Demons.

[miekko]

 

 

 

 

I do think there are forces or energies out there that can play upon a person's mind and maybe affect someone physically. I don't know if I would call them demons though. In the universe there is still the undiscovered and unknown.

 

I am not going to debate this, it just comes from my experience of life.

 

You don't want to debate it yet you claim something here that you most assuradly cannot prove in science at this moment in history.

 

I am not saying your wrong. Just that if you have some unique experience that leads you to believe this then maybe you should share it with us. I know that I would like to hear it if you feel something that helps explain things that the religious believe simply because they are to weak or stupid to accept logic and call it magic instead.

 

I am of the school that says all things are quantifiable in this universe. Maybe I cannot quanitfy it but it is possible or it cannot exist period. Our brains are made of chemical factories. I would not doubt there are things out there that can act on them that we do not see hear touch taste or smell. Thankfully none of them are magic or god(s).

 

It is a big universe and there is probably something out there a lot more powerful than we are, I wonder if one day we will use them or they us to accomplish some goal. Who can say for sure until it is known. One thing I can say for sure is I will ask people for proof or explanation when they post like this on the internet.

 

No need to debate just tell us what you actually think.

 

 

Not saying you're wrong, but you would have been looked at as crazy at the time of Galileo, if you said the earth as round or a sphere.  Yet, it is.  The use of the words 'Demons' or 'Forces' may be words that simply describe something that we, as of yet, do not understand how to observe and manipulate.  Science, logic, and empirical data are only good with the known universe and solving problems.  There is FAR more  we don't know about the universe than what we do know.  

 

Maybe in the countryside, but pretty much everyone with an education from the time of the ancient greeks knew the world was spherical, even in the darkest parts of medieval decay.

 

The reason people objected to Columbus' plans of sailing west and reaching India was that Columbus had used a wildly inaccurate estimate o the circumference of the world. Had he not run into an unknown continent, the crew would have depleted the food they brought long before reaching India. 

 

One thing science has gotten damn good at in recent centuries is figuring out what it does not know and honing in on it so it can find those things out. Ghosts and demons, if they exist, would have to leave some kind of trace, and we can be pretty sure by now that they would've been traced if they existed.

 

Oh, Eratosthenes discovered the world was spherical and calculated it's dimensions in the 3rd century BC.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8cbIWMv0rI

 

Many sources only think he calculated its dimensions, whereas the idea that it was round predated him by a bit.

[mymistake]

 

That is based on KNOWN facts, and those can change over time. I have had conversations with physicists who have been bouncing around the theory that what some see as 'ghosts' or 'spirits' may not be baloney, but perhaps something akin to a photograph, except on light sensitive substances like photographic paper, but rather, an element of time space, the fabric of the universe. OR...the point at which we are seeing another physical dimension we are as of yet unable to measure.

 

 

It is a known fact that human perception is deeply flawed.  We can create near death experiences, out of body experiences, the feeling of ghosts and similar creepy experiences in the lab.  It's just a matter of tricking the mind the way optical illusions do or stimulating the correct part of the brain.

[mymistake]

 

 

 

That is based on KNOWN facts, and those can change over time. I have had conversations with physicists who have been bouncing around the theory that what some see as 'ghosts' or 'spirits' may not be baloney, but perhaps something akin to a photograph, except on light sensitive substances like photographic paper, but rather, an element of time space, the fabric of the universe. OR...the point at which we are seeing another physical dimension we are as of yet unable to measure.

It is a known fact that human perception is deeply flawed. We can create near death experiences, out of body experiences, the feeling of ghosts and similar creepy experiences in the lab. It's just a matter of tricking the mind the way optical illusions do or stimulating the correct part of the brain.

Opinion and closed mindedness. Not saying your wrong, but again I say, no way at this time to prove nor disprove.

 

 

Facts are not opinion.  It's been demonstrated in the lab over and over again.  

 

Put on the right equipment that stimulates the correct part of the brain and an NDE results.  The details of each NDE will be different.  But they are all "weird" experiences caused by stimulating that part of the brian.

 

Now they have created ghost experiences using low frequency sound waves.

 

Out of body experiences require disorienting the mind's concept of spacial orientation.  And then - bam - you feel like you are floating and looking down at yourself.

 

All of these experiences are quite real and testable.

[mymistake]

 

Not denying that at all....but are you saying that is the ONLY thing it can be and NOTHING ELSE?

 

 

Just googling online I bumped into Ketamine which use to be used as a general anesthesia and apparently one of it's common side effects is a classic NDE.  It is being phased out but this drug might be responsible for the NDE being so popular in our culture.

 

As I understand it being a fighter pilot can also cause NDEs.  The disorientation resulting from high G-turns can create such a sensation.  And the added bonus is if you are disoriented while flying a fighter plane you are actually very near to death.

[Deva]

I agree with Seeker that other possibilities should be considered, and I am very much in favor of scientific investigation of any and all phenomenon. Sometimes, however, there is no answer.

 

Yes, BO, while I have not heard that particular explanation regarding the genome project, I have read where another scientist said that the genome project was not as promising as originally envisioned.

[directionless]

I had an interesting discussion with a fellow I do frequent business with, a Ph.D geneticist, who has been published many times. Over time, I have developed a friendship along with a business relationship. Back in February of this year, I was in his office doing business. We got to talking. He told me, that because of the Genome project, which he is a part of, and heavy contributor to, the whole human evolutionary model might have to be scrapped and redone. He said that the tests run on the bones of human ancestors and modern humans of the DNA does not fit. He said that our genes are similar buy VERY different from our closest DNA cousins, Chimps and Gorillas. They have 48 chromosomes, we have 46. Our second and third chromosomes are fused and several are oppositely arranged from those other primates. Not only that, modern humans are so unique, that we have as a species, over 4000 KNOWN genetic disorders yet we managed to survive and thrive. He said that no other known animal or plant species survives more than 1 to 2 generations with even 1/10 that number of disorders. Be also said that from testing the DNA, where it can be successfully extracted, from early human bones, it is ape DNA, not human. ONLY modern human DNA is SO radically different. He looked me in the eye and said that if he did not know any better, he would swear that modern human DNA has been genetically manipulated.

I wonder if modern humans have more genetic disorders simply because humans can complain about their ailments and apes can't?

 

That really has my imagination going (ancient aliens?). If anybody has links to articles about this topic, I would be curious.

[skepticalme]

I had an interesting discussion with a fellow I do frequent business with, a Ph.D geneticist, who has been published many times. Over time, I have developed a friendship along with a business relationship. Back in February of this year, I was in his office doing business. We got to talking. He told me, that because of the Genome project, which he is a part of, and heavy contributor to, the whole human evolutionary model might have to be scrapped and redone. He said that the tests run on the bones of human ancestors and modern humans of the DNA does not fit. He said that our genes are similar buy VERY different from our closest DNA cousins, Chimps and Gorillas. They have 48 chromosomes, we have 46. Our second and third chromosomes are fused and several are oppositely arranged from those other primates. Not only that, modern humans are so unique, that we have as a species, over 4000 KNOWN genetic disorders yet we managed to survive and thrive. He said that no other known animal or plant species survives more than 1 to 2 generations with even 1/10 that number of disorders. Be also said that from testing the DNA, where it can be successfully extracted, from early human bones, it is ape DNA, not human. ONLY modern human DNA is SO radically different. He looked me in the eye and said that if he did not know any better, he would swear that modern human DNA has been genetically manipulated.

You kind of answered your own riddle there.  Animals with a fraction of those disorders don't survive more than a generation or two.  As a result they don't get passed down.  We survive and thrive through them because we have all but elliminated natural selection.  Take diabetes for example, if an animal in the wild developed that condition, it would die fairly quickly and those genes would come to an abrupt end.  Technology, medicine, trade and agriculture have allowed us to survive these disorders.  That's also why the disorders are so recent.  Another example, all mammals are capable of producing vitamin C themselves, they don't have to consume it; humans can't.  We've used technology, trade and agriculture to bring vitamin C with us.  The plentifulness of vitamin C in our diets has allowed the broken gene to spread unchecked, so we all have it now.  Indirectly, we've genetically manipulated ourselves in much the same way we manipulated animals genes by domesticating them.

[mymistake]

Humans live in groups.  Weak members are kept alive by the strong.  Less productive members are kept alive by the produces.  We are social.  A family or tribe has a lot more going on than any individual could do on their own.

[skepticalme]

 

 

I had an interesting discussion with a fellow I do frequent business with, a Ph.D geneticist, who has been published many times. Over time, I have developed a friendship along with a business relationship. Back in February of this year, I was in his office doing business. We got to talking. He told me, that because of the Genome project, which he is a part of, and heavy contributor to, the whole human evolutionary model might have to be scrapped and redone. He said that the tests run on the bones of human ancestors and modern humans of the DNA does not fit. He said that our genes are similar buy VERY different from our closest DNA cousins, Chimps and Gorillas. They have 48 chromosomes, we have 46. Our second and third chromosomes are fused and several are oppositely arranged from those other primates. Not only that, modern humans are so unique, that we have as a species, over 4000 KNOWN genetic disorders yet we managed to survive and thrive. He said that no other known animal or plant species survives more than 1 to 2 generations with even 1/10 that number of disorders. Be also said that from testing the DNA, where it can be successfully extracted, from early human bones, it is ape DNA, not human. ONLY modern human DNA is SO radically different. He looked me in the eye and said that if he did not know any better, he would swear that modern human DNA has been genetically manipulated.

You kind of answered your own riddle there.  Animals with a fraction of those disorders don't survive more than a generation or two.  As a result they don't get passed down.  We survive and thrive through them because we have all but elliminated natural selection.  Take diabetes for example, if an animal in the wild developed that condition, it would die fairly quickly and those genes would come to an abrupt end.  Technology, medicine, trade and agriculture have allowed us to survive these disorders.  That's also why the disorders are so recent.  Another example, all mammals are capable of producing vitamin C themselves, they don't have to consume it; humans can't.  We've used technology, trade and agriculture to bring vitamin C with us.  The plentifulness of vitamin C in our diets has allowed the broken gene to spread unchecked, so we all have it now.  Indirectly, we've genetically manipulated ourselves in much the same way we manipulated animals genes by domesticating them.

 

 

 

Here is the problem...when they checked the ancient modern human skeletons, they still had the same genetic issues and not the technology to perpetuate it.  Tribes in remote places like the Amazon, or Borneo and in the recent past in other parts of the world would, if a child had a bad genetic disorder at some point, would put infants to death because they would not be healthy enough to survive.  Those genetic disorders would not have survived.  Also, that professor said that it is one thing to have a DNA with one or two variations in it...NOT the number we have and two chromosomes fused like that.  He said it is a real enigma and it ONLY shows up in modern humans.  He said even Neanderthal man has 48 chromosomes unlike our 46. 

 

Exactly, child death rates were very high before modern times.  The fatally flawed genes were killed off almost immediately.  If the person survived, then they clearly weren't an insurmountable burden.  There may be alot of remains with the faulty genes, many may have survived to be teenagers or young adults but they may have been far from healthy and not attracted mates to produce offspring.  It was the strong and health who made babies, with alot of causulties along the way.

 

And Neandertals and modern man interbred to a point.  If you are of European descent, about 10% of your DNA is Neandertal.

[skepticalme]

Humans live in groups.  Weak members are kept alive by the strong.  Less productive members are kept alive by the produces.  We are social.  A family or tribe has a lot more going on than any individual could do on their own.

Great point.  There may have been many individuals who weren't fit enough to hunt or fight or gather.  The weak were probably supported and left to make tools, weapons, cloths, cook, watch the children, lookouts, etc.  Just because someone wasn't in peak condition doesn't mean they were useless.  Though it was the heathiest who had mates and were making babies.

[mymistake]

 

 

And Neandertals and modern man interbred to a point. If you are of European descent, about 10% of your DNA is Neandertal.

That would be impossible. It would be like crossing a human with a Chimp. The DNA does not match. There would be no pregnancy from any such crossing.

 

 

 

I wouldn't be so quick if I were you.  The experts are still looking into this.  Neandertals might not have been a genetically separate species.  They certainly were not as far apart as humans vs. chimps.  Neandertals and moderns came from common stock.  And of course that is the competing theory - that the Neandertal DNA comes from that common stock.

[sdelsolray]

 

 

I had an interesting discussion with a fellow I do frequent business with, a Ph.D geneticist, who has been published many times. Over time, I have developed a friendship along with a business relationship. Back in February of this year, I was in his office doing business. We got to talking. He told me, that because of the Genome project, which he is a part of, and heavy contributor to, the whole human evolutionary model might have to be scrapped and redone. He said that the tests run on the bones of human ancestors and modern humans of the DNA does not fit. He said that our genes are similar buy VERY different from our closest DNA cousins, Chimps and Gorillas. They have 48 chromosomes, we have 46. Our second and third chromosomes are fused and several are oppositely arranged from those other primates. Not only that, modern humans are so unique, that we have as a species, over 4000 KNOWN genetic disorders yet we managed to survive and thrive. He said that no other known animal or plant species survives more than 1 to 2 generations with even 1/10 that number of disorders. Be also said that from testing the DNA, where it can be successfully extracted, from early human bones, it is ape DNA, not human. ONLY modern human DNA is SO radically different. He looked me in the eye and said that if he did not know any better, he would swear that modern human DNA has been genetically manipulated.

You kind of answered your own riddle there.  Animals with a fraction of those disorders don't survive more than a generation or two.  As a result they don't get passed down.  We survive and thrive through them because we have all but elliminated natural selection.  Take diabetes for example, if an animal in the wild developed that condition, it would die fairly quickly and those genes would come to an abrupt end.  Technology, medicine, trade and agriculture have allowed us to survive these disorders.  That's also why the disorders are so recent.  Another example, all mammals are capable of producing vitamin C themselves, they don't have to consume it; humans can't.  We've used technology, trade and agriculture to bring vitamin C with us.  The plentifulness of vitamin C in our diets has allowed the broken gene to spread unchecked, so we all have it now.  Indirectly, we've genetically manipulated ourselves in much the same way we manipulated animals genes by domesticating them.

 

 

 

Here is the problem...when they checked the ancient modern human skeletons, they still had the same genetic issues and not the technology to perpetuate it.  Tribes in remote places like the Amazon, or Borneo and in the recent past in other parts of the world would, if a child had a bad genetic disorder at some point, would put infants to death because they would not be healthy enough to survive.  Those genetic disorders would not have survived.  Also, that professor said that it is one thing to have a DNA with one or two variations in it...NOT the number we have and two chromosomes fused like that.  He said it is a real enigma and it ONLY shows up in modern humans.  He said even Neanderthal man has 48 chromosomes unlike our 46. 

 

Does your "professor" acquaintance have any peer reviewed publications?

 

Please provide evidence that Neanderthal had 48 chromosomes.  My limited research indicates 46.

[sdelsolray]

Double post.

[directionless]

I've been googling the topics in this discussion such as the number of chromosomes for Neanderthals and the evidence for interbreeding with humans. Some sources say 46, some say 48, some say it's impossible to know due to the degraded DNA. There also seems to be a variety of opinion on interbreeding.

 

Here is a link I was just reading that describes the difficulties of reconstructing Neanderthal DNA.

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/20/5/547.full

 

I don't understand these things, but it seems like nobody knows for sure yet.

[Denyoz]

I've been struggling whether demons actually exist or not ...

 

Yes, demons exist, and no, they don't, because:

 

Everything "is" and "isn't" at the same time.

All truths are but half truths and every truth is half false.

There are two sides to everything.

Opposites are identical in nature, yet different in degree.

Extremes meet, and all paradoxes may be reconciled.

 

That's how it is, according to Hermes Trismegistus' Principle of Polarity. 

[mymistake]

 

I've been struggling whether demons actually exist or not ...

 

Yes, demons exist, and no, they don't, because:

 

Everything "is" and "isn't" at the same time.

All truths are but half truths and every truth is half false.

There are two sides to everything.

Opposites are identical in nature, yet different in degree.

Extremes meet, and all paradoxes may be reconciled.

 

That's how it is, according to Hermes Trismegistus' Principle of Polarity. 

 

 

I wouldn't worry about polarity.

 

We have a great deal of evidence that demons are fiction.  People use to believe that demons caused disease.  It was the explanation for why bad things happen.  Well today science has explained they why of most bad things that happen.  No demons anywhere.

 

When I was a Christian I had a morbid fear of demons.  I thought they were always watching me.  I thought they could read my mind.  I thought they implanted thoughts into my mind to try and trick me.  I thought they would scratch my skin when I wasn't looking or asleep.  I thought in the middle of the night they wandered around my living room.  It was horrible and praying to Jesus didn't help much.  I didn't realize it at the time but the cure was to become an atheist.  Now I realize there is no such thing.  I sleep so much better.  There are no demons.

[Denyoz]

When I was a Christian I had a morbid fear of demons.  I thought they were always watching me.  I thought they could read my mind.  I thought they implanted thoughts into my mind to try and trick me.  I thought they would scratch my skin when I wasn't looking or asleep.  I thought in the middle of the night they wandered around my living room.  It was horrible and praying to Jesus didn't help much.  I didn't realize it at the time but the cure was to become an atheist.  Now I realize there is no such thing.  I sleep so much better.  There are no demons.

 

Thank you mymistake for sharing this personal experience with us.  I think it illustrates very well one of the points I was indirectly trying to make:  that our experience of reality is shaped by our own beliefs.  So what difference does it make whether or not demons exist objectively, a person who believes in them will still experience their presence subjectively.  Scientific evidence arguments will only work if the person believes in scientific evidence.

 

We could both agree on what a tree is, but our own personal beliefs about the tree will greatly influence how each of us experience the tree.  Thus the reason why some people hug trees and others don't.  The experience you get from the belief does exist.

 

I think what's important is to learn how to control our beliefs.  We do have that ability.  Once you realize how beliefs work in your psyche, you can learn to use your beliefs instead of being used by them.  This will give you great power over how you experience reality.

[miekko]

 

 

 

And Neandertals and modern man interbred to a point. If you are of European descent, about 10% of your DNA is Neandertal.

That would be impossible. It would be like crossing a human with a Chimp. The DNA does not match. There would be no pregnancy from any such crossing.

I wouldn't be so quick if I were you. The experts are still looking into this. Neandertals might not have been a genetically separate species. They certainly were not as far apart as humans vs. chimps. Neandertals and moderns came from common stock. And of course that is the competing theory - that the Neandertal DNA comes from that common stock.

Again, the fellow who explained this to me IS a geneticist. He said that he and a team who tested modern human DNA also tested a myriad of those pre-modern human bones, including Neanderthal and those other pre-modern bones clearly had 48 chromosomes. That was a shocker to him and the team he was working on the project with.

 

One thing worth pointing out here is that science is a difficult, painstaking process in which not just one team of researchers participate.

 

If one researcher or team of researchers makes a claim, this is scrutinized by other teams, who then test whether the claim adds up. When this claim is published, other teams will carefully check whether the methods that team used are sound and whether their analysis makes sense. Once that's done, they will try and redo the central parts of the research to see if they can obtain similar results. 

 

Teams have made mistakes before. Remember the OPERA neutrino lightspeed anomaly? That was an equipmental malfunction, yet the team did thousands of retakes of the experiment. They knew the result was strange - in fact, one of the most carefully verified ideas of general relativity would be wrong in the case they were right. Sure, that kind of thing might happen. Fairly unlikely, but unlikely things do happen at times. 

 

Now three options are open: 1) we go and accept their claim without investigating, and start working on whatever should replace GR then. 2) We go and investigate whether the claim bears out, and if we find it doesn't, we can be happy, and if it does, we start working on whatever should replace GR. 3) Give up on the idea that we can actually figure out what's going on by painstaking observation, experiment and analysis and accept both as correct.

 

I for one think 2) is the way to go unless we get a lot of experimental confirmation that 3) could be true - which has not been the case thus far.

 

Now, this is relevant for the geneticist example above: maybe they're using methods that have some kind of a flaw they haven't realized yet? Maybe some member in the team is fabricating some results? Without knowing how the team works together and so on, it's difficult to tell whether problems like that occur. Now, if their results are as surprising as has been claimed, others will check these things, and if there really is something to it, it will be widely accepted. Chances are great that there's a problem with their method, though.

[skepticalme]

I've been googling the topics in this discussion such as the number of chromosomes for Neanderthals and the evidence for interbreeding with humans. Some sources say 46, some say 48, some say it's impossible to know due to the degraded DNA. There also seems to be a variety of opinion on interbreeding.

 

Here is a link I was just reading that describes the difficulties of reconstructing Neanderthal DNA.

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/20/5/547.full

 

I don't understand these things, but it seems like nobody knows for sure yet.

To get a chromosome count you, more or less, have to have intact cells.  Sequencing the genome isn't enough.  If you looked at the human genome, not knowing the chromosome count of the sample, one might infere that it had 48 due to the presence of telemeres in the middle of #2.  You can change the chromosome count without changing the sequence, which is how we got 46 to begin with.

[Kris]

BO- I am extremely surprised that your Geneticist friend is amazed by the genetic differences in modern humans from other related species! Just a quick search on the Internet shows that the fusion of chromosome two and inversions of certain chromosomes are have been common knowledge for a while. In fact, there are very astute explanations for these things-- and they don't require scrapping everything learned thus far.

[mymistake]

 

BO- I am extremely surprised that your Geneticist friend is amazed by the genetic differences in modern humans from other related species! Just a quick search on the Internet shows that the fusion of chromosome two and inversions of certain chromosomes are have been common knowledge for a while. In fact, there are very astute explanations for these things-- and they don't require scrapping everything learned thus far.

There is FAR more than has been posted by me. The main point by my rabbit trail is that even the academics admit there are holes on the theories that are often glossed over to the public for PR purposes. Not everything can be reduced to a simple common denominator. Logic is only good with KNOWN facts, methods of measurements and material evidence. If you try to extrapolate beyond a certain point, it breaks down. Extrapolation is a fancy word for an educated guess. Be careful about what you place absolute faith in. Like Christians who place their faith in a faulty Bible, all too often people place their faith in an extrapolation of academia the same way.

 

 

Science isn't like that.

[mwc]

     Darwin knew this day would come:

 

     So some day they'll totally realize I am a fraud but hopefully, by then, they'll all be so invested my so-called theory they'll just keep on lying about it then make something else up like I did to fool people with since that's mostly what science is about.  Or maybe they'll figure out the real answer.  Whatever.  I'll be dead.

 

          Charles Darwin - Memoirs.

 

          mwc

[Kris]

Please tell me this is a joke-quote MWC!!! Darwin is one of my heroes and I would hate to think of himself as a perpetrator of a fraud!!!

[mwc]

Please tell me this is a joke-quote MWC!!! Darwin is one of my heroes and I would hate to think of himself as a perpetrator of a fraud!!!

     Yes, it's a joke.  Darwin also didn't simply invent his theory out of thin air and he didn't gloss over "problems" for PR reasons.  His theory isn't in any trouble and won't be replaced by something totally new.  There are no serious challengers to the theory of evolution.  There will be continued refinements and deeper understanding of processes. 

 

     If a serious challenger does arise it will, among other things, be because it has a better ability to explain what has happened, is happening and will happen than the current theory.  Just being surprised at some sample data doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

 

          mwc

[Kris]

Whew!!! I thought it was a joke-- I had never heard that, but you made such a convincing "fake-quote", it tripped me out a little!! I love the elegant theory of evolution and it makes so much sense to me!!