Impossibility: the limits of science - audio lecture by John D. Barrow (online at Gresham college)
Quotes and comments;
1. Barrow claims progress is a modern idea...
- Has he never read Daniel or Isaiah? Postmillenialism is as old as Christianity; though it's rarely been the prevalent eschatalogical view.
2. H he mentions the statement by the founder of IBM that he couldn't imagine a market for computers of more than six!
- remember this when you hear 'experts' making predictions :=)
- the fact is we have no idea what is possible or impossible. In the bible we're told that with God all things are possible... and we have no way to deny this.
3. 'Progress used to be thought of as being able to manipulate bigger and bigger things; even planets and stars and galaxies... but now the idea is to manipulate smaller and smaller things.'
4. Like all English blokes he just accepts Darwinism (the greatest idiot idea in history) as if it were as obvious as 2+2 (I find this incomprehensible; I guess they just hide from all critiques.)
- If it's possible the universe came from nothing, and that life came from non-life, and intelligence from non-intelligence, and consciousness from the not-conscious, and persons from matter, I don't know how ANYthing can be impossible :=)
5. he talks about it being difficult to think in any other way than what we do; eg. all causes are local. (There is no way to prove any theory of causation in my opinion; the fact we tend to see causation in a 'newtonian' way doesn't mean this corresponds to reality.)
6. he speaks of 'uncomputible' problems (in math) even with computers...
- if the smartest people we have (and super computers) can't figure out how 'nature' does something... then I see this as powerful evidence of Intelligent design (that designer x is at least far superior in intelligence to the crew at MIT) The idea this can happen by 'chance' is an idea I find absurd. (Only because college grads of m. colleges are conditioned to have knee jerk reactions against ID are people in denial about this. If they'd been taught ID they'd have no problem with this.) The idea the super complex happens by chemical reaction is the idiot idea of all history.
7. he says one of Godel's theorems is 'one can never prove a sequence (of numbers?) is random.'
- This sounds to me like you can never disprove God.)
- was it William Rusher who said we should call evolution, accidentalism; but maybe impossibilism would be better. (And maybe not :=)
Notes;
1. Date/Time: 26/01/2006
- not bad; 3.5/5
Quotes and comments;
1. Barrow claims progress is a modern idea...
- Has he never read Daniel or Isaiah? Postmillenialism is as old as Christianity; though it's rarely been the prevalent eschatalogical view.
2. H he mentions the statement by the founder of IBM that he couldn't imagine a market for computers of more than six!
- remember this when you hear 'experts' making predictions :=)
- the fact is we have no idea what is possible or impossible. In the bible we're told that with God all things are possible... and we have no way to deny this.
3. 'Progress used to be thought of as being able to manipulate bigger and bigger things; even planets and stars and galaxies... but now the idea is to manipulate smaller and smaller things.'
4. Like all English blokes he just accepts Darwinism (the greatest idiot idea in history) as if it were as obvious as 2+2 (I find this incomprehensible; I guess they just hide from all critiques.)
- If it's possible the universe came from nothing, and that life came from non-life, and intelligence from non-intelligence, and consciousness from the not-conscious, and persons from matter, I don't know how ANYthing can be impossible :=)
5. he talks about it being difficult to think in any other way than what we do; eg. all causes are local. (There is no way to prove any theory of causation in my opinion; the fact we tend to see causation in a 'newtonian' way doesn't mean this corresponds to reality.)
6. he speaks of 'uncomputible' problems (in math) even with computers...
- if the smartest people we have (and super computers) can't figure out how 'nature' does something... then I see this as powerful evidence of Intelligent design (that designer x is at least far superior in intelligence to the crew at MIT) The idea this can happen by 'chance' is an idea I find absurd. (Only because college grads of m. colleges are conditioned to have knee jerk reactions against ID are people in denial about this. If they'd been taught ID they'd have no problem with this.) The idea the super complex happens by chemical reaction is the idiot idea of all history.
7. he says one of Godel's theorems is 'one can never prove a sequence (of numbers?) is random.'
- This sounds to me like you can never disprove God.)
- was it William Rusher who said we should call evolution, accidentalism; but maybe impossibilism would be better. (And maybe not :=)
Notes;
1. Date/Time: 26/01/2006
- not bad; 3.5/5
posted by M. Johnson at 10:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home