Thank you for coining "mechanical accidentalism". That's a lucid turn of phrase that illustrates the existential catastrophe we're living through, especially in the way it implies the virtual annihilation of independent thought and, perhaps more vitally, critical self-reflection. The assbackwardness of Darwin the racist fighting for the abolition of slavery echoes the absurdity of today's official crusade against bigotry by an army of woke bigots, or by the legions who believe that staying safe and healthy includes injecting their bodies with poison. The other day I watched in amazement as a friend burst into tears because she's worried about my mental health, seeing as I hold these ongoing "beliefs" in, for example, the grave risks posed by the covid shots. But once she'd finished sobbing, she did add that when I do finally admit that I suffer from a mental illness and when I do finally admit that my brain is polluted with so much conspiratorial nonsense, she and my other true believing friends will forgive me for all the terror I've caused them via my crazy ideas. I wonder if such derangement, such cultish thinking is what results when people believe they're essentially robots with no minds of their own enduring meaningless lives mass-produced in a cosmic factory.
From the sounds of it, the "vaccine" must have passed the blood-brain barrier and caused some injury to your friends.
As for "mechanical accidentalism"--thank you. I realise that I didn't explain what that was exactly in this last piece because I have addressed that elsewhere. I plan on getting to that along with gradualism for the upcoming Barstool Bit, so stay tuned.
But of course, the finches of the Galapagos remain finches. The problem with "chance mutations" is that bodily systems aren't independent from each other. Mutations die; grow out, because according to their DNA, which is the building map, or overall plan - mutations are system failures. Like the famous finches, which are somehow magically 'modified' to suit their environments - they all defiantly remain - according to their DNA, finches. And monkey to human, Darwin couldn't have foreseen that there are about 30 million chromosomal differences, because his microscope wasn't big enough.
And as your article seems to incline, besides these problems with extended carpets under-which much is swept, the Sciences suffer many internal egotistical cat fights.
The details are sticky, though I plan to look at some of that when I get to present day new atheists. For now, my message is focused on the fundamental trouble of rejecting our inner world. This is a dogma of Darwinism as any among us discovers when attempting conversation with such folk. They are convinced that we're all operating according to a software. . . that we are ruled somehow by a microscopic power, and that furthermore, there is nothing imaginative or magical about this way of seeing things.
You'd get on very well with my 2012 philosophy book The Mythology of Evolution, which deals with topics like these on quite a broad tapestry. It also became my most pirated ebook for some reason! 😁
I would love to give you something on this - leave this with me while I toil through the end-of-month deliverables currently unleashing their hot breath upon my neck!
Thank you for coining "mechanical accidentalism". That's a lucid turn of phrase that illustrates the existential catastrophe we're living through, especially in the way it implies the virtual annihilation of independent thought and, perhaps more vitally, critical self-reflection. The assbackwardness of Darwin the racist fighting for the abolition of slavery echoes the absurdity of today's official crusade against bigotry by an army of woke bigots, or by the legions who believe that staying safe and healthy includes injecting their bodies with poison. The other day I watched in amazement as a friend burst into tears because she's worried about my mental health, seeing as I hold these ongoing "beliefs" in, for example, the grave risks posed by the covid shots. But once she'd finished sobbing, she did add that when I do finally admit that I suffer from a mental illness and when I do finally admit that my brain is polluted with so much conspiratorial nonsense, she and my other true believing friends will forgive me for all the terror I've caused them via my crazy ideas. I wonder if such derangement, such cultish thinking is what results when people believe they're essentially robots with no minds of their own enduring meaningless lives mass-produced in a cosmic factory.
From the sounds of it, the "vaccine" must have passed the blood-brain barrier and caused some injury to your friends.
As for "mechanical accidentalism"--thank you. I realise that I didn't explain what that was exactly in this last piece because I have addressed that elsewhere. I plan on getting to that along with gradualism for the upcoming Barstool Bit, so stay tuned.
Yet another well-written article!
But of course, the finches of the Galapagos remain finches. The problem with "chance mutations" is that bodily systems aren't independent from each other. Mutations die; grow out, because according to their DNA, which is the building map, or overall plan - mutations are system failures. Like the famous finches, which are somehow magically 'modified' to suit their environments - they all defiantly remain - according to their DNA, finches. And monkey to human, Darwin couldn't have foreseen that there are about 30 million chromosomal differences, because his microscope wasn't big enough.
And as your article seems to incline, besides these problems with extended carpets under-which much is swept, the Sciences suffer many internal egotistical cat fights.
The details are sticky, though I plan to look at some of that when I get to present day new atheists. For now, my message is focused on the fundamental trouble of rejecting our inner world. This is a dogma of Darwinism as any among us discovers when attempting conversation with such folk. They are convinced that we're all operating according to a software. . . that we are ruled somehow by a microscopic power, and that furthermore, there is nothing imaginative or magical about this way of seeing things.
So I guess summarizing, The Sciences don't know so that no one else can know either, because they're not The Sciences. Case closed, lol.
You'd get on very well with my 2012 philosophy book The Mythology of Evolution, which deals with topics like these on quite a broad tapestry. It also became my most pirated ebook for some reason! 😁
Thanks, Chris. Will take a look. If you'd like to contribute a piece on this subject, I'd be happy to take a look. Great to have other voices.
I would love to give you something on this - leave this with me while I toil through the end-of-month deliverables currently unleashing their hot breath upon my neck!