tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.comments2023-05-29T06:33:43.786-07:00Thoughts on Science and PseudoscienceThe Other John Mchttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comBlogger98125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-22786044660851101182018-10-24T16:37:17.402-07:002018-10-24T16:37:17.402-07:00Nice post mate, keep up the great work, just share...Nice post mate, keep up the great work, just shared this with my friendz <a href="https://yaldoeyecenter.com" rel="nofollow">Click here</a><br />John brahamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17022175466412097956noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-21995520243636443912018-09-25T04:39:59.966-07:002018-09-25T04:39:59.966-07:00If you are looking for more information about flat...If you are looking for more information about flat rate locksmith Las Vegas check that right away. <a href="http://www.freaklore.com" rel="nofollow">strange news headlines</a><br />SEO Link buildinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06495687346466149886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-46312181639556295332016-03-17T07:25:59.559-07:002016-03-17T07:25:59.559-07:00Really your post is very informative
http://awaren...Really your post is very informative<br />http://awarenesspost.blogspot.com<br />computer Awareness Post<br />Welcome To computer Awareness Post Here You Can Learn About Computer Studies...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18370871857700642535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-50816153882941913792015-09-17T20:46:14.897-07:002015-09-17T20:46:14.897-07:00After reading through your article and all the com...After reading through your article and all the comments I'm left confused. What exactly defines intelligence? Is the process of thinking considered an act of intelligence? An amoeba does not think to split though correct? But if a leopard is hot, does it not think to look for a shady tree to climb up and lie in? Now I know that the basic need to eat, breed, sleep, and drink is just basic instinct for survival for any living thing. So that can't be considered intelligence. But does an animal just lie dormant when it has fed and gotten a drink? Or does it interact in a social environment and communicate in its own way? Does an amoeba communicate? I don't think so, so can communication not between higher species not be considered a form of intelligence?<br /><br />You speak of adapting as a part of the evolutionary process, which reverts to Darwin's premises of survival of the fittest. We didn't determine where we are today on the evolutionary process, it was by chance humans are on top. It could have easily been the bottlenose dolphin or some other species. But given the probability that there is another planet like earth out there, with the same chance as us of forming life and intelligence, I hunk the probability is rather high or at least one other planet containing intelligent life at a minimum. Especially since there are galaxies much older than ours and have had more time to develop that life and intelligence. Whether they are able to travel through space and time is a different story but they can still have intelligence. Do anyone that says there is no possibility just remember that there is nothing impossible on improbable at most. But just because you come up with a calculation to try and turn and explanation into numbers to try and prove a point, next time keep it simple. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you make a great argument but I find it invalid in your assumptions given there is no accurate count to the number of planets and stars and more in each galaxy. We know far to little about what is out there to even add numbers to that degree yet. We still find new life on our very own planet and only 3% of our oceans are explored. So why not let us focus on finding out if there is not something more intelligent on our planet first? Who knows, maybe there is something so intelligent on our planet, its' been able to avoid and hide from us all this time.<br /><br />Don't get me wrong though I liked your article and it adds thought and perspective. It just can't be physically accurate or even remotely close without a solid factual basis to go off of with actual true numbers. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-54551666860479317792015-03-11T22:47:43.792-07:002015-03-11T22:47:43.792-07:00Bigfoots are very real. The only reason they don&#...Bigfoots are very real. The only reason they don't get hit by cars or that we have never even found a Bigfoot body yet is because they are indeed very intelligent. I did a study on a Bigfoot I captured about a year ago and finally got him talking last weekend. It appears that the only reason a Bigfoot body has never been found is because they can re-spawn. Thus making Bigfoots immortal. Also Bigfoots have been around since dinosaurs existed. I cut up with the Bigfoot for the whole weekend and he told me EVERYTHING about they're existence. If anyone has any questions about Bigfoots hit me up at yo local Circle K. I will be waiting. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-27074616337737675512014-12-28T01:12:24.427-08:002014-12-28T01:12:24.427-08:00Dr. Ketchum uses several universities to do all he...Dr. Ketchum uses several universities to do all her testing; it's not "her lab" as you commented. The problem is the PC scientific community shuns anything "bigfoot" and avoids her. That's why they purchased a review to publish it. One review was going to publish her research but withdrew after fielding criticism. <br /><br />They produced many samples that showed human and something unknown, which according to Dr. Ketchum is what you would expect to find, just like when the entire genomes of Neanderthal and Denisovan man were sequenced we share most of the same DNA, but then there is unknown DNA. <br /><br />There have been skeptical scientists who looked at her results and invariably claimed the samples must have been contaminated. It's based on the circular argument that there is no such thing as bigfoot, therefore the samples must have been contaminated. The problem is the university labs does washing techniques to remove contaminants, and a major criticism of these skeptical scientists is to declare so many different samples contaminated.<br /><br />There is DNA evidence, but the problem is without a type species to attach it to you cannot use DNA to declare it's existence. Doverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07478376856110865622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-39898309716193689352014-12-28T00:49:57.631-08:002014-12-28T00:49:57.631-08:00The statistics for how frequently sasquatches shou...The statistics for how frequently sasquatches should be hit by cars is flawed. You do note the urban pedestrian accidents would not apply to them, but additionally they are often extremely rural as they avoid humans. They have an aversion to lights shined their way. The best way to keep one away is shine a flashlight into the woods. They would naturally avoid car headlights. <br /><br />They are a lot smarter and perhaps less numerous than the large animals struck by cars in your study. Statistical studies of family tracks in habituation sites suggest they give birth about once every five years. I'm a bigfoot researcher and I've seen it (around 8 ft. tall) and cast footprints of it (17 in. long), and I've heard one speak. Most of us believe they are relict hominids. They are people, just not Homo sapiens, and you can't use rates of dumb animals killed as a good comparison, like 15 Florida panthers killed out of a population of 80-100. Are 15 out of every 100 people killed by vehicle strikes, people who live in the midst of cars. <br /><br />The running speed of a sasquatch was estimated at 35-40 miles an hour after it ran after a car that had hit it, and kept pace with the car at those speeds. There have been a number of reports of car strikes, you're just reading bad info and have limited knowledge of this subject.<br /><br />For a more compelling case for sasquatch existence here is another article I wrote that you can copy and paste to an address bar.<br /><br />http://sasquatchresearchers.org/blogs/bigfootjunction/2014/11/19/sasquatch-skull-found-near-lovelock-nv/<br /><br />Doverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07478376856110865622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-11856339692848605742014-12-27T23:48:22.630-08:002014-12-27T23:48:22.630-08:00The BFRO is not the final word and they are someti...The BFRO is not the final word and they are sometimes not a reliable source of information.<br /><br />I've read stories of sasquatches being struck by vehicles, and sometimes killed. When people return with means to remove the body the body is gone. There are numerous accounts of sasquatches removing their dead and burying them. Even in the late 1800's a train struck and killed a sasquatch one night. It took six men to load it onto a flat car, and while they were fixing the cattle catcher damaged in the collision other sasquatches apparently stole the body off of the flat car. I wrote an article on this subject. You can read it at the following link. If the link does not work paste it to an address bar or search engine.<br /><br /><br />http://sasquatchresearchers.org/forums/index.php?/topic/434-why-are-there-no-sasquatch-bodies-or-bones/Doverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07478376856110865622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-48116848381980102802014-12-27T23:42:04.140-08:002014-12-27T23:42:04.140-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Doverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07478376856110865622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-24015503147314708062014-11-25T14:26:59.170-08:002014-11-25T14:26:59.170-08:00Thanks for the thoughts Jimmy. Isn't there sti...Thanks for the thoughts Jimmy. Isn't there still a contradiction in the argument, in assuming that motion from 0 to 0.5 (or any distance) is possible but the whole trip from 0 to 1.0 is not?The Other John Mchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-3181601549075840792014-11-25T09:36:34.917-08:002014-11-25T09:36:34.917-08:00Zeno presents the argument as a reductio ad absurd...Zeno presents the argument as a reductio ad absurdum, so the form of the argument is to assume a hypothesis and prove that the hypothesis, when assumed to be true, leads to absurdity. So he can legitimately assume the premise, "motion is real," to prove that this hypothesis leads to a contradiction. You've got the proposed contradiction right (you cannot complete the infinite task), the contradiction encountered thus proving the hypothesis that "motion is real" is false. So he is allowed to assume the premise, to prove it leads to absurdity.<br /><br />Additional note - in the modern "refutations" of Zeno's paradoxes that use calculus or infinite sums, you still are not resolving Zeno's paradox. Just because the math works, doesn't mean you can complete an infinite task in the physical world. Simply acknowledging that modern math allows that the infinite sum equals 1 does not show you can cross an infinite number of physical spaces - completing an infinite task in physical space/time is not the same as summing an infinite series (which you also cannot actually "do" in real space/time). The dot-dot-dot hides the task, but doesn't complete it!tjallenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09231542592695193360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-87238517546563955992014-08-27T09:39:21.423-07:002014-08-27T09:39:21.423-07:00Check out my follow up article from Dec 12. You...Check out my follow up article from Dec 12. You'll see that ignoring humans and using large mammals for comparisons makes the conclusion even stronger.The Other John Mchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-20422084758014863112014-08-26T20:11:50.095-07:002014-08-26T20:11:50.095-07:00It seems to me that you fail to take into account ...It seems to me that you fail to take into account the fact that people get hit by cars, albeit a very small amount of people, because they are around them all the time. I don't even want to know how many people cross in front of traffic everyday, whether at a crosswalk or not. People get hit by cars for this reason alone. It is not like bigfoot at all. You cannot plug the number of humans hit by cars into a formula like this and expect accurate results.<br /><br />It seems to me that those die hard non-believers use the same types of inadmissible evidence as the believers. I mean I could use the same types of evidence and logic you present here to make a pro case for bigfoot. But I don't suppose you will take that into account, considering you are just like the believers...only on the other side.JiggyPotamushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16791120399763296912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-83062835110460469612014-08-15T00:23:48.249-07:002014-08-15T00:23:48.249-07:00Even after clarifying this there are still some in...Even after clarifying this there are still some interesting thought experiments left. If we are drawing a line from 0 to 1 in infinitely many steps within one second:<br /><br />time t = 0: drawing a line segment from 0 to 0.5 in 0.5 seconds<br />time t = 0.5: drawing a line segment from 0.5 to 0.75 in 0.25 seconds<br />time t = 0.75: drawing a line segment from 0.75 to 0.875 in 0.125 seconds<br />...<br /><br />At which point exactly can we lift the pen in order to finish the line?<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615165470672352773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-55917247181411880192014-08-13T12:10:57.241-07:002014-08-13T12:10:57.241-07:00Yes! That one is much more compelling. This one is...Yes! That one is much more compelling. This one is dismantled via more modern mathematical thinking than was available in Zeno's time: the infinite sum IS mathematically equivalent to the final value 1. An infinity of numbers exist within any finite magnitude.The Other John Mchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-58586060083900719162014-08-13T11:59:06.449-07:002014-08-13T11:59:06.449-07:00By the way, there is a way more compelling "m...By the way, there is a way more compelling "motion impossible" argument from Zeno.<br /><br />If you want to reach 1 you have to reach 0.5 before<br />If you want to reach 0.5 you have to reach 0.25 before<br />If you want to reach 0.25 you have to reach 0.125 before<br />...<br /><br />Since there is no first step you can take you cannot even start moving.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615165470672352773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-8779887546231084632014-08-12T22:19:36.401-07:002014-08-12T22:19:36.401-07:00Of course we can start with
time t = 0: moving fr...Of course we can start with<br /><br />time t = 0: moving from 0 to 1 in 1 second<br /><br />and there we go. We can use any finite number of steps to reach point 1 like<br /><br />time t = 0: moving from 0 to 0.5 in 0.5 seconds<br />time t = 0.5: moving from 0.5 to 1 in 0.5 seconds<br /><br />The process described in my previous post is also accomplished in a finite amount of time. At t = 1 we have done infinitely many steps, but none of these infinitely many steps is targeting point 1. Zeno's conclusion, that this means, motion is impossible, is arbitrary. My conclusion is, that<br /><br />time t = 0: moving from 0 to 0.5 in 0.5 seconds<br />time t = 0.5: moving from 0.5 to 0.75 in 0.25 seconds<br />time t = 0.75: moving from 0.75 to 0.875 in 0.125 seconds<br />...<br /><br />is not a complete description of what is really going on.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03615165470672352773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-72580609068645584962014-08-12T14:28:02.068-07:002014-08-12T14:28:02.068-07:00Right but my point was that if we can assume that ...Right but my point was that if we can assume that moving any distance is possible (half the distance) in a finite amount of time, then the paradox disappears under its own argumentThe Other John Mchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-9947214051962229042014-08-10T02:08:00.725-07:002014-08-10T02:08:00.725-07:00The puzzling part is not that we cannot move (that...The puzzling part is not that we cannot move (that's a nonsensical conclusion). The puzzling part is that there is no last step. You are moving on the number line from zero to one like this:<br /><br />time t = 0: moving from 0 to 0.5 in 0.5 seconds<br />time t = 0.5: moving from 0.5 to 0.75 in 0.25 seconds<br />time t = 0.75: moving from 0.75 to 0.875 in 0.125 seconds<br />...<br />There is no step on the list above like<br /><br />time t = x: moving from x to 1 in ? seconds<br /><br />So, take all the infinitely many steps on this list, and you still don't cover point 1.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-2844201155115586002014-02-27T10:37:04.497-08:002014-02-27T10:37:04.497-08:00So wait, you are accusing me of assuming that Sasq...So wait, you are accusing me of assuming that Sasquatch are less intelligent than humans? I am assuming they don't exist at all, so their intelligence is basically an irrelevant question. Also, I would never equate "un-intelligent" with "living in a tribal state of life".The Other John Mchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-52188528039282965272014-02-16T00:33:18.325-08:002014-02-16T00:33:18.325-08:00The issue, here, is that you assume that Sasquatch...The issue, here, is that you assume that Sasquatch are necessarily less intelligent than humans. I assume that this is based on the fact that they are less advanced - except that there are many human beings still stuck in a tribal state of living. Not that I necessarily believe that Bigfoot exists - but there's always the chance that they're more intelligent than us and avoid our society and technology because of the proven damage that they cause.Uneasyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08793131537817386184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-59366279997461241982013-07-09T14:40:28.149-07:002013-07-09T14:40:28.149-07:00Thanks for reading, here are your replies:
"...Thanks for reading, here are your replies:<br /><br />"What are people seeing?" I attempted to answer this in a previous post on eye-witness reports. Short answer: black bears, brown bears, people, elk, honey badgers, trees, rocks, rhinos, horse flies, aliens, angels, and often nothing at all. No evidence of anything mysterious going on, people say and do strange things, even 'normal' people that aren't otherwise crazy, sick, or on drugs.<br /><br />I also did a previous post (cited in first sentence of this post) about the annual roadkill rate for humans, and then applied to estimated Sasquatch populations. I came to similar conclusions: there should be overwhelming evidence by now, dozens or even hundreds of dead or injured Bigfoot. The large mammal data cited in this post provides even further evidence in that direction.<br /><br />I feel bad that anyone would give up hunting or fishing or enjoying the outdoors for fear of such a thing. But similar behaviors occur out of fear of demons, ghosts, leprechauns, witches, goblins, etc. Some people are afraid to fly, others to drive, still others to go out in public. Hopefully I could convince some of these people that while there might be plenty of things to fear in the deep dark woods, squatches aren't one of them.The Other John Mchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-65245127343378566762013-07-08T06:56:21.692-07:002013-07-08T06:56:21.692-07:00Interesting! If that is the case, then what are pe...Interesting! If that is the case, then what are people seeing? Why are many of these people now afraid to go back into the woods. Some have given up hunting and fishing because of fear. I really don't buy the percentage rate probability of road kill sasquatch. These things are said to be very intelligent. So now, lets take the road kill probability of the human. How many humans in North America, outside the city limits, have been struck by cars? What would that percentage rate be? After all, there are many really stupid people out there, no doubt dumber than a sasquatch, taking that into consideration, what kind of percentage rate are we talking about?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-38776377842729566182013-06-24T13:13:11.320-07:002013-06-24T13:13:11.320-07:00Thank you very much for reading, I appreciate the ...Thank you very much for reading, I appreciate the kind words.The Other John Mchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06648184479112487844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3457668362098152413.post-73145449368824853592013-06-23T19:30:52.812-07:002013-06-23T19:30:52.812-07:00I am bringing nothing to the table aside from sayi...I am bringing nothing to the table aside from saying that i read your article and everyone's responses. It was a really fun read.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com