@spruce112358

I too saw that article and very nearly linked it at the science forum. It is astonishing that a wild animal has some understanding of medicinal herbs. It’s almost enough to make me believe in reincarnation. Maybe that ape was Pythagoras in a former life, what do you think? Maybe this belongs in the spirituality forum.

@spruce112358 said
An orangutan has been observed for the first time using a medicinal herb on a wound.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/first-orangutan-seen-treating-wound-150254658.html

Should we preserve certain areas of the world for these sentient creatures to live in?

Or should we treat orangutans like Palestinians - shove them off their land and bulldoze their property to make ro ...[text shortened]... for more of 'us', saying, 'We are stronger, so tough luck'?

Note: Orangutans are somewhat smelly.

It is an astonishing thing, that an orang utan understands medicinal properties of a plant. Makes one wonder what else animals know that we don’t give them credit for.

Duane Eddy.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/02/entertainment/duane-eddy-death-scli-intl/index.html

"Kids are like sail boats: they look good on a sunny day and in the distance, but require a lot of maintenance."

Chris Isaak

@averagejoe1 said
I hereby introduce for the record the Marauder post, just above, which says all this ad nauseum, leaving me once again to ask………why has the prosecution not rested, why does the jury not have the case in the jury room? If Marauder has all this, why doesn’t the jury? Hello? Could it be there are no facts for them to deliberate? Seems Marauder has laid out the law, but short on facts, which is the responsibility of the jury to deliberate.

The jury is deliberating. The reason it has been long getting this far is that Trump delays and stalls and appeals and intimidates witnesses and delays again and appeals to the SCOTUS claiming executive privilege and total immunity for ever and ever, and complains that he shouldn't have to stand trial because it is 'politically motivated', because 'he has a campaign to run', and because 'he should be attending his wife's birthday party'.

@carnivorum said
About the duons that peer reviewed scientific article says:

"dual coding is nearly impossible by chance"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17511511

If it cannot come into being by chance, then it has to come into being by intelligent design.

And intelligent design proves an Intelligent Designer.

Negative on all counts.


1. "Nearly impossible" is not impossible, just unlikely in a short period of time in a single deal of the cards. There are about 100 naturally occurring elements in the universe, and only about 20 of them compose the state of matter we call "life". Given deep time (which KJ does not accept, because he's a biblical literalist and thinks the universe is only 6,000 yrs old), every possible combination of chemical elements is not only possible, but certain. Life is the royal flush of chemistry. The universe is about 14 billion years old, and there are billions and billions and billions of galaxies. Plenty of 'shuffles' for the 'poker hand' we call "life" to have occurred, at least once.

2. "Design" is ambiguous. It can mean simply regularity, or it can mean intentional. For example, if you look a knitted quilt, you will see patterns, "designs", in the weave; these were intended, by the person who made the quilt. However, if you look at sand dunes or the surface of a bay from high above, you will probably see regular waves, a pattern, something which looks like "design". But there is no intentionality there, only the result of a mindless process.

What appears to us to be design looks the same in both cases, but only one of them has a designer.

3. "Coding" is an anthropocentric metaphor when applied to natural processes (chemicals, molecules, duons). There is no code in chemicals. There is no code in molecules. There is no code in duons. It looks like 'code' to us because we make codes ourselves and we make things intelligible to ourselves in terms we understand. But something's being intelligible (to us) does not mean that it is intelligent (in itself). You could just as well associate musical notes with duons (or with the chemicals in a cup of coffee or the electrical charges in a lightning bolt or any other process in nature), and then you'd be astounded at the "symphony of nature" but this would not prove that there must have been an Intelligent Composer. You would merely be imposing another anthropocentric metaphor on a mindless process.

4. Chance or intelligent design is a false dichotomy. This has been pointed out about 150 times in this forum in previous threads.

@very-rusty said
Hey if we happen to be over 65 we are seniors whether we like or not. 😉

I'd give you a race if you were closer, but I'd have to get some sneakers on instead of my slippers. 🙂

-VR

I honestly don't know remember where my 50s went. They zoomed by so quickly. I passed 65 several years ago. I now consider myself to have arrived at 'advanced middle age.'

@very-rusty said
moon,
I am trying to mellow out, now don't get me stirred up! 😛 🙂

-VR

OK, Rusty. Now mellow out, or I'll break your arm !

@Phranny

The unspoken part of the plan, of course, is that he would instigate some sort of national-crisis-excuse to set the constitution aside, declare martial law and himself president for life. His unfettered admiration for Putin should be warning enough.

@very-rusty said
I have bias when it comes to the OP of this thread, so would be wise to keep my comments to myself, in the Public Forum. 🙂

-VR

Oh the irony. When have you ever played your cards close to your chest ?

@the-gravedigger said
I disagreed with my shooter and he shot me.

Well, if you go picking a fight with someone packing a Smith & Wesson, you should expect that.

@AverageJoe1

Each can have his own opinion and his own dream, but not his own facts, and that is where the shoe is pinching right now.

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/28/politics/election-misinformation-conspiracy-theories-what-matters/index.html

@greenpawn34 said
HI moonbus

One thing I remember was two strong players going over a game. The most common
phrase was 'centralise' and 'centralise' and 'centralise'.... I was thinking big deal but
what are you threatening. (then I was at the stage you must be either threatening or
defending with every move....preferably threatening something.)

It took a while to sink in and even ...[text shortened]... approach but
at least now I knew why my attacks were getting knocked back. I ignored centalisation.

Centralising is great for chess, but lousy for the economy.


😆

@divegeester said
Leave the dogs alone Sir… dogs represent the pinnacle of evolution

Negative. It's cats. Cats, I tell you. We domesticated dogs, but cats domesticated us. They took one look around at all the animals in Eden and asked themselves, 'which one is most likely to invent tin openers if we rub ourselves against their legs and purr?' Yup, we're it.

@kellyjay said
The point of acknowledging design doesn't prove God, it proves design over a mindless process nothing more. God can only be known when we seek God and God calls, but even there we can suppress God's call, just as we can suppress evidence by refusing to acknowledge what we see to avoid philosophical ramifications evidence points to.

The fundamental logical error you and Creationists generally are making is this: you confuse intelligibilty with intelligence. A thing can be intelligible (to us) without being intelligent (in-itself). You are merely projecting your own designs and metaphors (error-checking, start-stop mechanisms, etc.) into nature.