Bloodhounds never forget a smell

William Miller tells his story of being seduced into evolutionary science by a mysterious female named Sue.

Download The First 3 Chapters of Evolution 2.0 For Free, Here – https://evo-2.org/3-free-chapters

Where Did Life And The Genetic Code Come From? Can The Answer Build Superior AI? The #1 Mystery In Science Now Has A $10 Million Prize. Learn More About It, Here – https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0

8 Responses

  1. Duane Gruber says:

    Sniff

    https://biblehub.com/niv/ecclesiastes/12.htm

    Well, packma, here!
    Pack ma big black hole.com

    The Era of No Cosmology began 12-25-ish-2019, when Sabine Hossenfelder ran the Ergo Procto through Every Last Cosmology Theory.

    Cosmology Exploded: The Universe did not explode. Duane Gruber 2007

    We sit here on the First Day of 2020, and No Theory of the Universe fits the Observable.

    A Scienceless Universe.

    Duane A. Gruber

  2. Christopher Jones says:

    Would like to hear more from the “Arrived at Evolution 2.0 Independently” club, especially from Henry Hang and what he found in his cancer research.

    • This would be a great topic for a blog post or video sometime. Short answer for now:

      Henry Heng’s books:
      https://smile.amazon.com/s?k=%22henry+h.+heng%22&ref=nb_sb_noss
      Chapters 3 and 6 of “Genome Chaos” are very good. Especially chapter 6. Expensive book but you can request a loaner copy, most likely, through your local library.

      Also see the bottom of this blog post for a list of great books:

      https://evo2.org/ny2018/

      Two thirds of the authors listed here are “outsiders” to standard evolutionary biology, yet come to remarkably similar conclusions. In fact, 100% of these authors had significant outside influences and perspectives which tipped them off that the usual neo-Darwinian story could not possibly be correct. Good example is Denis Noble (eminent British scientist), who in the process of tracing the behavior of the heart rhythm, knocked out genes and determined that the usual assumptions about the relationship between genotype and phenotype were wrong at a wholesale level.

      John Hands was a total outsider, I had no contact with him before Cosmosapiens came out, yet his book and EV2.0 came to essentially identical conclusions. He’s a great writer and a fastidious researcher.

      Also: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fgene.2019.01082/full

  3. arthur harris says:

    William Miller is one of the most enlightened persons re evolution with whom you have done a podcast. There is no doubt that unconscious logic has directed evolution although Miller does not express it that way. Instead he talks about cells being “intelligent” and being capable of gathering and processing information.The plant cafe marron is native to the island of Rodrigues in the Indian Ocean. Its leaves are eaten by giant tortoises. So as it grows it disguises the form and colour of its leaves until it grows to a height above the reach of the tortoises mouth. Now is assumes leaves of the correct colour and shape.How does it do this and when to time the transition to “true” leaves? What needs to be explored in greater detail is the nature of logic used by cells.

    • Mike Lamb says:

      So the cafe marron is no longer eaten by the tortoises? So how many tortoises know that they are A) eating the wrong colour/form leaves,
      B) have changed their diet to exclude cafe marron? Why should the plant revert to it’s original form/colour leaves at all?

  4. arthur harris says:

    So Michael Behe uses the term “intelligent design”. That is an ambiguous term. It could mean that a power outside the cell is organizing or arranging it in a complex manner so as to fulfill a function perfectly and so warrant the term “intelligent” being applied to that design. It could also mean that cells themselves are capable of logic and so organizing themselves into a manner that could justify the term “intelligent”. The work of William Miller now shines the spotlight on this latter interpretation by asserting that cells are “intelligent”. If one now accepts that cells are driven by a form of “logic” (my term as opposed to “intelligence” for which I have no rules but logic does) what form does this logic take? When one gives a scientific explanation one thinks in terms of cause (the antecedent condition) and effect ( the consequent). Darwin’s theory of evolution was meant to be mechanistic relying on the model of cause and effect. However for a cell to be intelligent that sort of logic will not apply. The cell must now have purpose and and be motivated to achieve an end intelligently.. The question of motivation needs to be examined because that is a topic totally missing in the Darwinian conjecture. It is possible to present a theme or pattern to evolution ( Darwin denied any pattern) by how different motivational states are organised. In a single eukaryotic cell the nucleus controls each motivation and only one motivation at a time can occur. Each motivation has its own unique furniture in the cytoplasm so that as one motivation ends the stage must be cleared and “the scenery” set for a new motivation. Greater efficiency was introduced by resorting to multicellular co=operation such as in the Portugese man o war. A specialized structure for each motivational state is simultaneously present. Dactylozooids protect and capture food which they deliver to gastrozooids which digest them Gonozooids do reproduction. None of these specialized structures can function independently. Next came the metazoan design of the hypothalamus in vertebrates and invertebrates. Each motivation is simultaneously present there together with a body housing the organs each motivation needs and which can be switched on quickly when needed using hormones.It worried me that the adult form of insects specializing in reproduction does not occur until after the pupal stage and therefore might not be present simultaneously with the motivations of the larval stage. Not so.”Soon after the egg is fertilized and the cells begin to divide a strange event takes place. From a place in the egg where the future adult thorax will develop, what has been called a “wave of determination” spreads out over the embryo. Like a stage director, this wave arrays certain cells for the specific roles they will play in the life of the larva. Shortly thereafter a second wave assigns still other cells to the roles they will play in the insect’s pupal and adult stages. The cluster of adult cells that result are known as the imaginal buds. Thus the forming caterpillar has within it simultaneously two separate growth patterns.”
    .This arrangement of motivational stages can be elaborated but enough has been stated to detect an intelligent design. So this question must be now asked?
    IF one accepts “intelligent design” to mean an external intelligent power then why muck about with the build up to the hypothalamus stage? This is the stage of greatest efficiency between switching a motivational state on or off. Rather is appears that the hypothalamus stage was reached because of William Miller’s concept of “intelligent”cells co-operating to form a design that enables greater efficiency.

  5. arthur harris says:

    Dear Perry Marshall
    I truly enjoy these podcasts but I am puzzled as to why you never ask your guest the most important question in evolutionary theory- WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE GULF BETWEEN HUMAN AND BEAST? This is critical. It was Aristotle who suggested that the rational soul was divinely implanted into the human embryo some time before birth. Thomas Aquinas who studied Aristotle made this belief an article of faith for the Catholic Church. Muslim scholars also studied Aristotle and divine implantation is a pillar of that religion. Unless a theory of evolution explains this gulf it will be forever open to a religion to invoke divine implantation as something separate from the rest of evolution.
    Now Darwin proposed that this gulf was a matter of degree not quality (in “The Descent of Man”) This was not a guess; it was mandated from the premises of the theory he has expressed in “The Origin of Species”. His concept that mutations to individual differences lead a new species meant that humans had accumulated more “intelligence”,
    “We have only to suppose the steps in the process of modification to be more numerous or greater in amount to convert these varieties into well defined species” (p.164) This quote exemplifies his theory.
    Darwin’s theory permits few predictions that can be tested but this was one. There had to be a common dimension of intelligence shared by different species. This was tested in the area of learning theory in Psychology in the middle of the twentieth century. Rats and pigeons were used as representatives of this continuum and it was hoped that principles of learning could be extrapolated from them and applied to humans who were further along the same dimension. What followed was the BIG COVER UP. By 1969 it was found that there was no such continuum. THIS DISPROVED DARWIN’s THEORY. A false prediction or consequent means that the hypothesis making the prediction is FALSE. (see Psychological Review 1969 pp337-50 “Scala Naturae: why there is no theory in comparative psychology”).This finding was hushed up and almost two decades later Richard Dawkins told the world that Darwin had solved the problem of evolution. (“The Blind Watchmaker”)
    What now explains this gulf in evolutionary terms? Can your interviewees explain their mind when professing that it can explain evolution?

    • I do not merely think, but observe, that humans have profound spiritual experiences, supernaturally heal other humans (www.coffeehousetheology.com/miracles) and are spiritual beings. So I believe that in some spiritual sense the statement “And God breathed the breath of life in to the man and he became a living being” is true. It’s true whether or not man is descended from primates.

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *