Resources for the evolutionist and atheist

[jinx]

http://austore.creation.com/catalog/sta ... p-135.html

http://creation.com/d-russell-humphreys-cv

Dr Russel Humphreys Phd presents his YEC cosmology. He runs through the big bang and contrasts it with his model.


http://austore.creation.com/catalog/gre ... p-520.html

http://creation.com/dr-jonathan-d-sarfati

Dr Jonathan Sarfati Phd demolishing Richard Dawkins points from 'The greatest show on earth'.


http://austore.creation.com/catalog/gen ... -1003.html

http://creation.com/john-sanford

Dr John Sanford Phd Analysis of neoDarwinian paradigm/germ line cell mutations and decline in fitness.

http://austore.creation.com/catalog/cla ... p-504.html

http://creation.com/dr-jonathan-d-sarfati

Dr Jonathan Sarfati Phd. General all round point by point demolition of evolution. Covers genetics (natural selection, mutations, created kinds, speciation) stuff Darwin said, stuff Dawkins says, physics (big bang, distant starlight, YEC cosmologies) history of science, dating methods, fossils.

[Cerveny]

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=8456&start=2 :)

[Ginkgo]

Hi Cerveny

You should read some literature produced by Stewart Hameroff. He explores the idea of quantum consciousness and proto consciousness. He explores evolution from a quantum perspective rather than the classical Darwinian approach.

Hameroff offers an interesting explanation for the Cambrian explosion of life. Basically he is saying that these primitive creatures use their microtubules to tap into an 'awareness' of their environment.

Interesting stuff anyway. I could try and find a link if you like.

[Cerveny]

Hi Cerveny

You should read some literature produced by Stewart Hameroff. He explores the idea of quantum consciousness and proto consciousness. He explores evolution from a quantum perspective rather than the classical Darwinian approach.

Hameroff offers an interesting explanation for the Cambrian explosion of life. Basically he is saying that these primitive creatures use their microtubules to tap into an 'awareness' of their environment.

Interesting stuff anyway. I could try and find a link if you like.

Ginkgo, you're very kind. If I do not be able to find the link, I will ask you.
Perhaps one rather clumsy reasoning:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=9654&start=9
Consciousness is a feeling of the influencing of the future :)
sorry bad English (I'm a bit dyslexic)

[Ginkgo]

Hi Cerveny

You should read some literature produced by Stewart Hameroff. He explores the idea of quantum consciousness and proto consciousness. He explores evolution from a quantum perspective rather than the classical Darwinian approach.

Hameroff offers an interesting explanation for the Cambrian explosion of life. Basically he is saying that these primitive creatures use their microtubules to tap into an 'awareness' of their environment.

Interesting stuff anyway. I could try and find a link if you like.

Ginkgo, you're very kind. If I do not be able to find the link, I will ask you.
Perhaps one rather clumsy reasoning:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=9654&start=9
Consciousness is a feeling of the influencing of the future
sorry bad English (I'm a bit dyslexic)

No, your English is excellent. I think I can see what you are getting at. All I can do is tell you what I know of Hameroff and how that compares to what you are saying.

Let's take evolution as an example. The issue of evolution seems to boil down to the question of whether things evolve via the use of a crane or a skyhook. Classical evolutionary theory says evolve slowly from the ground up, while the religious interpretation says that things a built from the top down. And never the twain shall agree.

It seems to me that both are actually correct. Hameroff suggest that the problem is that we are not thinking past the classical. He proposes a rather unique quantum theory of consciousness. Basically Hameroff see all life forms (even the most basic types) as containing microtubules. Primitative animals have these structures in the bodies while higher order animals have them within their brains.

Hammeroff wants to claim that these microtubules function like a quantum computer. So even simple organisms function with a type of intelligence. Thus far it seems to me that what Hameroff is saying is well within the realms of science and he has the theory and mathematics to demonstrate this thus far.

The problem comes about when he wants to claim that the 'crane' approach is not enough to explain consciousness. He wants to add in a 'skyhook'. In other words, what is also required is a type of proto-consciousness to make organisms evolutionary conscious. In other words, we need both types of consciousness as a driving force for a type of teleological progress. Very roughly speaking, we could say that both types of consciousness combined creates an intelligent design.

I hope I am not doing Hameroff a disservice, but this is my understanding.