May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« Halloween Costumes | Main | My Worst Blog Post Ever »

Comments

Vladislav Chernyshov

I'm not sure I understand what evoluton does in common with space.

Space is a some kind of relative location measure.
Evolution is a theory about how live nature is progressing.
Even in time, not in space.

It's like comparing red delicious cubes with Cauchy problem.

And what is all this buzz about???

Kevin Kunreuther

Your Lying Shadow is actually a good name for a rock band.

Armando Esteban

Quote:

You're the shadow of a pandimensional monkey

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

charlie

I can imagine the discovery of extra dimensions invalidating our notion of evolution, but I think it is highly unlikely. And even if it happened, we are only equipped to deal with the world we perceive, and within that world, evolution is the best model we have.

I think I got that right.

loser of guitar picks

okay that's a lie

Gene

That's me God's shadow puppet. Kinda puts a whole new spin on the created in His own image.

Andy Watt

It really is amazing how many different nuances of pissing contest about the theory of evolution's validity there are on here.

This one smells like... intellectual cheese.

latsot

"Maybe it's just me, but does evolution really matter? How the hell is it going to effect me whether or not gradual changes produced me and other animals?"

Much of our understanding of biology is based on it. If you have ever required medicine, then it is likely that you have profited from our knowledge of evolution.

Additionally, do you seriously suggest that ignorance is better than knowledge? Can you really not imagine profiting personally because less stupid people than you understand stuff you don't?

You have had every opportunity to grow up. It is odd that you would fail to take it, but there you go.

latsot

"I’ve been saying for years that evolution as we perceive it is not a feature of reality so much as an internally consistent perception, like a shadow. Our brains aren’t equipped to understand the nature of reality. What we understand as the gradual change of species over time is no more a feature of reality than your shadow is a real person."

On what do you base this? Other than a funny feeling that evolution might not be quite right, you have never (on this blog) stated a specific fault. This kind of namby-pamby fence-sitting in the face of large bodies of evidence is startling. If you have a problem with evolution, just go ahead and say what it is. Not understanding evolution is a poor basis for deciding it isn't real. Even creationists try harder than that.

Of course, you might just be yanking our chains. You might not really believe any of this stuff and are setting us up to make fools of ourselves by replying to it as though it were honest. That isn't foolish.

Paul

I like the idea of a comic strip based on Evolution. There is a lot of good material out there it seems. Does one already exist? Some of my favorite Far Side strips are the evolution ones.

Nostok

The annoyed people who visit this blog annoy me to the point of being an annoyed visitor of this blog. Stop it damn you!

Keep the "bullshit" analysis/thoughts coming Mr Adams; I read them and always think the patronising angle is for the other plebs who got here by accident because of your excellent Dilbert doodlings.

Commenting on a blog is I feel like attending a stand up comic show and being sat in the front row; you will be ridiculed somehow... and you paid for that this is free.

Lamark

All matter is made up of tiny sub atomic particles, whose behaviour does not agree with Newtons laws of motion but by Quantum mechanics. Does this mean that engineers now reject Newtons laws and try to to model how planes fly based on Quantum mechanics? No, because the laws of motion are true at a macro level and the fact that these are a subset of a range of interactions of quantum effects is only book-keeping. Similarly, if evolution is proven in 3 dimensions, it is true, even if the base level mechanism can be shown to be in a mysterious fourth , fifth , tenth etc dimension.

Iain

Just thought I'd leave a comment about science research. You can get some real shit published somewhere in the scientific literature. There are two papers in my own field that claim, in their title, that the authors have created an anti-gravity surface for water drops which is a physical impossiblity. Obviously they haven't actually stated it's an anti-gravity surface but when you know the field their comments go beyond headline grabbing. (I have a feeling this guy is going for tenure).

Arturo

I think you'll find that evolution has no dependency on the number of dimensions of spacetime.

random

'The reason is that the theory of evolution is the only scientific view that gave the atheists some kind of intellectual validity, as Richard Dawkins declared. Pity that a fairy tale becomes your intellectual justification for a world view, but hey, that's 'science' for you! Also the Supreme Court won't allow anything else to be taught in schools, so evolution must be a big deal...'

evolution a fairy tale? Was that deliberate humour, as that is effectively what Richard himself has used to describe as the justification of the religious world view. Something along the lines of, believing in religion makes as much sense as believing in fairies at the end of your garden.

The argument that god cannot be 100% disproved therefore you should believe in god, could just as easily be applied to fairies or unicorns, or pretty much anything. Evolution on the other hand is not just some idea someone made up completely, but based on evidence. Even if it is shown to be flawed by future evidence it still wouldn't be equivalent to religion. Religion of course cannot be disproved because there is no proof to falsify. However as Richard Dawkins shows it can be shown that the probability of gods existing is so small as to be negligible. And that is enough to consider yourself atheist, you do not need to be 100% sure there is no god to be atheist, its enough to consider that you have no reason to believe based on current knowledge available to you. Atheist do not claim that there cannot possibly be a god, just that so far there is no evidence of one. It is for the theist to prove god to us. Scientists would have rejected evolution straight off if Darwin had absolutely no evidence to back it up, just as most scientists reject religion due lack of any evidence.

Tom Beck

Here's a comment you did not predict:

What do you mean by "evolution as we perceive it is not a feature of reality so much as an internally consistent perception, like a shadow. Our brains aren’t equipped to understand the nature of reality. What we understand as the gradual change of species over time is no more a feature of reality than your shadow is a real person."?

I literally have no idea what you mean by that. Maybe I'm stupid (not at all unlikely), but if "the gradual change of species over time is no more a feature of reality than your shadow is a real person," then what has actually been going on? How do you explain the observations that have led scientists to conclude that the evolutionary process has taken place and is still taking place?

Your statement, to me, is as much bullshit as the things that you call bullshit, because I honestly do not understand what you mean by it.

oliver

Why does the tip of the penis have a bigger diameter than the shaft?
France: More pleasure for women
USA: More pleasure for men
Kazakhstan: So that your hand does not fly off and hid you on the forehead

random

re God is hiding in the 5-D Reality watching us (WCE)

How did you know Zeus was there? Are you not worried by revealing Zeus's plan you will be smited by him? Oh, you meant a different god? So, if god doesn't reveal himself so as to catch out the evildoers, how do you know which god is the real God? Did it reveal itself to you or someone you trust, if so then doesn't that contradict your claim that god doesn't reveal itself. A god that punishes people that do not believe in it despite it not giving any proof or any other valid reason to believe in it is not a god I would want to believe in.

Note if you suggest it just gives this proof to select few that is of no use as it still doesn't give others a reason to believe. The others have no means to tell the difference between those who know the truth and those of different beliefs who are merely delusional.

Also, what crimes does your god punish? If you refer to the bible, it is contradictory and a lot of things punishable by death in it are not even considered crimes today. How should we decide which rules to follow to not be smited by this hidden god if it refuses to even prove its existance let alone give actual instructions to us. (Again I'll point out that these should be given directly rather than to a select few to pass on as we have no rational reason to believe these select few.)

Gustaf

Evolution theory would be as invalidated by extra dimensions as the germ theory of disease.

Rack

3, 6 and 7. Of course all aspects would have only a shadow connection to actual reality, but they'd still have their same connection to shadow reality. And to reiterate stop wittering about evolution, this would have impact on all fields equally, stop trying to ram every story into your hopeless evolution bet.

Marxist

How many grams of hash did you take while making this blog?

Jim Geraghty

Jeffrey Harper wrote

"I don't really KNOW that the Earth wasn't created just 5 seconds ago. Heck, if it really was through some intelligent design, couldn't that designer create any desired starting point? Just look at the work done in Hollywood to create a brand new set that looks over 100 years old. If a creator is capable of making all these mechanisms work, and if some of those mechanisms are able to make things that fool people into thinking that their creations are older than they really are, wouldn't the ultimate creator be talented enough to create a world where things appear older than they really are? And, if all people's minds are "programmed," couldn't that creator have programmed a past, where things actually just started 5 seconds ago, but we all believe that we've had a full life prior to this point?

Perhaps you never really read this post -- you were just programmed to think that you read it, just as I may have been programmed to think that I typed it."

------------------

Actually, it was only one of you that wrote that. There are an infinite number of you in parallel universes, some typing nearly what you typed, some doing other things. Some have just sprung into existence fully-formed, and some haven't. It's all perfectly clear - once you think about it. (dribble, drool)

Thomas

Any scientific theory (and that's what it is) will be deemed valid until it can be falsified. If it gives us the power to predict new stuff, then we deem it useful (think Einstein and redshift, perihelion precession etc.) - for the moment. That would be the useful math part. BTW It's not like having more than 3 dimensions is new. We are living with a fourth for a long time now... some of the wilder physicists cannot deal with any number below 23 dimensions. Those going for 11 dims usually also add up all positive integers to -1/12 (yes, that is 1+2+3+4+... = -1/12). I kinda liked the proof during my university years. I particularly liked my then-girlfriend getting angry at me when I tried to explain that to her.

Håvard

You missed the one where I say that this work in physics has no impact on the theory of evolution whether it's correct or not.

But you're right when it comes to news stories about science. Much too often they're hyped beyond anything a rational scientist would actually say (other than to a funding committee when desperate).

Jim Geraghty

"
"Maybe it's just me, but does evolution really matter? How the hell is it going to effect me whether or not gradual changes produced me and other animals?..I can understand the God-ites, cause heaven vs. hell vs. oblivion is a big deal, but to the atheists? Why bother?" Justin Long

The reason is that the theory of evolution is the only scientific view that gave the atheists some kind of intellectual validity, as Richard Dawkins declared.....
"

Actually, it would be accurate to say that none of this matters at all...if you think life is about grubbing around like an earthworm - eating to live and procreate, living to eat and procreate, procreating...well, bacause it's nice.

But we humans like to think that we are more than mere beasts, so we do Philosophy. So keep philosophising Scott. Some of your blogs are boring to me, but I read most of them, because they are stimulating, even when annoying. And the jokes are in Dilbert, so they don't always have to be here too.

The comments to this entry are closed.