Consciousness is a Biological Problem

What is the role of a mediator who is involved in the debate?

However I still do not agree with you. How can one argue their views if they cannot say what is on their mind regardless of whether or not you agree with their view. That is what a debate is. Your determination of the revelance of their point of view to the topic can be part of the debate but should not be a factor in what or how they should think on the matter.

I dont think that you can have this debate without the metaphysical aspect. What you are suggesting is that we debate the color of fruit but nobody is allowed to use the word orange.

The reason it doesn't effect everyone equally is because of the immune response which triggers an overreaction of the microglia cells such as a concussion or inflammatory illness.

I guess one can always say that what they think is correct, but then what is new?

Personally, I don't see anything from the scientific side other than that they see things such as neurons wiggle, and they think that wiggling is consciousness. In other words, things just start to wiggle on their own - whether it be a neuron or a speck of sand. I think this is ridiculous. I think that that wiggling is caused by consciousness.

I also think that consciousness transcends a single physical life which actually affords a lot more explanation about human evolution than a wiggling neuron.

How is that for my counter synopsis of the debate?

Rich

I agree. The problem we now face as a society/culture is that the long-term effects of vaccinations and particularly all of the combination of vaccinations in babies and young children, were never studied. What's more the whole population has been more or vaccinated with dozens upon dozens of vaccinations, so there is no longer a control group. Thus, we are completely in the dark about the long term combinatorial effects of vaccinations on individual health as well as the population at large - e.g. immune system, genes, etc.

I think the whole post was a random and heavily biased, including the wording that was used. We can take it sentence by sentence if you wish ...

So there may be long term effects -- but there may not, and the immediate public health rewards have been enormous.

Guys, please do not ignore post #961. Aedes made a great point, a great point which everyone in this discussion should keep in mind.

My criticism still stands. There are many variables including when the antigens are administered, the method that they are introduced, the amount, the nature, etc. I think that science is playing in the dark and they have mandated that have successfully lobbied for laws that force everyone play with them.

I disagree. There is no separability. The notion of separability was demolished a long time ago with quantum theory understanding of the nature of the universe.

so do you think veggies will cure or prevent any of the following diseases:

• diptheria
  
• Hib
  
• hepatitis B
  
• measles
  
• meningitis
  
• mumps
  
• tetanus
  
• rubella
  
• tuberculosis
  
• polio
  
• and last but not least, smallpox
  

how do you account for the failure of traditional medicine to contain these diseases



why is classical mechanics still in wide use then

right

it's ok when King Rich brings up vaccines in a thread that doesn't have to do with vaccines, but not when any of the mere peons in this thread do, even if they're responding to his harmful exaggerations of their dangers

yes ... of course classical mechanics is still very accurate when there aren't enough nonlinear effects and things aren't near the speed of light etc. ... the only time you really have to worry in a practical, everyday setting is when the system is too chaotic to be explained adequately by simple physical models, which can happen a lot in real-life

on the other hand, no engineer in his right mind would worry about quantum effects at the macroscopic scale in, say, bridge-building or power distribution. but I already know I'm talking to someone who has a spotty command of physics which is 9 parts feel-good mysticism to 1 part truth so now I'm really not even sure why I bothered to type this response

it has plenty to say

nearly all (maybe all indeed) of the artificial life efforts currently underway are using pretty much plain old atomic/molecular level physics and chemistry. your (bastardized) interpretation of quantum mechanics does not apply

I'll let your fellow scientists straighten you out if they wish. Or they may agree that classical mechanics has a lot to say about the nature of Life and Consciousness. If none respond to you, I'll take it that they share your beliefs.

Rich

So again, I wanted this thread to be a challenge to what I have written in th OP.

I'll let your fellow scientists straighten you out if they wish. Or they may agree that classical mechanics has a lot to say about the nature of Life and Consciousness.

It does and it doesn't. I wouldn't overstate the case, Rich -- truth exists at many levels. The fact that the Tongass is a temperate rainforest is no less true than the fact that it's made out of quarks. We regard natural phenomena at different levels of resolution, and quantum theory -- true or not -- is not sufficient to explain things at a different level of resolution.

Neither does quantum mechanics except insofar as much of neuroscience uses positron or magnetism-based imaging, so it's a matter of a practical application and not explanatory power that gives it any relevance.

I also wanted to be clear here -- you who represent neurons, genes, and mutations as a magical black box really have more confidence in theoretical particles like gague bosons??