Explain Your Religious Views or Lack Thereof

[Mavorpen]

Who needs DNA when you have YAWEH, amirite?

Can you measure your thoughts, your emotions, your feelings?

Yes.

[The Silence of Night]

Who needs DNA when you have YAWEH, amirite?

Can you measure your thoughts, your emotions, your feelings?

Abso-frikin-lutely.

[O5vx]

DNA do not change over time.

So, DNA=Your soul?

No, DNA does not change over time but our bodies does, hence we can rule out DNA as being responsible for those changes.

[Blasveck]

Who needs DNA when you have YAWEH, amirite?

Can you measure your thoughts, your emotions, your feelings?

If, by measure, you mean that we can see which areas of the brain "flares up" per-se, when specific emotions and feeling arise, then yes.

[Grave_n_idle]

So, DNA=Your soul?

No, DNA does not change over time but our bodies does, hence we can rule out DNA as being responsible for those changes.

Psst. Did you lose track of your argument?

You were arguing that the 'soul' was what kept the consistent bits consistent. Like DNA.

I don't think the others have noticed yet, quick - go change it.

[The Silence of Night]

So, DNA=Your soul?

No, DNA does not change over time but our bodies does, hence we can rule out DNA as being responsible for those changes.

No one was saying that DNA was responsible for the changes, they were saying it's responsible for us staying the same (If I understood the argument correctly).

[O5vx]

Can you measure your thoughts, your emotions, your feelings?

Abso-frikin-lutely.

Can you? Show me any thing that proves that it is possible.

[Blasveck]

Abso-frikin-lutely.

Can you? Show me any thing that proves that it is possible.

Brain scans?

[Mavorpen]

So, DNA=Your soul?

No, DNA does not change over time but our bodies does, hence we can rule out DNA as being responsible for those changes.

Actually yes we can. Your hormones influence gene expression which can be influenced by DNA as well as the environment.

Regardless you missed the point. If DNA doesn't change, then you admit your brain cells have something in common with the brain cells you were born with.

[Mavorpen]

Abso-frikin-lutely.

Can you? Show me any thing that proves that it is possible.

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/10 ... s-measured

[O5vx]

No, DNA does not change over time but our bodies does, hence we can rule out DNA as being responsible for those changes.

No one was saying that DNA was responsible for the changes, they were saying it's responsible for us staying the same (If I understood the argument correctly).

How do you then explain the physical change that our body undergoes? If a physical object does not changes.

[Blasveck]

No one was saying that DNA was responsible for the changes, they were saying it's responsible for us staying the same (If I understood the argument correctly).

How do you then explain the physical change that our body undergoes? If a physical object does not changes.

Because of growth?
Because our bodies mature as we grow older?

What makes that happen? DNA.
It's seriously basic biology.

[Mavorpen]

No one was saying that DNA was responsible for the changes, they were saying it's responsible for us staying the same (If I understood the argument correctly).

How do you then explain the physical change that our body undergoes? If a physical object does not changes.

Can you? Show me any thing that proves that it is possible.

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/10 ... s-measured

[The Silence of Night]

No one was saying that DNA was responsible for the changes, they were saying it's responsible for us staying the same (If I understood the argument correctly).

How do you then explain the physical change that our body undergoes? If a physical object does not changes.

I'm sorry, you're just sprouting nonsense now.

[Grave_n_idle]

No one was saying that DNA was responsible for the changes, they were saying it's responsible for us staying the same (If I understood the argument correctly).

How do you then explain the physical change that our body undergoes? If a physical object does not changes.

Anyone with even the basest knowledge of physics would laugh at the claim that physical objects do not change.

Where did you even get that from?

[O5vx]

Can you? Show me any thing that proves that it is possible.

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/10 ... s-measured

This is another one of those skewed research.

[Mavorpen]

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/10 ... s-measured

This is another one of those skewed research.

That's as close as a concession I'll get, so I'll take it.

[Grave_n_idle]

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/10 ... s-measured

This is another one of those skewed research.

Explain how it's skewed?

More to the point - you asked for any proof (I think you mean 'evidence') - and it was provided.

Your claim was debunked.

[The Silence of Night]

How do you then explain the physical change that our body undergoes? If a physical object does not changes.

Anyone with even the basest knowledge of physics would laugh at the claim that physical objects do not change.

Where did you even get that from?

Perhaps he misunderstands The Law of the Conservation of Energy?

[Seperates]

My last and final argument. And there is actually more than one reason that we have this intuitive sense of the transcendent nature of our identity as humans. We also understand this based on the fact that we do NOT lose our identity over time. Let’s do another exercise together. Imagine that you own a beautiful 1972 Volkswagen Bug (just like mine). It is in mint condition and perfect in every way. No dings, no damage; a true collector’s item. Now imagine that your next door neighbor also owns a 1972 VW Bug. What a coincidence. The only difference between the two is that his Bug is a mess. Old and damaged, it doesn’t run and looks like a complete piece of junk. One day as you look out your window, you notice that the front quarter panel on YOUR Bug looks just like the old front quarter panel that used to be on your neighbors Bug! And sure enough, his Bug now has a quarter panel that looks just like yours! It appears as though the panels have been exchanged, one for the other! Now suspend logic a little bit here and imagine that over the next years, each and every day, more and more of your Bug was seen on your neighbor’s Bug, cleanly exchanged for parts from YOUR vehicle! In fact, at the end of the year, the Bug sitting on YOUR driveway looks suspiciously like your NEIGHBOR’S Bug. All the parts have been exchanged.

OK, now let me ask you a question: that Bug that is now sitting in your driveway. Whose Bug is it? Is it yours? Or is it your neighbor’s? I think we would agree that the Bug sitting in your driveway, even though it is on your property, is actually the Bug that used to belong to your neighbor! So, what’s the point of all this? Simply this: physical things are dependent on their parts for their identity. When the parts get exchanged, their identity changes as well. At some point, that Bug was no longer your Bug. Even when only ONE part had been replaced, you would not have been happy about it. You would have to admit that a pristine 1974 Bug with one crummy quarter panel was NOT your Bug!

But while physical things are dependent on their parts for their identity, Souls are NOT. Look at yourself in the mirror. Do you have the same body today that you had ten years ago? No. Each and every cell in your body has been renewed and replaced. Some would argue that brain cells are NOT renewed, but that ignores what is happening at the cellular level WITHIN each cell. The replacement process is taking place at that level, until whatever brain cells you were born with have nothing in common with what you now have. So let’s be very strict about this. While you have a very different body than you had years ago, YOU are still YOU! So clearly YOU cannot be described as something that is purely physical, because physical things that have different PARTS have a different identity.

I'm done coddling you. Full fucking Neo Art mode.

You are ignorant of everything that we do know about how the brain, DNA, and neurology works. You would use an analogy that would have even a philosopher shaking his head in utter contempt. Brain cells (also called neurons to those of us who actually bother with learning the science behind such things) are not replaced in the same fashion than other cells in the body are. Technically speaking the only cells that even have true regenerative properties for even motor nerve tissue are stem cells, which is why such research is extremely important to victims of neurological damage. While the brain continues making small amounts of cranial tissue throughout your life, neurons do not regenerate, once they are dead they stay dead. Fortunately though, your brain doesn't actually need all of it's neurons in functioning state to work, because the thought process is driven by patterns formed by the action potential of those synapses (gaps) between the neurons through with these neurons 'communicate' electro-chemical signals. And if an action potential area is destroyed, it will eventually re-route the signal somewhere else. The brain itself literally physically changes in an attempt to compensate for the damage. You change. You are not 'yourself' any longer, but someone else who is exactly the same barring that small difference. It is exactly like the hardware on a computer, except in this case the hardware is alive. You destroy the computer, you destroy the software process... you destroy the brain, you destroy the process.

So, you claim that the reason that our cells retain their form is because there is a soul concept that keeps it together. Tell me, why can we grow a human ear on a mouse then? Is there a human soul in that mouse too? Or is it because DNA, which is mindless chemicals, are the blueprint and 'remember' what our form is supposed to be? Can you answer me that, oh great and mighty philosopher?

[Blasveck]

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/10 ... s-measured

This is another one of those skewed research.

How is it skewed?

What wouldn't be skewed, in your opinion?

[Grave_n_idle]

Anyone with even the basest knowledge of physics would laugh at the claim that physical objects do not change.

Where did you even get that from?

Perhaps he misunderstands The Law of the Conservation of Energy?

Based on the rest of the thread, I assume he just ignores it, because it's biased.

[Seperates]

http://engineering.mit.edu/live/news/10 ... s-measured

This is another one of those skewed research.

Explain how it is skewed and why.

[Seperates]

No one was saying that DNA was responsible for the changes, they were saying it's responsible for us staying the same (If I understood the argument correctly).

How do you then explain the physical change that our body undergoes? If a physical object does not changes.

Physical objects change all the fucking time, who claimed they didn't? We grow and die, trees wither and wilt, mountains rise and erode to dust. Literally everything is in the process of change.

[Seperates]

The very fact that he makes the claim that your brain cells aren't in any shape or form similar to what they were years ago is enough to call bullshit on his post. Seriously, he's evidently never heard of DNA.

DNA do not change over time.

Actually, yes it does. Radiation and other chemicals changes DNA, along with coding, transcribing and translating errors. Most of the time, these are caught by some of the 'editing' processes in the cell. However, some of these cells normally either self destruct, or the process is irrelevant because 90% of our DNA doesn't actually code for anything important. But you know cancer? That is when DNA has changed so much within a cell that it grows rapidly without stopping, which is why it is nearly impossible to stop.