|
Post by abacus9900 on Jun 15, 2015 15:09:10 GMT 1
The only sensible approach here is to say that our models of the universe are only as good as how persistently they work at given times, so we can never assume they will always be reliable. The one thing that does seem to be a universal truth about existence is that things do change in time, so nothing is fixed, including the way human beings perceive things. The world of a Neanderthal, for example, would not be quite the same as the world of a reasonably well educated Homo-Sapien. We must never lose sight of the fact that nature is and will always be much smarter than us.
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Jun 16, 2015 8:45:56 GMT 1
Are you certain that Neanderthal men existed? If so how? Do you think that they existed in the same world as us (ie planet Earth) or maybe they lived on a different planet?
|
|
|
Post by jean on Jun 16, 2015 8:56:31 GMT 1
I'm not even sure myself of the existence of a Homo-Sapien.
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Jun 24, 2015 7:38:04 GMT 1
I gather that the Neanderthals were very well adapted to their environment, which is why they lasted for so long, but, inevitably, conditions changed and Neanderthals could not adapt, partly I gather, due to the them not being able to compete successfully with Homo-Sapiens. There seems to be some evidence, in fact, that the two bred with one another, creating a kind of hybrid form.
|
|
|
Post by fascinating on Jun 24, 2015 21:32:03 GMT 1
How about answering my questions Abacus?
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 22, 2015 0:27:23 GMT 1
I do take your main point about theories of cosmology being something of a house of cards with each questionable theory depending upon the somewhat wobbly ones beneath. I think there is sufficient firmness in the "cards" to make some legitimate generalisations, say for example about the sizes and distances of the nearer (less than 500 million light years) galaxies. You could argue about how accurate the distance measure using the Cepheids is, but I think it is probably of the right order. Yes, perhaps. It's all dependant on the standard interpretation of the redshift being correct, though. That's the foundation of your house of cards. It might be right - it might not. I suspect the latter, and there's very good evidence to support my suspicion. Evidence totally ignored by consensual physics, of course. You need to know the distance and the nature of it, exactly. Look - all we have is a light. We have a spectral analysis of that light, which we interpret to tell us its distance. That interpretation may be incorrect. It wouldn't affect the appearance of the light in the slightest. No - not incorrect. Merely incorrect to suppose that you speak English as your first language, it seems. You've admitted that yourself. No big deal - but don't pretend anyone might suppose you're any sort of physicist
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 22, 2015 0:49:21 GMT 1
The only sensible approach here is to say that our models of the universe are only as good as how persistently they work at given times, so we can never assume they will always be reliable. The one thing that does seem to be a universal truth about existence is that things do change in time, so nothing is fixed, including the way human beings perceive things. The world of a Neanderthal, for example, would not be quite the same as the world of a reasonably well educated Homo-Sapien. The understanding of the world of a Neanderthal...or a frog, or a dadaist Frenchy, or you. The world that you and me all share, on the other hand, is exactly what it is, thankyou. Reality doesn't care what anyone thinks about it.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 22, 2015 0:52:10 GMT 1
I'm not even sure myself of the existence of a Homo-Sapien.That's why they died out. Gaylords, the lot of em.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 22, 2015 0:56:00 GMT 1
I gather that the Neanderthals were very well adapted to their environment, which is why they lasted for so long, but, inevitably, conditions changed and Neanderthals could not adapt, partly I gather, due to the them not being able to compete successfully with Homo-Sapiens. There seems to be some evidence, in fact, that the two bred with one another, creating a kind of hybrid form. Homo Socialistibum. A comparatively moderate intelligence, but a high degree of dependence on their social superiors. Like cats. Feed me, feed me...
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Jul 22, 2015 0:57:53 GMT 1
How about answering my questions Abacus? Dream on.
|
|