from Wikipedia:

    “An operational definition is the application of operationalization used in defining the terms of a process (or set of validation tests) needed to determine the nature of an item or phenomenon (e.g. a variable, term, or object) and its properties such as duration, quantity, extension in space, chemical composition, etc.”

    You have provided no way of determining anything about “etheric force”.

    President Trump wields a lot of power. Can you show me how to measure it and tell me what units you are using to do so?

    The power of the president is (supposed to be) defined by the Constitution. The effects of his power can be measured in terms of the results of the laws he signs, his impact on international affairs, the increased risk to Americans due to that impact, the measurable harms he has caused to U.S. citizens, and numerous other real world effects. This is all possible because he actually exists. There is no evidence that your “etheric forces” do.

    Now please stop with the attempted distractions and explain what it is you’re talking about and how you can possibly know.

    Why don’t you start with the physical explanation and then we can discuss the essence.Or do you admit that your analogy with a human being is bogus because humans can be demonstrated to exist?

    You are asking for me to give a physical explanation for something which is outwith the physical.

    What does that even mean? How do you know what it is and that it exists? You’re still talking nonsense.

  14. GlenDavidson

    CharlieM: This is equivalent to explaining the Mona Lisa by invoking the forces inherent in the movement of the brushes and the constituents of the paint and canvas.

    That’s more of an (actual) explanation than you’ve ever provided.

    Glen Davidson

  15. Kantian NaturalistKantian Naturalist

    CharlieM: The different stages of the life cycle can be observed using our physical senses but these cannot give us the combination which gives us the whole process over time. We can only come to an understanding of this by the means of our thinking minds. The whole is more than the sum of the parts. We see the physical with our eyes, we see what lies above the physical with our minds.

    I know this seems obviously true to you. But it does not seem obviously true to me. Do you have an argument for this?

    Here’s an alternative way of thinking about this stuff (which I think is much closer to the truth): the mind is constantly generating expectations about upcoming sensations. Those expectations are based on background beliefs, concepts, attitudes, etc — in short, the mental model of the domain that is relevant to some task or goal. These expectations are then sent ‘downwards’ towards lower-level units of cortical and subcortical processing. When various energies (heat, light, kinetic, etc.) activate sensory transducers, that initiates a chain of messages ‘upwards’ that convey the degree to which the predictions were confirmed or disconfirmed. The job of sensory receptors, in other words, is to function as prediction errors.

    This means that not even sense-perception is a passive process, just taking in what’s there anyway. Rather, perception begins with a spontaneous anticipation of what is there to be sensed, with that expectation subject to correction based on the irritations of sensory transducers.

    The next step is to realize that the top-level expectations can vary in complexity, in spatio-temporal resolution (expecting that your chair will not disappear as you sit down in it is very different from expecting that your car hasn’t been stolen during the night, etc.), and also — though there’s been less work on this — whether the generative model in question is solely internal to the cognitive agent itself or if the model is shared by many agents (ideologies, myths, theories, “worldviews”).

    In short, the difference between sense-perception and theoretical understanding is not that the former uses “the senses” and the latter uses “the mind”, but that in the former, generative models specify what is coming up for the individual cognitive agent within the next few seconds or minutes, whereas the latter involves generative models that are often shared by cognitive agents and involve predictions over hours, days, or even years.

    The main thing to be said in favor of the account I’m offering here is that it is based on a highly productive research program in cognitive science, an approach called “predictive processing”.

  16. CharlieMCharlieM

    I’m part way through watching a video that Kantian Naturalist linked to in a post here.

    I’d like to thank him for drawing our attention to this and I think it is giving us some really good food for thought. I look forward to finishing it when I have the time.

  17. OMagain

    CharlieM: We see the physical with our eyes, we see what lies above the physical with our minds.

    You seem to be saying that “etheric force” cannot be observed, only it’s existence can be inferred

    CharlieM: You have taken it on faith that the pattern on a peacock’s tail can be achieved through the developmental processes you mention. You have not explained how it achieves this.

    Explain what you have observed that can only be explained by invoking “etheric force”. Explain how “etheric force” achieves, well, anything at all.

  18. John HarshmanJohn Harshman

    CharlieM: You have taken it on faith that the pattern on a peacock’s tail can be achieved through the developmental processes you mention. You have not explained how it achieves this. This is equivalent to explaining the Mona Lisa by invoking the forces inherent in the movement of the brushes and the constituents of the paint and canvas.

    I have taken it on faith? I at least know that there are developmental mechanisms that cause similar things to happen. There is, for example, a huge literature on the mechanisms that create eyespots on butterfly wings. It’s complicated, but not completely opaque. No etheric forces need apply. And there seems no reason to doubt that peacock feathers are analogous.

    Now of course that’s an explanation at the level of brush movements and paint. For ultimate causation one must look to natural selection acting on those slight variations you may have heard about. Again, no etheric forces.

    Surely, with your vast knowledge of biology, this can come as no surprise to you.

  19. John HarshmanJohn Harshman

    OMagain: You seem to be saying that “etheric force” cannot be observed, only it’s existence can be inferred

    Nothing wrong with that. That’s how science very often works. I can’t observe phylogeny, or a carbon nucleus, or fusion in the solar core. But I can infer their existence. Charlie’s problem is that his inferences are based on no data, just the intuitions of other people whose word salad he has read.

  20. OMagain

    John Harshman: Nothing wrong with that. That’s how science very often works.

    Yes, and it seems to me that such knowledge can often let us achieve new breakthroughs. We start to understand quantum interactions, we start to make better superconductors.

    So I suppose I’m trying to understand what adding this extra “layer” allows us to do or understand beyond adding something called “etheric force” and creating a parallel “physics” that can “explain” why cats get old and die but not how to keep them alive forever.

    John Harshman: Charlie’s problem is that his inferences are based on no data

    Charlie, what would convince you that “etheric forces” do not actually exist?

  21. Kantian NaturalistKantian Naturalist

    John Harshman: Nothing wrong with that. That’s how science very often works. I can’t observe phylogeny, or a carbon nucleus, or fusion in the solar core. But I can infer their existence. Charlie’s problem is that his inferences are based on no data, just the intuitions of other people whose word salad he has read.

    I’d say that CharlieM’s problem is much deeper than that. He thinks that the posits are directly seen by the mind, whereas observables are seen directly with the senses, so they are something mysteriously non-physical.

    A more sensible way of thinking about it (as I think) is that posits are themselves also entities (structures, relations, processes) that exist in space and time, but that the posit must “earn its keep” by being systematically related to predicted observations. If merely positing were sufficient, there would be no meaningful distinction between storytelling and science.

  22. CharlieMCharlieM

    CharlieM:
    We see the physical with our eyes, we see what lies above the physical with our minds.

    Kantian Naturalist: I know this seems obviously true to you. But it does not seem obviously true to me. Do you have an argument for this?

    Our eyes take in images of the world around us. In order to make sense of these images requires us to use our thinking minds. I have split these activities in two just for the sake of clarity as to what does what. In the acquisition of knowledge there is never a time when these two processes are actually separate.

    I cannot tell if someone is angry or sad just by looking at them, I have to use my thinking to connect past experience with the present sensory cues to make that judgement. Only by thinking do we make sense of what we see.

    Here’s an alternative way of thinking about this stuff (which I think is much closer to the truth): the mind is constantly generating expectations about upcoming sensations. Those expectations are based on background beliefs, concepts, attitudes, etc — in short, the mental model of the domain that is relevant to some task or goal. These expectations are then sent ‘downwards’ towards lower-level units of cortical and subcortical processing. When various energies (heat, light, kinetic, etc.) activate sensory transducers, that initiates a chain of messages ‘upwards’ that convey the degree to which the predictions were confirmed or disconfirmed. The job of sensory receptors, in other words, is to function as prediction errors.

    This means that not even sense-perception is a passive process, just taking in what’s there anyway. Rather, perception begins with a spontaneous anticipation of what is there to be sensed, with that expectation subject to correction based on the irritations of sensory transducers.

    The next step is to realize that the top-level expectations can vary in complexity, in spatio-temporal resolution (expecting that your chair will not disappear as you sit down in it is very different from expecting that your car hasn’t been stolen during the night, etc.), and also — though there’s been less work on this — whether the generative model in question is solely internal to the cognitive agent itself or if the model is shared by many agents (ideologies, myths, theories, “worldviews”).

    In short, the difference between sense-perception and theoretical understanding is not that the former uses “the senses” and the latter uses “the mind”, but that in the former, generative models specify what is coming up for the individual cognitive agent within the next few seconds or minutes, whereas the latter involves generative models that are often shared by cognitive agents and involve predictions over hours, days, or even years.

    The main thing to be said in favor of the account I’m offering here is that it is based on a highly productive research program in cognitive science, an approach called “predictive processing”.

    And you arrived at the understanding you relate above by the process of thought. There is no getting round it. Thinking is primal.

  23. CharlieMCharlieM

    OMagain: You seem to be saying that “etheric force” cannot be observed, only it’s existence can be inferred

    I am saying that the etheric force cannot be observed with the physical eyes. Do you believe the solar wind is real? Can you see it?

    Explain what you have observed that can only be explained by invoking “etheric force”. Explain how “etheric force” achieves, well, anything at all.

    The overall pattern of a peacock’s tail, the form of organisms, and the organisms whole being throughout all the stages of its life, these are best explained by formative forces working on the substances that are made available by the genetic processes.

  24. OMagain

    CharlieM: Do you believe the solar wind is real? Can you see it?

    It can push sails. It is measurable.

    CharlieM: The overall pattern of a peacock’s tail, the form of organisms, and the organisms whole being throughout all the stages of its life, these are best explained by formative forces working on the substances that are made available by the genetic processes.

    You’ve yet to provide that explanation however.

    The solar wind has a source and effects. What is the source of etheric force and what are its effects?

    So, the overall pattern of a peacock’s tail. Explain using “etheric force” why the peacock has such a tail and other birds do not.

  25. OMagain

    CharlieM: And you arrived at the understanding you relate above by the process of thought. There is no getting round it. Thinking is primal.

    How deep. Or, in fact, how pathetically shallow.

    Reminds me of the creos’ at UD who think that by making an argument you are admitting theism because only theism allows rational arguments to be made. It just shows their lack of actual arguments.

    Same for you Charlie. Ah, you thought about something and thereby are agreeing with me.

  26. CharlieMCharlieM

    John Harshman:   (Quote in reply)  (Reply)

    John Harshman: I have taken it on faith? I at least know that there are developmental mechanisms that cause similar things to happen. There is, for example, a huge literature on the mechanisms that create eyespots on butterfly wings. It’s complicated, but not completely opaque. No etheric forces need apply. And there seems no reason to doubt that peacock feathers are analogous.

    Now of course that’s an explanation at the level of brush movements and paint. For ultimate causation one must look to natural selection acting on those slight variations you may have heard about. Again, no etheric forces.

    Surely, with your vast knowledge of biology, this can come as no surprise to you.

    To believe that natural selection acting on slight variations can produce the wisdom and beauty of nature’s designs does take a great deal of faith.

    Here is a video of an octopus using camouflage. And below I have attached a photo of a small tortoiseshell butterfly. Look at the areas I have indicated with blue arrows and see how it gives the appearance of light being shone from under the dark surface. True art.

  27. OMagain

    CharlieM: Look at the areas I have indicated with blue arrows and see how it gives the appearance of light being shone from under the dark surface. True art.

    Is your claim then that camouflage cannot evolve?

  28. OMagain

    CharlieM: True art.

    Interested readers can search for “eye worm parasite” for other examples of the stunning beauty of the natural world.

  29. CharlieMCharlieM

    OMagain: Charlie, what would convince you that “etheric forces” do not actually exist?

    If I found out that the natural world was all a big dream, if all the duality around us suddenly became single, down but no up, darkness without light, that sort of thing. The physical forces are incomplete without the complimentary etheric forces. You cannot have centripetal force without the corresponding centrifugal force.

  30. CharlieMCharlieM

    Kantian Naturalist: I’d say that CharlieM’s problem is much deeper than that. He thinks that the posits are directly seen by the mind, whereas observables are seen directly with the senses, so they are something mysteriously non-physical.

    No, we perceive the physical world around us and it is real, but it is only half real. It becomes full reality when, by the effort of our thinking mind we rejoin what our senses gave us in a fragmentary manner. We are using our minds constantly to try to re-unite reality, but it takes effort on our part.

  31. OMagain

    CharlieM: To believe that natural selection acting on slight variations can produce the wisdom and beauty of nature’s designs does take a great deal of faith.

    Well, what does create such designs then? And how do you know that?

    And are parasites that blind children wise and beautiful?

  32. OMagain

    CharlieM: The physical forces are incomplete without the complimentary etheric forces.

    For each physical force, what is the complementary etheric force?

    You use the plural. Is there more then one?

  33. OMagain

    CharlieM: You cannot have centripetal force without the corresponding centrifugal force.

    It may be news to you then that centrifugal force does not actually exist. So yes, it seems you can have “unpaired” forces, despite what you may think.

  34. CharlieMCharlieM

    OMagain: Well, what does create such designs then? And how do you know that?

    And are parasites that blind children wise and beautiful?

    Weapons of mass destruction can still be beautifully designed.

  35. OMagain

    CharlieM: Weapons of mass destruction can still be beautifully designed.

    And what does that tell you about the society that produced such designs?

    Why did you not post a picture of a child infected with eye worms, rather then a butterfly? If both are beautifully designed, please post such a picture and annotate it as you did the butterfly one to point out specific features of the design.

  36. GlenDavidson

    CharlieM: Weapons of mass destruction can still be beautifully designed.

    What’s beautiful about the degenerate sequences so common in parasites? And less common, but hardly rare, in non-parasites? What’s beautiful about Archaeopteryx, a poor flyer only partially adapted to flight? What’s beautiful about the tiny vertebrae of our coccyx, or our spine turned to keep us upright and prone to back problems?

    Of course Charlie doesn’t do analysis, he does feelings, beliefs, fragrant thoughts wafting through neurospace. Etheric forces fit right in, they do whatever he wants them to, no questions asked.

    Glen Davidson

  37. Allan Miller

    CharlieM,

    To believe that natural selection acting on slight variations can produce the wisdom and beauty of nature’s designs does take a great deal of faith.

    If a particular patterning of butterfly wings gives the bearers any advantage, measured in net survival and reproduction vs non-bearers, it takes no faith to see how it can increase in the population.

  38. John HarshmanJohn Harshman

    I will also note that Charlie seems unable to distinguish between development and evolution, or between the sorts of things explained by developmental or evolutionary processes. Is that because “etheric” forces just do duty for both, causing features to appear in individuals and species both?

  39. CharlieMCharlieM

    OMagain: For each physical force, what is the complementary etheric force?

    You use the plural. Is there more then one?

    Yes there is more than one. I will say no more on that just now as I don’t have the time to go into it.

    We can see the balance of the centric radial forces and the peripheral planar forces if we study the human frame. Our limbs contain the long bones like radial spokes while the dome of our skull reflects the greater influence of the planar forces. The rib cage is a transition between the two. Look at a crocodile and see how it is caught in the horizontal position with its form tapering towards the ends.

    We can look at these things and say that they are just accidents which help individual survival and leave it at that, or we can ponder over these forms and let them tell us fresh new facts about themselves. We can open or close our minds to these things, it is up to us.

  40. CharlieMCharlieM

    OMagain: It may be news to you then that centrifugal force does not actually exist. So yes, it seems you can have “unpaired” forces, despite what you may think.

    When an astronaut is in a centrifuge what he feels is a tremendous force trying to hurl him away from the centre. You can abstract from this that there is no such force it just inertia. I am more interested in how things feel in real life rather than abstractions. Tell the astronaut that he is not experiencing a large force trying to force him outwards.

  41. CharlieMCharlieM

    OMagain: And what does that tell you about the society that produced such designs?

    That it needs to change.

    Why did you not post a picture of a child infected with eye worms, rather then a butterfly? If both are beautifully designed, please post such a picture and annotate it as you did the butterfly one to point out specific features of the design.

    I can see beauty in the butterfly and I see beauty in the way it lives , I don’t see it in the eye worm, what I see I find repulsive. But that is not to say that if I looked through a microscope at the activity in one of its cells I might find activities and structures that I would find beautiful.

  42. CharlieMCharlieM

    GlenDavidson: What’s beautiful about the degenerate sequences so common in parasites?And less common, but hardly rare, in non-parasites?

    You tell me?

    What’s beautiful about Archaeopteryx, a poor flyer only partially adapted to flight?

    It has asymmetrical flight feathers which I think are a beautiful design. It was obviously well enough adapted to survive. There is much about archaeopteryx that I find beautiful.

    What’s beautiful about the tiny vertebrae of our coccyx, or our spine turned to keep us upright and prone to back problems?

    I can see beauty in the coccyx, the way the bones form tapering downwards in contrast to the bone formation at the top of the axial skeleton.

    There are plenty of people who go through life with no back problems whatsoever, unfortunately I’m not one of them. But I don’t put my back problems down to bad design but to my misuse of my body and poor posture. Bad workmen always blame their tools but I am also not one of them. I am like a bad workman who takes responsibility for the results of my actions.

    Of course Charlie doesn’t do analysis, he does feelings, beliefs, fragrant thoughts wafting through neurospace.Etheric forces fit right in, they do whatever he wants them to, no questions asked.

    Glen Davidson

    You are welcome to your opinion.

  43. CharlieMCharlieM

    Allan Miller:
    CharlieM,

    If a particular patterning of butterfly wings gives the bearers any advantage, measured in net survival and reproduction vs non-bearers, it takes no faith to see how it can increase in the population.

    The problem is that you can use that excuse for anything you find. Showy pattern, no pattern, camouflaged pattern; any feature you find can be put down to survival advantage and left at that. The current New Scientist has an article that suggests day dreaming and mind wandering exists because it has a survival advantage.

  44. CharlieMCharlieM

    John Harshman:
    I will also note that Charlie seems unable to distinguish between development and evolution, or between the sorts of things explained by developmental or evolutionary processes. Is that because “etheric” forces just do duty for both, causing features to appear in individuals and species both?

    I could go into what I see as the links between individual development and evolution as a whole but I don’t have the time at the moment.

  45. newton

    CharlieM: The current New Scientist has an article that suggests day dreaming and mind wandering exists because it has a survival advantage.

    A bridge too far?

  46. GlenDavidson

    CharlieM:

    GlenDavidson: What’s beautiful about the degenerate sequences so common in parasites?And less common, but hardly rare, in non-parasites?

    You tell me?

    Well, nothing. Couldn’t you figure that out? Why don’t you actually learn about life rather than go on with your mystical nonsense?

    What’s beautiful about Archaeopteryx, a poor flyer only partially adapted to flight?

    It has asymmetrical flight feathers which I think are a beautiful design. It was obviously well enough adapted to survive. There is much about archaeopteryx that I find beautiful.

    You were implying that they were beautiful designs, not that there are beautiful aspects to the organisms. You haven’t even slightly shown that Archaeopteryx is a beautiful design. There’s nothing beautiful about designs using the kludges made, especially during transitions. Not surprised that you equivocated rather than dealing with the issues, however.

    What’s beautiful about the tiny vertebrae of our coccyx, or our spine turned to keep us upright and prone to back problems?

    I can see beauty in the coccyx, the way the bones form tapering downwards in contrast to the bone formation at the top of the axial skeleton.

    Again with the equivocation that avoids the fact that the coccyx retains utterly useless little tail bones, hardly a beautiful design.

    There are plenty of people who go through life with no back problems whatsoever, unfortunately I’m not one of them. But I don’t put my back problems down to bad design but to my misuse of my body and poor posture. Bad workmen always blame their tools but I am also not one of them. I am like a bad workman who takes responsibility for the results of my actions.

    A horizontal spine turned vertical is hardly a beautiful, or very good, design. I realize you’re not interested in that fact, or in the evolutionary constraints that led to it, but they’re still there no matter how much you attempt to obfuscate the matter.

    Of course Charlie doesn’t do analysis, he does feelings, beliefs, fragrant thoughts wafting through neurospace. Etheric forces fit right in, they do whatever he wants them to, no questions asked.

    Glen Davidson

    You are welcome to your opinion.

    You are welcome to avoid the truth. Which you do in spades.

    Glen Davidson

  47. John HarshmanJohn Harshman

    CharlieM: Look at a crocodile and see how it is caught in the horizontal position with its form tapering towards the ends.

    Do you have a corresponding theory about the Brontosaurus, which *ahem* is your own?

Leave a Reply