Intelligent Design

Yeah, those creationist idiots never provide a shred of evidence for their loony horseshit, but they always want others to prove they're wrong.

     Everything - the ability of our body to self-healing and self-repairing ... if we don't hinder it too much; the ability to reproduce from generation to generation by minimizing the risks of genetic diseases; the ability to acquire knowledge about ourselves & the world (except for the theory of the Big Bang and the Theory of Evolution, perhaps); the ability to exchange knowledge and skills through communication and presentations; the ability to learn from past experience and from trial and error; the long-term memory that our mind possesses; the ability to make logical inferences on the grounds of distant, weak and/or fuzzy associations; the optimal consumption of energy that we use for living; the harmonization of our life with that of the surrounding biosphere, etc.
      Take for example the energy. If we walk from point A to point B for one hour for example, we will use 0.5 kW.h of energy for the transition. If a guy with the SUV goes from that very same point A to point B, arriving there in 10 min, he will use 250 x 1/6 = 4 2 kW.h of energy, which is 84 times more. Do you notice what is the energy efficiency of our body.

That's where you are mistaken.

It's not because they want you to prove their theory wrong.

It's because they were brought up to lies and deceit.

In a way, there's more idiocy in an intelligent man trying to reason with an ignorant man, than there is in an ignorant man trying to rationalize themselves in the eyes of an intelligent man.

All you have to do is be a true intelligent man by not trying to teach a kid all the tricks of the trade of thinking - instead, understand where the kid is coming from; understand that they were raised with the illusion of knowledge and most importantly, understand the existential crisis behind their beliefs. Otherwise, you're just as obnoxious as they are.

Unfortunately, knowledge and the illusions thereof share all the same hallmarks.
A man who thinks he knows all, truly knows little, a man who knows the limitations of his own understandings however is an intelligent man indeed

     This would be a rough mistake - not to teach the students how to think, and instead of that teaching them how to read ... and write scientific & pseudo-scientific articles of any kind.
     The inference engine is by itself procedural knowledge - it is valid component of the system of knowledge representa-tion, maintenance, and operation. The better the inference engine is, the less declarative knowledge one will need to maintain a knowledge system of 'one and the same star magnitude' - but this is just my opinion.

That is not what I was saying.

I was saying that a genius shouldn't give a kid Hubble's Telescope and expect the kid to make the same connections, or learn at the same rate.

Everyone is born a genius - we're wired differently and have different elements of the Universe driving us towards different goals. That is why people are so different - everyone has their own universal strengths and weaknesses based entirely on the Universe's algorithm. You really can't see the algorithm in the billions of people because people aren't true to themselves; you have to see them for who they are behind the facade to understand (that is how I am aware of the algorithm). Some people are strong-minded, but weak at heart; some people are strong-hearted, but weak mentally; some people are emotional; some people are informational; some people are artists; some people are musicians; some people can learn faster from patience; some people can learn faster from action. Everyone has a weakness and a strength where others have it vice versa. It's important to know what a person is good at and bad at to understand them best.

There is a pattern to how people are wired and it's important to understand that children's brains are very special indeed. Your knowledge will not aid them as it aids you - your knowledge can only sway them towards a universal understanding so they don't have to go through the abstract aspects of the mind, like emotion, psyche, compensation, relation, inter-relation, inter-reflection, the smorgasbord of shapes and sizes, contradictions, contrasts and many, many more important fundamentals of thinking so they can cut straight to the point of releasing their own potential.

Sounds like the perfect formula for you! LOL

You mean your impression of me that you created because you will never have the brain capacity to comprehend me for the actual me.

Do you really understand any one?
Impressions of who you are is directly related to what and how you post your opinions on a2k.

From MPOV, you're an idiot! Your opinions are based on misinformation and imagination, and not on factual understanding of the topic.

Where did you study Economics?

No, it's how YOU interpret the posts I make.

Considering that you just said genius is in the eye of beholder, despite the contraries in the history of geniuses - not one being a false genius - you have already lost all credibility in every single one of your posts.

FYI, not everybody sees 'genius' in the historical list of geniuses. That's because everybody has different interests and qualifications for what they deem as a 'genius.'
You lack historical perspective and personal critical thinking abilities.

You can't compensate for your poor education and your total lack of real intelligence. Admit it...Pee or get off the pot:(

No, I lack stupidity and ignorance.

You see, this world was defined and refined by wise men. I learned from the best. I listened, read and shaped myself around wise men and this Universe's unfinished design.

You can't say the same, hence you are clearly listening to only one side of some political farce.

I learned from the best; you learned from the worst. My knowledge will always excavate your hollow shell time after time again; and frankly, I will always know you more than you know yourself because honesty has a higher power, it tends to see things you are not honest with yourself with. So you see, I'm not psychic - I'm analytic. Some analysis cannot be done until you open yourself up - frankly, again, you're insulting anyone that dares challenge your arrogance, so you haven't gotten that far yet.

Since you learned from the best, perhaps you can tell us stupid people how you propose to excavate something that is hollow. It seems you don't even know how much dirt is in a hole.

The same way archaeologists excavate while they are standing in a hole they'd dug up.

       ... and you don't need to. You have your own inference engine and you can verify and validate of what they are saying, or trying to say or whatever there it might be.
      This sounds like tapping the net ... and the communication channels and developing algorithms in the Data Centers for Big Data analysis.
       ... and some are simply dishonest ... even with themselves, and prefer to talk (in compliance with their personal gain and interests) what is convenient to the day, rather than looking for the truth. The truth has no value to them, for it is usually inconvenient.

It's more interesting when you get to know people through the subatomic faculties which drive them, rather than this social illusion the Universe creates via a series of communicative networks.

It's more so understanding the human mind for what it is beyond this social understanding of it. For an example, incorporating the behavioral patterns of heat and water throughout the Universe, as what drives our anger and our sadness; or passion and wisdom, when you master these elements of the human mind. Another example would be our laughter. This brain of mine one day suddenly made the connection between how lightning behaves and how laughter behaves. Lightning carries nitrogen. Laughing gas contains nitrogen. We laugh when we're maintaining our composure. Lightning supplies nitrogen to maintain the planet's composure. The human body contains an electromagnetic shield... so does our planet. The entire human experience is truly the Universe's experience; in a different form, on a different scale. For an example, our skin has pores like a rock, but the purposes of each other are very, very different - the design pattern, however, remains irrefutably so. As above, so below; from form, to faculty; to, and fro.

You missed the entire point of the third section. People are wired differently and they have strengths where others are weak and vice versa. To know someone is to know their algorithm - it's important for anyone who is aspiring to understand their own people, to understand that what works for you will not work for them, but there are specific details that are universal enough to influence someone regardless of their algorithm, which I mentioned already.

Archaeologists aren't excavating the hole. They are excavating rock, dirt, ash, etc. The excavation creates a hole but they don't excavate the hole.

Exactly.

So when I said I would excavate their hollow shell, I was saying that I would break down their characteristics and aspects regardless.

When you speak it seems you grass.

By grass, I mean you don't make any sense because grass means not making sense as much as excavate means break down their characteristics.