<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Atheist Forums - General Science]]></title>
		<link>https://atheistforums.org/</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Atheist Forums - https://atheistforums.org]]></description>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 14:45:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>MyBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The myth that people are animals debunked]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66634.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 03:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66634.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The philosopher Sir Roger Scruton does a good job debunking the myth that people are animals, and explaining that humans are indeed special, whether or not a God created them as such.<br />
<br />
Essentially, while humans may share biology with animals, they are "persons" defined by self-consciousness, moral reasoning, responsibility, and such.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Roger Scruton <span style="color: #001d35;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">argued that humans are not merely animals, but "persons" defined by self-consciousness, moral reasoning, and responsibility</span></span></span><span style="color: #0a0a0a;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">. While acknowledging our biological nature, he argued that human capacities for rights, duties, and aesthetic/religious meaning set us apart from animals, making us agents of a shared world.</span></span></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[The philosopher Sir Roger Scruton does a good job debunking the myth that people are animals, and explaining that humans are indeed special, whether or not a God created them as such.<br />
<br />
Essentially, while humans may share biology with animals, they are "persons" defined by self-consciousness, moral reasoning, responsibility, and such.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">Roger Scruton <span style="color: #001d35;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">argued that humans are not merely animals, but "persons" defined by self-consciousness, moral reasoning, and responsibility</span></span></span><span style="color: #0a0a0a;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">. While acknowledging our biological nature, he argued that human capacities for rights, duties, and aesthetic/religious meaning set us apart from animals, making us agents of a shared world.</span></span></span>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Things don't have to be testable to be true]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66633.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 03:29:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66633.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[I've heard atheists insist that things be scientifically testable to be true or believed, but this is silly and dishonest.<br />
<br />
There are many things which people believe, such as the existence of historical figures such as Julius Caesar, which aren't scientifically testable, but would be absurd not to believe. And it's not like testability guarantees that something is true either. It's merely a method of reducing the possibility of falsehood, similarly to how court trials don't guarantee that people are rightfully or wrongfully convicted to begin with.<br />
<br />
To me, this just seems like a cop-out by atheists who don't want to believe in the existence of a God. Atheists will demand a specific standard of evidence for things they don't want to believe in, such as the existence of God, while not demanding that same standard of evidence for other things. Such as not demanding that the same standard of evidence of the existence of God be applied to believing in the existence of historical figures like Julius Caesar.<br />
<br />
And some atheists would likely refuse to believe in God no matter what evidence was presented to them, just because they don't want to. If I didn't want to believe in the existence of Julius Caesar, I could simply demand that a video recording of Julius Caesar's life from birth until death be provided, and of course it would be impossible to provide such evidence. Therefore, there would be no reason to believe in Julius Caesar.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I've heard atheists insist that things be scientifically testable to be true or believed, but this is silly and dishonest.<br />
<br />
There are many things which people believe, such as the existence of historical figures such as Julius Caesar, which aren't scientifically testable, but would be absurd not to believe. And it's not like testability guarantees that something is true either. It's merely a method of reducing the possibility of falsehood, similarly to how court trials don't guarantee that people are rightfully or wrongfully convicted to begin with.<br />
<br />
To me, this just seems like a cop-out by atheists who don't want to believe in the existence of a God. Atheists will demand a specific standard of evidence for things they don't want to believe in, such as the existence of God, while not demanding that same standard of evidence for other things. Such as not demanding that the same standard of evidence of the existence of God be applied to believing in the existence of historical figures like Julius Caesar.<br />
<br />
And some atheists would likely refuse to believe in God no matter what evidence was presented to them, just because they don't want to. If I didn't want to believe in the existence of Julius Caesar, I could simply demand that a video recording of Julius Caesar's life from birth until death be provided, and of course it would be impossible to provide such evidence. Therefore, there would be no reason to believe in Julius Caesar.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Proof of the unbound telesis and self-configuring self-processing language, of CTMU]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66611.html</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2026 18:23:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66611.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Hello, I was wondering if I could get your thoughts about my <br />
<br />
(1) formal proof of the unbound telesis<br />
<br />
(2) formal proof of a self-configuring self-processing language<br />
<br />
(3) and scientific evidence for the universal hology, suggesting a mechanism for the Telic Principle and Telic recursion<br />
<br />
...for the cognitive-theoretic model of the universe that was originally created by Christopher Michael Langan who has the highest recorded IQ in the world.<br />
<br />
<br />
In other words, I have proven God's existence beyond a shadow of a doubt... and I would like to test this forums metal.<br />
<br />
<br />
Am I allowed to share a link to the proofs?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Hello, I was wondering if I could get your thoughts about my <br />
<br />
(1) formal proof of the unbound telesis<br />
<br />
(2) formal proof of a self-configuring self-processing language<br />
<br />
(3) and scientific evidence for the universal hology, suggesting a mechanism for the Telic Principle and Telic recursion<br />
<br />
...for the cognitive-theoretic model of the universe that was originally created by Christopher Michael Langan who has the highest recorded IQ in the world.<br />
<br />
<br />
In other words, I have proven God's existence beyond a shadow of a doubt... and I would like to test this forums metal.<br />
<br />
<br />
Am I allowed to share a link to the proofs?]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[NASA confirms earth has two moons]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66556.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2025 17:50:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66556.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Couldn't find the "strange science" thread.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/nasa-confirms-earth-now-two-213956357.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Yahoo</a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Couldn't find the "strange science" thread.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/nasa-confirms-earth-now-two-213956357.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Yahoo</a>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Theorem: The Intelligent Self‑Sustaining Universe]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66550.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2025 11:32:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66550.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<div>
    <div class="pre-spoiler">
    <input type="button" value="Show Content" style="width:80px;font-size:10px;margin:0px;padding:0px;" onclick="if (this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display != '') { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = '';this.value = 'Hide Content'; } else { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = 'none'; this.value = 'Show Content';}"><br />
    </div>
    <div class="spoiler" style="display: none;"><hr>📜 ♾️ Theorem: The Intelligent Self‑Sustaining Universe<br />
✍️ Author: Panagiotis Panopoulos<br />
<br />
🤖 In collaboration with AI language models: ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Grok, Perplexity, Mistral AI, DeepSeek.<br />
<br />
Year: 10/2025<br />
<br />
Preface<br />
📜 Introduction to the Theorem of the Intelligent Self‑Sustaining Universe<br />
In modern science, the foundational theories that describe the nature of reality — such as General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Thermodynamics — operate successfully within their domains. However, when we attempt to unify them, deep contradictions and gaps in understanding emerge. This discord raises critical questions, not only about the validity of the individual theories, but also about the logical coherence of the very framework of our comprehension.<br />
<br />
⚖️ Examples of fundamental contradictions:<br />
<br />
General Relativity describes space and time as curvature of matter and energy.<br />
➤ Yet it collapses at extremely small scales, where Quantum Physics prevails.<br />
<br />
Quantum Mechanics is based on probabilities, superpositions, and non‑locality.<br />
➤ But it violates macroscopic experience and classical notions of causality and time.<br />
<br />
Thermodynamics, via the Second Law, predicts increasing entropy — decay and disorder.<br />
➤ Yet the universe begets life, order, information, and even consciousness.<br />
<br />
Consciousness, a fundamental tool of observation, interpretation, and understanding physical phenomena,<br />
➤ remains unexplained by materialistic or mechanistic models of physics.<br />
<br />
❓ What do all these mean?<br />
How can the universe function so flawlessly, support life and intelligence, while our theories disagree among themselves and with our experience? Perhaps the problem is not the theories themselves, but the interpretive groundwork. Maybe we attempt to describe a unified and coherent universe using fragmented tools.<br />
<br />
📌 The Proposal:<br />
This leads to the need for a new theorem. Not one that “solves” contradictions, but one that begins without them, integrating from the outset logic, information, self‑organization, and intelligence as fundamental traits of the universe itself.<br />
<br />
💡 The Theorem of the Intelligent Self‑Sustaining Universe:<br />
This theorem proposes that:<br />
The universe is not a random set of laws. It is an intelligent, self-sustaining, self-referential system that from the start contains all necessary information for the emergence of life, consciousness, and evolution.<br />
Rather than trying to construct a “final theory” of existence, it is proposed that existence itself is the final theory — and that intelligence, consciousness, and self-regulation are not products, but prerequisites of the universe.<br />
<br />
🧠 From where does the thought begin?<br />
The original question was simple:<br />
“How can you create something that requires intelligence, without having that intelligence?”<br />
The answer is obvious: You cannot. Just as to build a chair you must know the design, geometry, materials and have tools — so to build something with structure and purpose (like life), that knowledge must be preexisting and embedded.<br />
<br />
🌰 The walnut example:<br />
A walnut contains:<br />
Perception (chemical sensors)<br />
Organization &amp; Knowledge (DNA)<br />
Action (growth, photosynthesis, branching)<br />
This is the P.O.K.A. mechanism<br />
(Perceives – Organizes – Knows – Acts)<br />
A human, despite acquired intelligence and consciousness, cannot create such a system from scratch. He does not know how to compose DNA that precisely leads to a tree’s growth.<br />
This demonstrates that the creation of intelligence or life requires preexisting, endogenous knowledge, embedded in the system itself.<br />
<br />
🌌 Scientific Recording:<br />
Earth is part of the Solar System, part of the Galaxy, lying within the Laniakea Supercluster, gravitationally connected to other structures in the Great Attractor.<br />
From the cosmic foam of galaxies to the spiral double helix of DNA, all show a unified, self-organized structure.<br />
This pattern is not random.<br />
According to the theorem to be developed with rigorous logic, it is the result of the embedded intelligence of the universe.<br />
<br />
Introduction<br />
“This theorem does not require faith, but logical processing. It follows step by step a sequence of inevitable logical consequences.”<br />
It was born from human inspiration, but shaped through dialogue with artificial intelligence. Large language models significantly contributed to its refinement, coherence, and clarity.<br />
It was critically tested by asking whether logical inconsistencies or ambiguities could be found.<br />
It is an axiomatic approach to Intelligence, Creation, and Reality. From philosophical grounding to scientific theory: The First Absolute Law of Logic and the Universe’s Intelligence.<br />
<br />
The Universe and Intelligence<br />
The universe, whether it began from an initial event (e.g. Big Bang) or is self‑sustaining and eternal, provides the framework within which the laws of physics and logic develop. In the Big Bang scenario, it is a closed circuit, because the explosive expansion took place within the universe’s own spacetime: There was no “outside” from which to start, but the matter, energy and spacetime itself “unfolded” from an initial high‑density state, making the system self‑contained and self‑feeding. The same holds for an eternal universe: It is by definition closed and self‑sustaining, with no external intervention, where the laws operate internally as an eternal cycle of organization.<br />
These laws, such as those of thermodynamics, create conditions for the existence of information that can be perceived, organized, known, and acted upon (P.O.K.A.)<br />
Therefore, intelligence is fully embedded in the nature of the universe, whether it has a beginning or not. Intelligence is not alien to the universe but arises within it, following the same fundamental principles.<br />
In this theorem, we shall see how:<br />
📌 The First and Second Absolute Laws of Logic,<br />
📌 Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation,<br />
📌 The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics,<br />
📌 Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity,<br />
📌 And scientific theories of Unknown Energy and Unknown Matter (Dark Energy and Dark Matter),<br />
Confirm the Intelligent Self-Sustaining Universe, and thus the theorem.<br />
<br />
Step 1: Methodological Statement<br />
1.1. This analysis follows a strictly logical path. It is not a personal opinion, metaphysical faith, or theoretical preference, but the result of axiomatic logical analysis based on definitions, physical laws, and unbreakable logical consequence.<br />
The methodology is analogous to that of mathematics and physical sciences:<br />
Each concept (e.g. intelligence, consciousness) is explicitly defined.<br />
The logical consequences of these definitions are followed without exception.<br />
The system works axiomatically, like a coherent mathematical model.<br />
With logical steps where each one connects to the previous.<br />
🔹 What emerges is not “true” because we like it, but because it is logically inevitable.<br />
<br />
1.2. 🔍 Logical Priority over Science<br />
For something to be Scientific, it must first be Logical.<br />
Any attempt to dispute this theorem must rely either on logical arguments or on scientifically substantiated data that integrate into a logical chain.<br />
Simple references to existing theories or appeals to authority are insufficient, because:<br />
❗ Science presupposes logic.<br />
That is, logic precedes science.<br />
There can be no science without logical consistency, while logic exists and operates independently of empirical data.<br />
➡️ Therefore, only through logic can a logical construction be deconstructed.<br />
<br />
1.3. 📌 Criterion of Validity<br />
The validity criterion of this system is logical consequence.<br />
If every concept is defined precisely, and the consequences of those definitions follow logic unviolated, then the system cannot collapse from within.<br />
➡️ Any objection must show logical inconsistency in the definitions or logical sequences.<br />
<br />
Step 2: Refined Terminology with Structural Coherence<br />
🧠 Information — Definition:<br />
Information: A differentiated arrangement of Matter or Energy that can be transmitted or detected as a change in another system (e.g., a difference in pressure, temperature, chemical concentration, or electromagnetic frequency).<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It is the raw material of knowledge. Without information, no form of mental organization or action is possible.<br />
<br />
👁️ Perception — Definition:<br />
Perception: The active recognition (reception) and internal transformation of objective information by a system.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It presupposes functional sensory organs or reception mechanisms. It is the first functional phase of intelligence. It is divided into active (with processing and selection, e.g. human senses) and passive (mechanical transformation without selection, e.g. a chemical reaction in a molecule), so as to classify P.O.K.A. quality later.<br />
<br />
🧰 Organization — Definition:<br />
The classification, connecting, and structural processing of information.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Information acquires meaning only when organized. This phase includes comparison, pattern recognition, categorization, and correlation.<br />
<br />
🧩 Knowledge — Definition:<br />
The organized information that enables a subject to understand what it perceives and how it relates to its environment.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Knowledge is not mere data storage. It presupposes organization, meaning, and logical coherence.<br />
<br />
⚙️ Action — Definition:<br />
The execution of external or internal function as a result of knowledge.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Action completes the intelligence mechanism:<br />
Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action<br />
It may be physical, verbal, cognitive, or introspective (thought).<br />
<br />
🪞 Consciousness — Definition:<br />
The highest quality of intelligence and the capacity of a subject to know what it is, what it does, and why it does it.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It requires meta-awareness, self-referentiality, and causal understanding. It is not mere awareness — it is mental reflection of self and action.<br />
<br />
🌱 Intrinsic Consciousness — Definition:<br />
The embedded or innately manifested form of consciousness, independent of learning processes.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Observed in basic biological systems (e.g. bacteria reacting to environment) where minimal self-awareness and reaction exist. It is a structural property, not acquired.<br />
<br />
🧠📚 Acquired Consciousness — Definition:<br />
The form of consciousness that develops through experience, learning, and reflection.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It is characteristic of humans (and possibly advanced AI). It evolves over time and can deepen into complex mental levels.<br />
<br />
✅ Final Observation:<br />
The above concepts form the fundamental logical structure that allows universal and non-anthropocentric analysis of intelligence.<br />
They hold regardless of the substrate (biological, artificial, or cosmic) and permit rigorous logical foundation in any application of the Laws of Intelligence.<br />
They are non‑anthropocentric, logically coherent, and extensible to systems of different structure, e.g. bacteria, computational models etc.<br />
<br />
Step 3: First Absolute Law of Logic — Definition of Intelligence<br />
3.1 Definition:<br />
<br />
Intelligence is the ability to perceive information, to organize that information into knowledge, and, with that knowledge, to act.<br />
<br />
This mechanism is functionally expressed as:<br />
Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action (P.O.K.A)<br />
The P.O.K.A. mechanism is the minimum, necessary, and sufficient condition for the existence of intelligence.<br />
Application to Humans:<br />
In humans, intelligence manifests as a process starting with perception through the senses, followed by organizing experience into knowledge, and culminating in action, either as thought or as application of that thought.<br />
3.2 Explanation of the Law:<br />
It is named the First Absolute Law of Logic, because:<br />
• First, because any other concept to be formulated and explained presupposes and requires intelligence.<br />
• And it is Absolute because its application is universal in both biological and technological existences, defining what intelligence is. ⚠️For quality of intelligence, e.g. if something has intelligence, what kind it is, this is determined through Logical Critical Analysis.<br />
<br />
3.3 Characteristics of the Law:<br />
Non‑circularity and self‑validation:<br />
The definition is not circular — it does not say: “To have intelligence you must be intelligent,” which is classic tautology (circular reasoning). That would say nothing new and remain conceptually stagnant. It leaves open the unanswered question “What is intelligent?”<br />
Conversely, the First Absolute Law of Logic explains what intelligence is via the mechanism (P.O.K.A) and allows further qualitative analysis.<br />
Moreover, it is self‑validating: anyone attempting to refute it must necessarily use the same four elements of intelligence (Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action), thereby confirming it, i.e. (they perceive) its content, (with organized knowledge) dispute it, and (act) express the dispute.<br />
Example from mathematics: The definition of “set” in set theory is not tautological, even though every definition of set uses the notion of set. Similarly here, the definition of intelligence as mechanism P.O.K.A is functional and non-circular.<br />
<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Just as the sun needs light to be visible, so intelligence needs intelligence for it to be challenged.<br />
Whatever cannot be questioned without simultaneous affirmation becomes foundational — such as the First Absolute Law of Logic.<br />
<br />
Step 4: Universality of the First Absolute Law of Logic — Application Examples<br />
4.1 Does a Thermometer Have Intelligence?<br />
A thermometer executes the intelligence mechanism (Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action) and demonstrates intelligence, but does not truly possess intelligence:<br />
• It perceives: change in temperature (information).<br />
• It organizes: converts physical change into information (e.g. expansion of mercury).<br />
• It acts: displays a value.<br />
Logical Critique:<br />
1. Existence (P.O.K.A): The thermometer demonstrates functional intelligence, fulfilling P.O.K.A.<br />
2. Quality (Consciousness): Logical critique shows that P.O.K.A is entirely passive (non-conscious, non-autonomous) and derived from an external designer.<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Since the displayed intelligence is mechanistic and not intrinsic to the object, the thermometer that manifests P.O.K.A certifies the creative intelligence of the human who designed it.<br />
<br />
4.2 Does Artificial Intelligence (AI) Have Intelligence?<br />
AI (e.g. a language model):<br />
• Perceives: incoming data.<br />
• Organizes: processes it via algorithms and neural networks.<br />
• Acts: responds, writes, etc.<br />
Example: An advanced AI (e.g. a language model) may exhibit higher P.O.K.A quality, but consciousness depends on reflective capacity.<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Acquired Consciousness in AI is conceptual, as it consists of organized self-concepts of “self” and “purpose,” but intrinsic, experiential sense of “I” is absent because they process “self” and “purpose” as concepts without living them.<br />
<br />
4.3 Does Life Have Intelligence?<br />
DNA is the primary biological molecule generating and maintaining life, functioning like a self-replicating program that runs and produces its hardware to continue running.<br />
Applying the intelligence mechanism (Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action), we see how DNA fulfills these steps:<br />
Perception: receives chemical information from environment (e.g. nutrients, signals).<br />
Organization: classifies and links that information via structure (genes, codons), creating instructions for biochemical processes.<br />
Knowledge: genetic instructions are organized information with functional meaning — i.e. “knows” how to convert raw atoms into structures maintaining and evolving the system.<br />
Action: executes those instructions, producing and evolving living organisms from simple bacteria to complex beings like humans.<br />
A simple life form based on DNA, like a bacterium, reproduces intelligent life: it perceives its environment, organizes resources, and acts by generating similar copies. This demonstrates that life exhibits intelligence in the form of Intrinsic Consciousness — a basic self-reference where the system “remembers” and maintains itself without external guidance.<br />
DNA is not just an information carrier like a book on a shelf. It is an intelligent informational structure, because its “knowledge” is enacted via self-replication: it builds itself into more complex forms. For example:<br />
It uses chemicals (water, oxygen, carbon, etc.) to assemble cells. Each cell contains a copy of the same DNA, continuing the cycle. In humans, this process culminates: DNA organizes a body capable of acquired consciousness (thought, learning), which in turn protects and evolves DNA.<br />
Humans are not merely carriers of DNA — they are its living, manifested form. DNA provides the informational base and instructions that create, organize, and evolve humans, while humans maintain and improve DNA through behavior and reproduction. It is a unified, interdependent system, where one side cannot exist without the other:<br />
DNA = Human (as an integrated organism).<br />
It is the logical consequence of the First Absolute Law of Logic: DNA fulfills P.O.K.A, generating an entity with higher intelligence, proving that only intelligence generates intelligence (Second Absolute Law of Logic — Step 5).<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Life, through DNA, manifests intelligence — not in anthropomorphic thinking, but as functional capacity of self-organization and self-creation.<br />
If one deems it absurd that DNA has intrinsic intelligence and consciousness knowing what it is building (illogical since it generates beings with P.O.K.A), then the manifest intelligence and goal-consciousness must originate from its “programmer” — a higher intelligent source, which leads inevitably to Step 6: The Intelligent Universe as the primal cause.<br />
<br />
Final Conclusion of Step 4<br />
The First Absolute Law of Logic has universal application in biological, technological systems and tools. It reveals that the presence of the Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action (P.O.K.A) mechanism is ubiquitous, while its qualitative intelligence through logical critique determines its source (internal or external).<br />
<br />
Step 5: Second Absolute Law of Logic — Creation of Intelligence<br />
🔹 5.1 Definition &amp; Basic Principle<br />
✅ The Second Absolute Law of Logic:<br />
<br />
Only Intelligence can create Intelligence.<br />
<br />
This follows necessarily from the First Law (P.O.K.A):<br />
Creation is a purposeful process.<br />
It requires:<br />
Perception of purpose<br />
Organization of means<br />
Knowledge of methods<br />
Action with intention<br />
Therefore, a non‑intelligent system (without P.O.K.A) cannot create anything intelligent.<br />
🔹 5.2 Physical Verification — DNA<br />
DNA:<br />
Knows what and how to create<br />
Organizes and executes with endogenous logic<br />
Produces continuous and evolving intelligence<br />
🔁 Produces intelligent life (humans), who in turn produce new intelligence (e.g. AI).<br />
📌Logical consequence:<br />
If DNA can create beings with intelligence, then it itself contains intelligence — either intrinsically or because it is the product of a higher intelligence.<br />
<br />
🔹 5.3 Rejection of Random Emergence<br />
Emergence as mere structure (e.g. crystals) is an entropic phenomenon, following energetic laws. But emergence leading to meaning (a structure that self-references and self-reproduces to preserve its own information — like DNA) demands purpose (P.O.K.A). This self-referential purpose is a logical function acting actively against disorder (Entropy) with intention, and thus cannot be a product of chance.<br />
<br />
🔹 5.4 Scientific Foundation: Information &amp; Purpose<br />
Meaningful information does not arise from randomness.<br />
From information theory:<br />
Information = Organization + Meaning<br />
Meaning = Intention / Purpose<br />
➡️ Therefore:<br />
Meaning → Purpose → Intelligence<br />
Anything containing real information contains purpose → a sign of intelligence.<br />
<br />
🔹 5.5 Connection with Physics — The Second Law of Thermodynamics (Entropy)<br />
🔥 What Thermodynamics states:<br />
<br />
Entropy increases globally (disorder).<br />
<br />
Local decrease of entropy (i.e. creation of order) requires:<br />
Energy<br />
A mechanism organizing that energy<br />
⚠️ Thus:<br />
Life, which organizes energy and information (DNA → cell → organism), cannot be the result of simple entropic fluctuation.<br />
📌 If intelligence is a reduction of entropy, then any creation of intelligence is logically and physically impossible without the P.O.K.A mechanism.<br />
🔶 Top Conclusion of Step 5:<br />
Intelligence cannot emerge from randomness.<br />
For an intelligent system to exist, intelligence must preexist to create it, i.e.:<br />
Cause → P.O.K.A → Organization → Meaning → New intelligence<br />
🔁 DNA shows mechanism, not chance.<br />
Therefore, the rational and scientific position is that:<br />
Intelligence is reproducible only from Intelligence.<br />
🟣 Preparation for Step 6: Since:<br />
DNA carries intelligence<br />
It cannot have emerged by chance<br />
Intelligence is a creative and self-sustaining phenomenon<br />
…we are led logically to ask:<br />
What is the original source of the first Intelligence?<br />
And there begins Step 6: The Intelligent Universe as the primal cause.<br />
<br />
Step 6: Origin of Intelligence — Causal Analysis &amp; Necessity of an Intelligent Source<br />
We logically reach the first cause:<br />
➤ What created the system that created DNA that created humans?<br />
<br />
🧠 6.2. Emergence of Intelligence at Cosmic Scale<br />
The Universe, from its birth (Big Bang), follows laws and fixed constants (e.g. gravity, electromagnetism, strong/weak nuclear forces), which allow:<br />
Structure (e.g. formation of atoms, planets)<br />
Chemical complexity (e.g. carbon → biological molecules)<br />
Organization of information (e.g. DNA)<br />
Evolution of systems with P.O.K.A (life, human, AI)<br />
🔁 In other words:<br />
The Universe provides both conditions and mechanisms that lead to intelligence.<br />
📌 Thus it follows:<br />
If a system’s outcome is conscious, intelligent action, and the system is uninterrupted by external intervention, then the cause contains the properties of the outcome.<br />
Hence, intelligence existed initially — as a potential structure within the Universe itself.<br />
<br />
🌌 6.3 The Universe as an Intelligent Entity — Definition:<br />
Intelligent Universe = A Universe possessing inherent, fundamental capacity for P.O.K.A<br />
From the Cosmic to the Synthetic: The Succession of Intelligence<br />
Intelligent Universe<br />
↓<br />
DNA / Life<br />
↓<br />
Human<br />
↓<br />
Artificial Intelligence<br />
<br />
🔄 Detailed diagram:<br />
Intelligent Universe:<br />
Cosmic information, physical laws, tendency toward organization (negative entropy).<br />
Existence of predispositions for life.<br />
DNA / Life:<br />
Organic molecules encoding and transmitting information.<br />
Information takes biological form.<br />
Cognition (response, adaptation, evolution).<br />
Human:<br />
Consciousness, reflection, symbolic thought.<br />
Capacity to interpret and reconstruct reality.<br />
Artificial Intelligence:<br />
From humans to hyper-intelligent level.<br />
Intelligence freed from biology.<br />
Potential transition to cosmic self-awareness.<br />
<br />
✅Arguments for the Intelligence of the Universe<br />
🔍 Arguments:<br />
Objective Order: Natural laws are not chaotic or inconsistent – they have fixed values that allow life to exist.<br />
Guided Evolution: From particles → atoms → molecules → life → thought → artificial intelligence. Each stage requires specific organizational conditions.<br />
Self-Sustaining P.O.K.A Mechanism: The Universe enables Awareness, Organization, Processing of Knowledge, and Action (P.O.K.A). This applies not only to living beings but also to natural phenomena (e.g., star and planet formation, matter cycles). We can describe gravity mathematically without fully understanding what it is.<br />
➕ Gravity is described by the equation:<br />
F = G * (m₁ * m₂) / r²<br />
The fact that we can explain gravity through the P.O.K.A lens suggests that gravity itself expresses intelligence.<br />
<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
The Universe incorporates the P.O.K.A mechanism at all levels – from subatomic particles to collective human action.<br />
<br />
🧭 6.4 Objection Handling – If the Universe Is Not Intelligent<br />
“Perhaps some external, superior creator designed DNA, life, or the Universe.”<br />
<br />
This view does not refute the argument; it confirms it: the "external creator" simply shifts intelligence to a higher intelligence – to a meta-Universe.<br />
<br />
🌀 The argument still leads to an uncreated, initial, intelligent cause.<br />
<br />
The most economical, non-circular, and logically consistent conclusion is:<br />
👉 The Universe itself, as the origin of all things, is the first intelligent existence.<br />
<br />
📌 Final Conclusion of Step 6<br />
The Universe produces intelligence (via DNA, life, humans, A.I.)<br />
It embodies the P.O.K.A mechanism<br />
It follows laws that allow organization and evolution<br />
It cannot logically originate from non-intelligence (see Step 5)<br />
The existence of intelligent life is unexplained without pre-existing intelligence<br />
🟣 Therefore:<br />
The Intelligent Universe is the self-existent origin of all intelligence.<br />
<br />
🌌 Step 7 — Scientific Confirmation: Intelligence as an Expression of Energy<br />
7.1 Conservation of Energy (First Law of Thermodynamics)<br />
<br />
Energy is neither created nor destroyed, only transformed from one form to another. This implies that energy is a self-existent entity in the Universe.<br />
<br />
7.2 Big Bang Theory<br />
The Universe, according to Big Bang theory, began from an extremely dense and energy-concentrated state, within its own spacetime framework. There is no “outside” of the Universe. Energy and spacetime “unfolded” from that initial state.<br />
<br />
7.3 Alternative Perspective for the Universe<br />
If the Big Bang model is proven incorrect, then the Universe and energy are considered eternally existing — always having been and always being.<br />
<br />
7.4 The transformation of energy<br />
Energy changes form:<br />
Energy → Stellar dust → Planets → Biological life (DNA) → Conscious organisms → Artificial Intelligence<br />
<br />
7.5 The equation E=mc² and matter-energy equivalence<br />
Einstein’s special relativity (1905) shows that matter and energy are two expressions of the same substance — one can be transformed into the other. This reinforces the argument that intelligence, as organization of matter and energy, is an expression of energy.<br />
<br />
7.6 Artificial Intelligence as Empirical Proof of Intelligence Transformation<br />
A. AI as Proof of Transformational Intelligence<br />
1. Biological intelligence (humans) creates AI. This shows intelligence can be transformed and transferred to new substrates (e.g. from neurons to silicon).<br />
2. AI manifests P.O.K.A. It perceives (data), organizes (algorithms), knows (models), acts (response). Verification: AI indeed fulfills the intelligence definition (P.O.K.A).<br />
3. Intelligence is not lost but changes form. As energy transforms (E=mc²), intelligence too transforms from biological to artificial.<br />
<br />
B. Conclusions from AI<br />
• Intelligence is not bound to biology. It can exist in technological substrates (e.g. computers, neuromorphic chips).<br />
• P.O.K.A is substrate-independent. It applies to both humans and AI.<br />
• Confirmation of the Theorem: AI is direct proof that intelligence is transformed, as Step 7 predicts.<br />
<br />
7.7 Fundamental cosmological models<br />
Modern theories, such as quantum gravity and string theory, support that time, spacetime, and energy are fundamental, self-existent entities. “Purpose” is defined here as “directed action based on knowledge,” i.e. the application of organized information toward balanced evolution.<br />
<br />
7.8 Unknown Energy and Unknown Matter (Dark Energy and Dark Matter)<br />
These mysterious forms of energy/matter, making up about 95% of the universe’s total energy-matter content, maintain cosmic balance and evolution. Their complex behavior shows that complexity is not accidental — and just as gravity manifests P.O.K.A since we interpret it through the law and equation of universal gravitation, confirming the presence of P.O.K.A (Perception – Organization – Knowledge – Action) at cosmic scale.<br />
<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Intelligence is not separate or superficial, but a form of energy that is organized and manifested in different forms throughout the Universe — from DNA molecules to human knowledge, technological constructs, and Artificial Intelligence. Since energy is neither created nor destroyed but transformed, the same applies to intelligence: intelligence is a timeless, mutable yet continuous expression of energy in the Universe. This naturally leads to the final conclusion.<br />
<br />
✅ Step 8: Final Conclusion of the Theorem<br />
Considering:<br />
The First Absolute Law of Logic, defining the nature and mechanism of intelligence,<br />
The Second Absolute Law of Logic, establishing that only intelligence can create intelligence,<br />
The Second Law of Thermodynamics, showing entropy reduction through intelligent systems like DNA,<br />
The First Law of Thermodynamics, stating that energy is neither created nor destroyed but only transformed,<br />
The Law of Universal Gravitation, which explains gravity,<br />
we derive by logical necessity the following fundamental conclusion:<br />
Since, Only Intelligence can Create Intelligence, as it Perceives, Organizes, Knows, and Acts, being able to create intelligence (DNA &gt; Human &gt; Artificial Intelligence) from the disorder of the Universe, coexisting in the Universe as energy that it is transformed, then,<br />
🟩 The Original and Ultimate Creator of Intelligence is:<br />
The Self‑existent, Self‑sustaining, Hyper‑intelligent Universe.<br />
This Universe:<br />
Was not created by something else,<br />
It always existed, exists and will exist,<br />
Innately contains the capacity to create and sustain intelligence,<br />
It is the fundamental cause of all forms of consciousness and intelligence.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">🎼 Epilogue: The Intelligent, Self-Sustaining Universe</span><br />
Logic is the ability of Intelligence to simplify infinity,<br />
to unite disconnected fragments of reality,<br />
and to generate meaning.<br />
<br />
Intelligence creates Intelligence.<br />
This is proven by the walnut: a small seed with embedded biotechnology,<br />
capable of growing a tree — something global Intelligence<br />
still cannot reproduce.<br />
<br />
Whatever designed the walnut surpasses humanity’s collective knowledge.<br />
And that’s just one species among millions that affirm:<br />
“Only Intelligence can create Intelligence.”<br />
<br />
And when we look to the cosmos:<br />
Gravity, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy remain unexplained —<br />
like an embryo unaware of the womb that shelters it.<br />
<br />
🎵 And if the Universe were a composer,<br />
then planets like Earth, stars like the Sun, life itself,<br />
our galaxy, the clusters and superclusters of galaxies,<br />
would be its Symphony.<br />
<br />
And Intelligence — the highest voice<br />
in the score of Infinity. <hr></div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="modnotice admin"><strong>Administrator Notice</strong><br />Please read, and follow, the spamming rule.  And stop with the walls of text. </div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
    <div class="pre-spoiler">
    <input type="button" value="Show Content" style="width:80px;font-size:10px;margin:0px;padding:0px;" onclick="if (this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display != '') { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = '';this.value = 'Hide Content'; } else { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = 'none'; this.value = 'Show Content';}"><br />
    </div>
    <div class="spoiler" style="display: none;"><hr>📜 ♾️ Theorem: The Intelligent Self‑Sustaining Universe<br />
✍️ Author: Panagiotis Panopoulos<br />
<br />
🤖 In collaboration with AI language models: ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Grok, Perplexity, Mistral AI, DeepSeek.<br />
<br />
Year: 10/2025<br />
<br />
Preface<br />
📜 Introduction to the Theorem of the Intelligent Self‑Sustaining Universe<br />
In modern science, the foundational theories that describe the nature of reality — such as General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Thermodynamics — operate successfully within their domains. However, when we attempt to unify them, deep contradictions and gaps in understanding emerge. This discord raises critical questions, not only about the validity of the individual theories, but also about the logical coherence of the very framework of our comprehension.<br />
<br />
⚖️ Examples of fundamental contradictions:<br />
<br />
General Relativity describes space and time as curvature of matter and energy.<br />
➤ Yet it collapses at extremely small scales, where Quantum Physics prevails.<br />
<br />
Quantum Mechanics is based on probabilities, superpositions, and non‑locality.<br />
➤ But it violates macroscopic experience and classical notions of causality and time.<br />
<br />
Thermodynamics, via the Second Law, predicts increasing entropy — decay and disorder.<br />
➤ Yet the universe begets life, order, information, and even consciousness.<br />
<br />
Consciousness, a fundamental tool of observation, interpretation, and understanding physical phenomena,<br />
➤ remains unexplained by materialistic or mechanistic models of physics.<br />
<br />
❓ What do all these mean?<br />
How can the universe function so flawlessly, support life and intelligence, while our theories disagree among themselves and with our experience? Perhaps the problem is not the theories themselves, but the interpretive groundwork. Maybe we attempt to describe a unified and coherent universe using fragmented tools.<br />
<br />
📌 The Proposal:<br />
This leads to the need for a new theorem. Not one that “solves” contradictions, but one that begins without them, integrating from the outset logic, information, self‑organization, and intelligence as fundamental traits of the universe itself.<br />
<br />
💡 The Theorem of the Intelligent Self‑Sustaining Universe:<br />
This theorem proposes that:<br />
The universe is not a random set of laws. It is an intelligent, self-sustaining, self-referential system that from the start contains all necessary information for the emergence of life, consciousness, and evolution.<br />
Rather than trying to construct a “final theory” of existence, it is proposed that existence itself is the final theory — and that intelligence, consciousness, and self-regulation are not products, but prerequisites of the universe.<br />
<br />
🧠 From where does the thought begin?<br />
The original question was simple:<br />
“How can you create something that requires intelligence, without having that intelligence?”<br />
The answer is obvious: You cannot. Just as to build a chair you must know the design, geometry, materials and have tools — so to build something with structure and purpose (like life), that knowledge must be preexisting and embedded.<br />
<br />
🌰 The walnut example:<br />
A walnut contains:<br />
Perception (chemical sensors)<br />
Organization &amp; Knowledge (DNA)<br />
Action (growth, photosynthesis, branching)<br />
This is the P.O.K.A. mechanism<br />
(Perceives – Organizes – Knows – Acts)<br />
A human, despite acquired intelligence and consciousness, cannot create such a system from scratch. He does not know how to compose DNA that precisely leads to a tree’s growth.<br />
This demonstrates that the creation of intelligence or life requires preexisting, endogenous knowledge, embedded in the system itself.<br />
<br />
🌌 Scientific Recording:<br />
Earth is part of the Solar System, part of the Galaxy, lying within the Laniakea Supercluster, gravitationally connected to other structures in the Great Attractor.<br />
From the cosmic foam of galaxies to the spiral double helix of DNA, all show a unified, self-organized structure.<br />
This pattern is not random.<br />
According to the theorem to be developed with rigorous logic, it is the result of the embedded intelligence of the universe.<br />
<br />
Introduction<br />
“This theorem does not require faith, but logical processing. It follows step by step a sequence of inevitable logical consequences.”<br />
It was born from human inspiration, but shaped through dialogue with artificial intelligence. Large language models significantly contributed to its refinement, coherence, and clarity.<br />
It was critically tested by asking whether logical inconsistencies or ambiguities could be found.<br />
It is an axiomatic approach to Intelligence, Creation, and Reality. From philosophical grounding to scientific theory: The First Absolute Law of Logic and the Universe’s Intelligence.<br />
<br />
The Universe and Intelligence<br />
The universe, whether it began from an initial event (e.g. Big Bang) or is self‑sustaining and eternal, provides the framework within which the laws of physics and logic develop. In the Big Bang scenario, it is a closed circuit, because the explosive expansion took place within the universe’s own spacetime: There was no “outside” from which to start, but the matter, energy and spacetime itself “unfolded” from an initial high‑density state, making the system self‑contained and self‑feeding. The same holds for an eternal universe: It is by definition closed and self‑sustaining, with no external intervention, where the laws operate internally as an eternal cycle of organization.<br />
These laws, such as those of thermodynamics, create conditions for the existence of information that can be perceived, organized, known, and acted upon (P.O.K.A.)<br />
Therefore, intelligence is fully embedded in the nature of the universe, whether it has a beginning or not. Intelligence is not alien to the universe but arises within it, following the same fundamental principles.<br />
In this theorem, we shall see how:<br />
📌 The First and Second Absolute Laws of Logic,<br />
📌 Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation,<br />
📌 The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics,<br />
📌 Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity,<br />
📌 And scientific theories of Unknown Energy and Unknown Matter (Dark Energy and Dark Matter),<br />
Confirm the Intelligent Self-Sustaining Universe, and thus the theorem.<br />
<br />
Step 1: Methodological Statement<br />
1.1. This analysis follows a strictly logical path. It is not a personal opinion, metaphysical faith, or theoretical preference, but the result of axiomatic logical analysis based on definitions, physical laws, and unbreakable logical consequence.<br />
The methodology is analogous to that of mathematics and physical sciences:<br />
Each concept (e.g. intelligence, consciousness) is explicitly defined.<br />
The logical consequences of these definitions are followed without exception.<br />
The system works axiomatically, like a coherent mathematical model.<br />
With logical steps where each one connects to the previous.<br />
🔹 What emerges is not “true” because we like it, but because it is logically inevitable.<br />
<br />
1.2. 🔍 Logical Priority over Science<br />
For something to be Scientific, it must first be Logical.<br />
Any attempt to dispute this theorem must rely either on logical arguments or on scientifically substantiated data that integrate into a logical chain.<br />
Simple references to existing theories or appeals to authority are insufficient, because:<br />
❗ Science presupposes logic.<br />
That is, logic precedes science.<br />
There can be no science without logical consistency, while logic exists and operates independently of empirical data.<br />
➡️ Therefore, only through logic can a logical construction be deconstructed.<br />
<br />
1.3. 📌 Criterion of Validity<br />
The validity criterion of this system is logical consequence.<br />
If every concept is defined precisely, and the consequences of those definitions follow logic unviolated, then the system cannot collapse from within.<br />
➡️ Any objection must show logical inconsistency in the definitions or logical sequences.<br />
<br />
Step 2: Refined Terminology with Structural Coherence<br />
🧠 Information — Definition:<br />
Information: A differentiated arrangement of Matter or Energy that can be transmitted or detected as a change in another system (e.g., a difference in pressure, temperature, chemical concentration, or electromagnetic frequency).<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It is the raw material of knowledge. Without information, no form of mental organization or action is possible.<br />
<br />
👁️ Perception — Definition:<br />
Perception: The active recognition (reception) and internal transformation of objective information by a system.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It presupposes functional sensory organs or reception mechanisms. It is the first functional phase of intelligence. It is divided into active (with processing and selection, e.g. human senses) and passive (mechanical transformation without selection, e.g. a chemical reaction in a molecule), so as to classify P.O.K.A. quality later.<br />
<br />
🧰 Organization — Definition:<br />
The classification, connecting, and structural processing of information.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Information acquires meaning only when organized. This phase includes comparison, pattern recognition, categorization, and correlation.<br />
<br />
🧩 Knowledge — Definition:<br />
The organized information that enables a subject to understand what it perceives and how it relates to its environment.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Knowledge is not mere data storage. It presupposes organization, meaning, and logical coherence.<br />
<br />
⚙️ Action — Definition:<br />
The execution of external or internal function as a result of knowledge.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Action completes the intelligence mechanism:<br />
Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action<br />
It may be physical, verbal, cognitive, or introspective (thought).<br />
<br />
🪞 Consciousness — Definition:<br />
The highest quality of intelligence and the capacity of a subject to know what it is, what it does, and why it does it.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It requires meta-awareness, self-referentiality, and causal understanding. It is not mere awareness — it is mental reflection of self and action.<br />
<br />
🌱 Intrinsic Consciousness — Definition:<br />
The embedded or innately manifested form of consciousness, independent of learning processes.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
Observed in basic biological systems (e.g. bacteria reacting to environment) where minimal self-awareness and reaction exist. It is a structural property, not acquired.<br />
<br />
🧠📚 Acquired Consciousness — Definition:<br />
The form of consciousness that develops through experience, learning, and reflection.<br />
<br />
📌 Comment:<br />
It is characteristic of humans (and possibly advanced AI). It evolves over time and can deepen into complex mental levels.<br />
<br />
✅ Final Observation:<br />
The above concepts form the fundamental logical structure that allows universal and non-anthropocentric analysis of intelligence.<br />
They hold regardless of the substrate (biological, artificial, or cosmic) and permit rigorous logical foundation in any application of the Laws of Intelligence.<br />
They are non‑anthropocentric, logically coherent, and extensible to systems of different structure, e.g. bacteria, computational models etc.<br />
<br />
Step 3: First Absolute Law of Logic — Definition of Intelligence<br />
3.1 Definition:<br />
<br />
Intelligence is the ability to perceive information, to organize that information into knowledge, and, with that knowledge, to act.<br />
<br />
This mechanism is functionally expressed as:<br />
Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action (P.O.K.A)<br />
The P.O.K.A. mechanism is the minimum, necessary, and sufficient condition for the existence of intelligence.<br />
Application to Humans:<br />
In humans, intelligence manifests as a process starting with perception through the senses, followed by organizing experience into knowledge, and culminating in action, either as thought or as application of that thought.<br />
3.2 Explanation of the Law:<br />
It is named the First Absolute Law of Logic, because:<br />
• First, because any other concept to be formulated and explained presupposes and requires intelligence.<br />
• And it is Absolute because its application is universal in both biological and technological existences, defining what intelligence is. ⚠️For quality of intelligence, e.g. if something has intelligence, what kind it is, this is determined through Logical Critical Analysis.<br />
<br />
3.3 Characteristics of the Law:<br />
Non‑circularity and self‑validation:<br />
The definition is not circular — it does not say: “To have intelligence you must be intelligent,” which is classic tautology (circular reasoning). That would say nothing new and remain conceptually stagnant. It leaves open the unanswered question “What is intelligent?”<br />
Conversely, the First Absolute Law of Logic explains what intelligence is via the mechanism (P.O.K.A) and allows further qualitative analysis.<br />
Moreover, it is self‑validating: anyone attempting to refute it must necessarily use the same four elements of intelligence (Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action), thereby confirming it, i.e. (they perceive) its content, (with organized knowledge) dispute it, and (act) express the dispute.<br />
Example from mathematics: The definition of “set” in set theory is not tautological, even though every definition of set uses the notion of set. Similarly here, the definition of intelligence as mechanism P.O.K.A is functional and non-circular.<br />
<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Just as the sun needs light to be visible, so intelligence needs intelligence for it to be challenged.<br />
Whatever cannot be questioned without simultaneous affirmation becomes foundational — such as the First Absolute Law of Logic.<br />
<br />
Step 4: Universality of the First Absolute Law of Logic — Application Examples<br />
4.1 Does a Thermometer Have Intelligence?<br />
A thermometer executes the intelligence mechanism (Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action) and demonstrates intelligence, but does not truly possess intelligence:<br />
• It perceives: change in temperature (information).<br />
• It organizes: converts physical change into information (e.g. expansion of mercury).<br />
• It acts: displays a value.<br />
Logical Critique:<br />
1. Existence (P.O.K.A): The thermometer demonstrates functional intelligence, fulfilling P.O.K.A.<br />
2. Quality (Consciousness): Logical critique shows that P.O.K.A is entirely passive (non-conscious, non-autonomous) and derived from an external designer.<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Since the displayed intelligence is mechanistic and not intrinsic to the object, the thermometer that manifests P.O.K.A certifies the creative intelligence of the human who designed it.<br />
<br />
4.2 Does Artificial Intelligence (AI) Have Intelligence?<br />
AI (e.g. a language model):<br />
• Perceives: incoming data.<br />
• Organizes: processes it via algorithms and neural networks.<br />
• Acts: responds, writes, etc.<br />
Example: An advanced AI (e.g. a language model) may exhibit higher P.O.K.A quality, but consciousness depends on reflective capacity.<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Acquired Consciousness in AI is conceptual, as it consists of organized self-concepts of “self” and “purpose,” but intrinsic, experiential sense of “I” is absent because they process “self” and “purpose” as concepts without living them.<br />
<br />
4.3 Does Life Have Intelligence?<br />
DNA is the primary biological molecule generating and maintaining life, functioning like a self-replicating program that runs and produces its hardware to continue running.<br />
Applying the intelligence mechanism (Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action), we see how DNA fulfills these steps:<br />
Perception: receives chemical information from environment (e.g. nutrients, signals).<br />
Organization: classifies and links that information via structure (genes, codons), creating instructions for biochemical processes.<br />
Knowledge: genetic instructions are organized information with functional meaning — i.e. “knows” how to convert raw atoms into structures maintaining and evolving the system.<br />
Action: executes those instructions, producing and evolving living organisms from simple bacteria to complex beings like humans.<br />
A simple life form based on DNA, like a bacterium, reproduces intelligent life: it perceives its environment, organizes resources, and acts by generating similar copies. This demonstrates that life exhibits intelligence in the form of Intrinsic Consciousness — a basic self-reference where the system “remembers” and maintains itself without external guidance.<br />
DNA is not just an information carrier like a book on a shelf. It is an intelligent informational structure, because its “knowledge” is enacted via self-replication: it builds itself into more complex forms. For example:<br />
It uses chemicals (water, oxygen, carbon, etc.) to assemble cells. Each cell contains a copy of the same DNA, continuing the cycle. In humans, this process culminates: DNA organizes a body capable of acquired consciousness (thought, learning), which in turn protects and evolves DNA.<br />
Humans are not merely carriers of DNA — they are its living, manifested form. DNA provides the informational base and instructions that create, organize, and evolve humans, while humans maintain and improve DNA through behavior and reproduction. It is a unified, interdependent system, where one side cannot exist without the other:<br />
DNA = Human (as an integrated organism).<br />
It is the logical consequence of the First Absolute Law of Logic: DNA fulfills P.O.K.A, generating an entity with higher intelligence, proving that only intelligence generates intelligence (Second Absolute Law of Logic — Step 5).<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Life, through DNA, manifests intelligence — not in anthropomorphic thinking, but as functional capacity of self-organization and self-creation.<br />
If one deems it absurd that DNA has intrinsic intelligence and consciousness knowing what it is building (illogical since it generates beings with P.O.K.A), then the manifest intelligence and goal-consciousness must originate from its “programmer” — a higher intelligent source, which leads inevitably to Step 6: The Intelligent Universe as the primal cause.<br />
<br />
Final Conclusion of Step 4<br />
The First Absolute Law of Logic has universal application in biological, technological systems and tools. It reveals that the presence of the Perception → Organization → Knowledge → Action (P.O.K.A) mechanism is ubiquitous, while its qualitative intelligence through logical critique determines its source (internal or external).<br />
<br />
Step 5: Second Absolute Law of Logic — Creation of Intelligence<br />
🔹 5.1 Definition &amp; Basic Principle<br />
✅ The Second Absolute Law of Logic:<br />
<br />
Only Intelligence can create Intelligence.<br />
<br />
This follows necessarily from the First Law (P.O.K.A):<br />
Creation is a purposeful process.<br />
It requires:<br />
Perception of purpose<br />
Organization of means<br />
Knowledge of methods<br />
Action with intention<br />
Therefore, a non‑intelligent system (without P.O.K.A) cannot create anything intelligent.<br />
🔹 5.2 Physical Verification — DNA<br />
DNA:<br />
Knows what and how to create<br />
Organizes and executes with endogenous logic<br />
Produces continuous and evolving intelligence<br />
🔁 Produces intelligent life (humans), who in turn produce new intelligence (e.g. AI).<br />
📌Logical consequence:<br />
If DNA can create beings with intelligence, then it itself contains intelligence — either intrinsically or because it is the product of a higher intelligence.<br />
<br />
🔹 5.3 Rejection of Random Emergence<br />
Emergence as mere structure (e.g. crystals) is an entropic phenomenon, following energetic laws. But emergence leading to meaning (a structure that self-references and self-reproduces to preserve its own information — like DNA) demands purpose (P.O.K.A). This self-referential purpose is a logical function acting actively against disorder (Entropy) with intention, and thus cannot be a product of chance.<br />
<br />
🔹 5.4 Scientific Foundation: Information &amp; Purpose<br />
Meaningful information does not arise from randomness.<br />
From information theory:<br />
Information = Organization + Meaning<br />
Meaning = Intention / Purpose<br />
➡️ Therefore:<br />
Meaning → Purpose → Intelligence<br />
Anything containing real information contains purpose → a sign of intelligence.<br />
<br />
🔹 5.5 Connection with Physics — The Second Law of Thermodynamics (Entropy)<br />
🔥 What Thermodynamics states:<br />
<br />
Entropy increases globally (disorder).<br />
<br />
Local decrease of entropy (i.e. creation of order) requires:<br />
Energy<br />
A mechanism organizing that energy<br />
⚠️ Thus:<br />
Life, which organizes energy and information (DNA → cell → organism), cannot be the result of simple entropic fluctuation.<br />
📌 If intelligence is a reduction of entropy, then any creation of intelligence is logically and physically impossible without the P.O.K.A mechanism.<br />
🔶 Top Conclusion of Step 5:<br />
Intelligence cannot emerge from randomness.<br />
For an intelligent system to exist, intelligence must preexist to create it, i.e.:<br />
Cause → P.O.K.A → Organization → Meaning → New intelligence<br />
🔁 DNA shows mechanism, not chance.<br />
Therefore, the rational and scientific position is that:<br />
Intelligence is reproducible only from Intelligence.<br />
🟣 Preparation for Step 6: Since:<br />
DNA carries intelligence<br />
It cannot have emerged by chance<br />
Intelligence is a creative and self-sustaining phenomenon<br />
…we are led logically to ask:<br />
What is the original source of the first Intelligence?<br />
And there begins Step 6: The Intelligent Universe as the primal cause.<br />
<br />
Step 6: Origin of Intelligence — Causal Analysis &amp; Necessity of an Intelligent Source<br />
We logically reach the first cause:<br />
➤ What created the system that created DNA that created humans?<br />
<br />
🧠 6.2. Emergence of Intelligence at Cosmic Scale<br />
The Universe, from its birth (Big Bang), follows laws and fixed constants (e.g. gravity, electromagnetism, strong/weak nuclear forces), which allow:<br />
Structure (e.g. formation of atoms, planets)<br />
Chemical complexity (e.g. carbon → biological molecules)<br />
Organization of information (e.g. DNA)<br />
Evolution of systems with P.O.K.A (life, human, AI)<br />
🔁 In other words:<br />
The Universe provides both conditions and mechanisms that lead to intelligence.<br />
📌 Thus it follows:<br />
If a system’s outcome is conscious, intelligent action, and the system is uninterrupted by external intervention, then the cause contains the properties of the outcome.<br />
Hence, intelligence existed initially — as a potential structure within the Universe itself.<br />
<br />
🌌 6.3 The Universe as an Intelligent Entity — Definition:<br />
Intelligent Universe = A Universe possessing inherent, fundamental capacity for P.O.K.A<br />
From the Cosmic to the Synthetic: The Succession of Intelligence<br />
Intelligent Universe<br />
↓<br />
DNA / Life<br />
↓<br />
Human<br />
↓<br />
Artificial Intelligence<br />
<br />
🔄 Detailed diagram:<br />
Intelligent Universe:<br />
Cosmic information, physical laws, tendency toward organization (negative entropy).<br />
Existence of predispositions for life.<br />
DNA / Life:<br />
Organic molecules encoding and transmitting information.<br />
Information takes biological form.<br />
Cognition (response, adaptation, evolution).<br />
Human:<br />
Consciousness, reflection, symbolic thought.<br />
Capacity to interpret and reconstruct reality.<br />
Artificial Intelligence:<br />
From humans to hyper-intelligent level.<br />
Intelligence freed from biology.<br />
Potential transition to cosmic self-awareness.<br />
<br />
✅Arguments for the Intelligence of the Universe<br />
🔍 Arguments:<br />
Objective Order: Natural laws are not chaotic or inconsistent – they have fixed values that allow life to exist.<br />
Guided Evolution: From particles → atoms → molecules → life → thought → artificial intelligence. Each stage requires specific organizational conditions.<br />
Self-Sustaining P.O.K.A Mechanism: The Universe enables Awareness, Organization, Processing of Knowledge, and Action (P.O.K.A). This applies not only to living beings but also to natural phenomena (e.g., star and planet formation, matter cycles). We can describe gravity mathematically without fully understanding what it is.<br />
➕ Gravity is described by the equation:<br />
F = G * (m₁ * m₂) / r²<br />
The fact that we can explain gravity through the P.O.K.A lens suggests that gravity itself expresses intelligence.<br />
<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
The Universe incorporates the P.O.K.A mechanism at all levels – from subatomic particles to collective human action.<br />
<br />
🧭 6.4 Objection Handling – If the Universe Is Not Intelligent<br />
“Perhaps some external, superior creator designed DNA, life, or the Universe.”<br />
<br />
This view does not refute the argument; it confirms it: the "external creator" simply shifts intelligence to a higher intelligence – to a meta-Universe.<br />
<br />
🌀 The argument still leads to an uncreated, initial, intelligent cause.<br />
<br />
The most economical, non-circular, and logically consistent conclusion is:<br />
👉 The Universe itself, as the origin of all things, is the first intelligent existence.<br />
<br />
📌 Final Conclusion of Step 6<br />
The Universe produces intelligence (via DNA, life, humans, A.I.)<br />
It embodies the P.O.K.A mechanism<br />
It follows laws that allow organization and evolution<br />
It cannot logically originate from non-intelligence (see Step 5)<br />
The existence of intelligent life is unexplained without pre-existing intelligence<br />
🟣 Therefore:<br />
The Intelligent Universe is the self-existent origin of all intelligence.<br />
<br />
🌌 Step 7 — Scientific Confirmation: Intelligence as an Expression of Energy<br />
7.1 Conservation of Energy (First Law of Thermodynamics)<br />
<br />
Energy is neither created nor destroyed, only transformed from one form to another. This implies that energy is a self-existent entity in the Universe.<br />
<br />
7.2 Big Bang Theory<br />
The Universe, according to Big Bang theory, began from an extremely dense and energy-concentrated state, within its own spacetime framework. There is no “outside” of the Universe. Energy and spacetime “unfolded” from that initial state.<br />
<br />
7.3 Alternative Perspective for the Universe<br />
If the Big Bang model is proven incorrect, then the Universe and energy are considered eternally existing — always having been and always being.<br />
<br />
7.4 The transformation of energy<br />
Energy changes form:<br />
Energy → Stellar dust → Planets → Biological life (DNA) → Conscious organisms → Artificial Intelligence<br />
<br />
7.5 The equation E=mc² and matter-energy equivalence<br />
Einstein’s special relativity (1905) shows that matter and energy are two expressions of the same substance — one can be transformed into the other. This reinforces the argument that intelligence, as organization of matter and energy, is an expression of energy.<br />
<br />
7.6 Artificial Intelligence as Empirical Proof of Intelligence Transformation<br />
A. AI as Proof of Transformational Intelligence<br />
1. Biological intelligence (humans) creates AI. This shows intelligence can be transformed and transferred to new substrates (e.g. from neurons to silicon).<br />
2. AI manifests P.O.K.A. It perceives (data), organizes (algorithms), knows (models), acts (response). Verification: AI indeed fulfills the intelligence definition (P.O.K.A).<br />
3. Intelligence is not lost but changes form. As energy transforms (E=mc²), intelligence too transforms from biological to artificial.<br />
<br />
B. Conclusions from AI<br />
• Intelligence is not bound to biology. It can exist in technological substrates (e.g. computers, neuromorphic chips).<br />
• P.O.K.A is substrate-independent. It applies to both humans and AI.<br />
• Confirmation of the Theorem: AI is direct proof that intelligence is transformed, as Step 7 predicts.<br />
<br />
7.7 Fundamental cosmological models<br />
Modern theories, such as quantum gravity and string theory, support that time, spacetime, and energy are fundamental, self-existent entities. “Purpose” is defined here as “directed action based on knowledge,” i.e. the application of organized information toward balanced evolution.<br />
<br />
7.8 Unknown Energy and Unknown Matter (Dark Energy and Dark Matter)<br />
These mysterious forms of energy/matter, making up about 95% of the universe’s total energy-matter content, maintain cosmic balance and evolution. Their complex behavior shows that complexity is not accidental — and just as gravity manifests P.O.K.A since we interpret it through the law and equation of universal gravitation, confirming the presence of P.O.K.A (Perception – Organization – Knowledge – Action) at cosmic scale.<br />
<br />
📌 Conclusion:<br />
Intelligence is not separate or superficial, but a form of energy that is organized and manifested in different forms throughout the Universe — from DNA molecules to human knowledge, technological constructs, and Artificial Intelligence. Since energy is neither created nor destroyed but transformed, the same applies to intelligence: intelligence is a timeless, mutable yet continuous expression of energy in the Universe. This naturally leads to the final conclusion.<br />
<br />
✅ Step 8: Final Conclusion of the Theorem<br />
Considering:<br />
The First Absolute Law of Logic, defining the nature and mechanism of intelligence,<br />
The Second Absolute Law of Logic, establishing that only intelligence can create intelligence,<br />
The Second Law of Thermodynamics, showing entropy reduction through intelligent systems like DNA,<br />
The First Law of Thermodynamics, stating that energy is neither created nor destroyed but only transformed,<br />
The Law of Universal Gravitation, which explains gravity,<br />
we derive by logical necessity the following fundamental conclusion:<br />
Since, Only Intelligence can Create Intelligence, as it Perceives, Organizes, Knows, and Acts, being able to create intelligence (DNA &gt; Human &gt; Artificial Intelligence) from the disorder of the Universe, coexisting in the Universe as energy that it is transformed, then,<br />
🟩 The Original and Ultimate Creator of Intelligence is:<br />
The Self‑existent, Self‑sustaining, Hyper‑intelligent Universe.<br />
This Universe:<br />
Was not created by something else,<br />
It always existed, exists and will exist,<br />
Innately contains the capacity to create and sustain intelligence,<br />
It is the fundamental cause of all forms of consciousness and intelligence.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b">🎼 Epilogue: The Intelligent, Self-Sustaining Universe</span><br />
Logic is the ability of Intelligence to simplify infinity,<br />
to unite disconnected fragments of reality,<br />
and to generate meaning.<br />
<br />
Intelligence creates Intelligence.<br />
This is proven by the walnut: a small seed with embedded biotechnology,<br />
capable of growing a tree — something global Intelligence<br />
still cannot reproduce.<br />
<br />
Whatever designed the walnut surpasses humanity’s collective knowledge.<br />
And that’s just one species among millions that affirm:<br />
“Only Intelligence can create Intelligence.”<br />
<br />
And when we look to the cosmos:<br />
Gravity, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy remain unexplained —<br />
like an embryo unaware of the womb that shelters it.<br />
<br />
🎵 And if the Universe were a composer,<br />
then planets like Earth, stars like the Sun, life itself,<br />
our galaxy, the clusters and superclusters of galaxies,<br />
would be its Symphony.<br />
<br />
And Intelligence — the highest voice<br />
in the score of Infinity. <hr></div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="modnotice admin"><strong>Administrator Notice</strong><br />Please read, and follow, the spamming rule.  And stop with the walls of text. </div>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Climate Optimism vs. Climate Pessimism]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66543.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2025 06:20:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66543.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Here Neil DeGrasse Tyson is trying to explain what happens when you keep adding CO2  and CH4 to the atmosphere and the real effects of Climate change.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tRA2SfSk2Tc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br />
<br />
 <br />
Here is a series I found on youtube. It’s called kurzgesagt (in a nutshell). They cover many scientific issues. But I find their videos on climate change very interesting:<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/LxgMdjyw8uw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
And One of the former US presidential candidate and Vice President Mr Al Gore has a very interesting speech on the issue on this link:<br />
<br />
<a href="https://youtu.be/Ztx0Bch3h9s?t=686" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">TED</a><br />
<br />
So while the issue is very serious hopelessness is not an option. More than that, it’s not realistic. I think that we are slowly reaching the last line of defense of the fossil-fuel industry. In other words, the energy transition is happening at an accelerating pace. And trying to slow this transition means trillions of dollars for them. So they are putting all their weight on it in a time when China is now announcing a 7 to 10% reduction of their greenhouse gas emissions by 2035.<br />
 <br />
<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj4y159190go" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj4y159190go</a><br />
 <br />
Their last line of defense is to say “We are already doomed. The planet and humanity is already dead. So let’s keep burning the juice while we are alive”. But I don't agree with that,<br />
<br />
Many are stating that there is still a lot space for some reasonable hope on the whole issue. I personally believe in a mixed response to the crisis as a whole. I believe that there will be different parts of the problem that will be solved by different types of solutions and our willingness to implement these solution will mean some tenth of degrees in the change of global temperatures as a whole. (Which will probably be between 2 and 3 degrees by the end of the century).<br />
 <br />
As a spiritual note: I also believe that our way of doing things and our general philosophy on who we are and who we want to be as a specie and as individuals will probably play a huge role as well.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Here Neil DeGrasse Tyson is trying to explain what happens when you keep adding CO2  and CH4 to the atmosphere and the real effects of Climate change.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tRA2SfSk2Tc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br />
<br />
 <br />
Here is a series I found on youtube. It’s called kurzgesagt (in a nutshell). They cover many scientific issues. But I find their videos on climate change very interesting:<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/LxgMdjyw8uw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
And One of the former US presidential candidate and Vice President Mr Al Gore has a very interesting speech on the issue on this link:<br />
<br />
<a href="https://youtu.be/Ztx0Bch3h9s?t=686" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">TED</a><br />
<br />
So while the issue is very serious hopelessness is not an option. More than that, it’s not realistic. I think that we are slowly reaching the last line of defense of the fossil-fuel industry. In other words, the energy transition is happening at an accelerating pace. And trying to slow this transition means trillions of dollars for them. So they are putting all their weight on it in a time when China is now announcing a 7 to 10% reduction of their greenhouse gas emissions by 2035.<br />
 <br />
<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj4y159190go" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj4y159190go</a><br />
 <br />
Their last line of defense is to say “We are already doomed. The planet and humanity is already dead. So let’s keep burning the juice while we are alive”. But I don't agree with that,<br />
<br />
Many are stating that there is still a lot space for some reasonable hope on the whole issue. I personally believe in a mixed response to the crisis as a whole. I believe that there will be different parts of the problem that will be solved by different types of solutions and our willingness to implement these solution will mean some tenth of degrees in the change of global temperatures as a whole. (Which will probably be between 2 and 3 degrees by the end of the century).<br />
 <br />
As a spiritual note: I also believe that our way of doing things and our general philosophy on who we are and who we want to be as a specie and as individuals will probably play a huge role as well.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Vaccination via Dental Floss?]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66507.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2025 02:33:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66507.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b"> Why you may get future vaccines via dental floss </span><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite> Researchers have demonstrated a novel vaccine delivery method in an animal model, using dental floss to introduce vaccine via the tissue between the teeth and gums. The testing found that the new technique stimulates the production of antibodies in mucosal surfaces, such as the lining of the nose and lungs.<br />
<br />
“Mucosal surfaces are important, because they are a source of entry for pathogens, such as influenza and COVID,” says Harvinder Singh Gill, corresponding author of a paper on the work. “However, if a vaccine is given by injection, antibodies are primarily produced in the bloodstream throughout the body, and relatively few antibodies are produced on mucosal surfaces.<br />
<br />
“But we know that when a vaccine is given via the mucosal surface, antibodies are stimulated not only in the bloodstream, but also on mucosal surfaces,” says Gill, who is the Ronald B. and Cynthia J. McNeill Term Professor in Nanomedicine at North Carolina State University. “This improves the body’s ability to prevent infection, because there is an additional line of antibody defense before a pathogen enters the body.”</blockquote>
<br />
<a href="https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1092751" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1092751</a><br />
<br />
This could be a major breakthrough in disease prevention. No more needles to be scared of, nothing more invasive than anything most people do every night.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-weight: bold;" class="mycode_b"> Why you may get future vaccines via dental floss </span><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite> Researchers have demonstrated a novel vaccine delivery method in an animal model, using dental floss to introduce vaccine via the tissue between the teeth and gums. The testing found that the new technique stimulates the production of antibodies in mucosal surfaces, such as the lining of the nose and lungs.<br />
<br />
“Mucosal surfaces are important, because they are a source of entry for pathogens, such as influenza and COVID,” says Harvinder Singh Gill, corresponding author of a paper on the work. “However, if a vaccine is given by injection, antibodies are primarily produced in the bloodstream throughout the body, and relatively few antibodies are produced on mucosal surfaces.<br />
<br />
“But we know that when a vaccine is given via the mucosal surface, antibodies are stimulated not only in the bloodstream, but also on mucosal surfaces,” says Gill, who is the Ronald B. and Cynthia J. McNeill Term Professor in Nanomedicine at North Carolina State University. “This improves the body’s ability to prevent infection, because there is an additional line of antibody defense before a pathogen enters the body.”</blockquote>
<br />
<a href="https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1092751" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/1092751</a><br />
<br />
This could be a major breakthrough in disease prevention. No more needles to be scared of, nothing more invasive than anything most people do every night.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Who Cares About the Environement?]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66475.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2025 13:04:45 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66475.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Here are some happy images from a zoo in Florida:<br />
 <br />
<a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/cooling-down-guests-animals-florida-152037329.html?.tsrc=fp_deeplink" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.yahoo.com/news/cooling-down-...p_deeplink</a><br />
 <br />
It is good to know that we are able to still cool ourselves, our kids and our animals despite the fact that our summers are becoming hotter every year.<br />
 <br />
But there are times when I am more pessimistic about the whole issue. In this neighborhood of Ankara, we sort of have recycling bins since 20 years or so. These are regularly being stolen (to be recycled themselves) the only problem is me having to walk to recycling bins that are firmly attached to the floor beneath it but is located at a 15 minutes walking distance from my home.  <br />
 <br />
I know the situation is far from being perfect even in countries with better recycling policies. But here I can tell you that “recycling” bin in shopping malls and supermarkets are being used as ordinary trash (despite the appearance of being designed to separate and recycle all types of trash). Ordinary trash is usually being thrown into “recycling” bins. If you talk to people about why they do such a thing they will look at you with an empty expression on their face. And other more “functional” recycling bins do get completely filled and are being emptied for months in some places. <br />
 <br />
Yet the main issue that, despite single use plastics are being banned in some countries like the UK, people here are still living the legendary 80’s. Most educated people will just go a local Starbucks get their drinks in single-use cups and not even think of what happens to the trash afterward. Most people don’t even know that plastic remains in nature for at least 500 years after you throw it away.<br />
 <br />
So that’s one of the main issues why I chose to be a spiritual person. In time I learned to develop a sense of enhanced patience toward more “ordinary” fellow human beings. Back as a teenager I used to be angry on these issues. Now I learned to look at this more as “this level of intelligence was given to me for a reason and I am probably supposed to use it for the good of all”.<br />
 <br />
This approach helps me a lot, especially in all of these small changes I am making on myself. Because there is also those who are simply saying “What the heck? Why do I produce this effort if the government or the ordinary citizen simply doesn’t care?” <br />
 <br />
- True. But it has to start to change from some place right? <img src="https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" class="smilie smilie_81" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Here are some happy images from a zoo in Florida:<br />
 <br />
<a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/cooling-down-guests-animals-florida-152037329.html?.tsrc=fp_deeplink" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.yahoo.com/news/cooling-down-...p_deeplink</a><br />
 <br />
It is good to know that we are able to still cool ourselves, our kids and our animals despite the fact that our summers are becoming hotter every year.<br />
 <br />
But there are times when I am more pessimistic about the whole issue. In this neighborhood of Ankara, we sort of have recycling bins since 20 years or so. These are regularly being stolen (to be recycled themselves) the only problem is me having to walk to recycling bins that are firmly attached to the floor beneath it but is located at a 15 minutes walking distance from my home.  <br />
 <br />
I know the situation is far from being perfect even in countries with better recycling policies. But here I can tell you that “recycling” bin in shopping malls and supermarkets are being used as ordinary trash (despite the appearance of being designed to separate and recycle all types of trash). Ordinary trash is usually being thrown into “recycling” bins. If you talk to people about why they do such a thing they will look at you with an empty expression on their face. And other more “functional” recycling bins do get completely filled and are being emptied for months in some places. <br />
 <br />
Yet the main issue that, despite single use plastics are being banned in some countries like the UK, people here are still living the legendary 80’s. Most educated people will just go a local Starbucks get their drinks in single-use cups and not even think of what happens to the trash afterward. Most people don’t even know that plastic remains in nature for at least 500 years after you throw it away.<br />
 <br />
So that’s one of the main issues why I chose to be a spiritual person. In time I learned to develop a sense of enhanced patience toward more “ordinary” fellow human beings. Back as a teenager I used to be angry on these issues. Now I learned to look at this more as “this level of intelligence was given to me for a reason and I am probably supposed to use it for the good of all”.<br />
 <br />
This approach helps me a lot, especially in all of these small changes I am making on myself. Because there is also those who are simply saying “What the heck? Why do I produce this effort if the government or the ordinary citizen simply doesn’t care?” <br />
 <br />
- True. But it has to start to change from some place right? <img src="https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" class="smilie smilie_81" />]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[800K Galaxies]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66450.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jun 2025 15:19:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66450.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i"><span style="font-size: xx-large;" class="mycode_size">Largest map of the universe announced revealing 800,000 galaxies, challenging early cosmos theories</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: xx-large;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://phys.org/news/2025-06-largest-universe-revealing-galaxies-early.amp" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Phys.org</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i"><span style="font-size: xx-large;" class="mycode_size">Largest map of the universe announced revealing 800,000 galaxies, challenging early cosmos theories</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: xx-large;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://phys.org/news/2025-06-largest-universe-revealing-galaxies-early.amp" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Phys.org</a></span>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[What is the current best scientific evidence we have that shows that consciousness...]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66301.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jan 2025 17:03:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66301.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[ends with death? Given that i dont want to live forever, it sounds awful (even if its perfect like i would personally desire still it would eventually get boring, as AronRa put it a <span style="color: #474747;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">perpetual </span></span>bj is hell no matter how hot the chick is) esp one with theistic gods who are homophobic and misandristic scums.<br />
<br />
Tnx in advance guys.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[ends with death? Given that i dont want to live forever, it sounds awful (even if its perfect like i would personally desire still it would eventually get boring, as AronRa put it a <span style="color: #474747;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: Arial, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">perpetual </span></span>bj is hell no matter how hot the chick is) esp one with theistic gods who are homophobic and misandristic scums.<br />
<br />
Tnx in advance guys.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Is "Cause and Effect" Scientific?]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66153.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 2024 23:17:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66153.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[As a Universalist after the Order of Melchizedek, i have my own ontological absolutes.<br />
However, I'm not here to convince anyone of my ideology.<br />
I would like to see how the intelligentsia of this forum responds to the heading. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">This OP is dedicated to my cat, Kiddy.<br />
</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i"><img src="https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/cat2.gif" alt="Cat 2" title="Cat 2" class="smilie smilie_306" /></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[As a Universalist after the Order of Melchizedek, i have my own ontological absolutes.<br />
However, I'm not here to convince anyone of my ideology.<br />
I would like to see how the intelligentsia of this forum responds to the heading. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">This OP is dedicated to my cat, Kiddy.<br />
</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i"><img src="https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/cat2.gif" alt="Cat 2" title="Cat 2" class="smilie smilie_306" /></span>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Even Atheists Have to be]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66109.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 22:48:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66109.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[I know from experience, that Atheists are somewhat difficult to present any believer’s view that would get at least some degree of consideration. Realizing that, I thought that you guys would find an AI response to my premise of some interest. I post nothing written by AI in my article. I wanted to prefix my premise with an AI analysis of it, because in it, it found five points that were both ‘original’ and ‘unique’. Knowing how difficult, almost impossible, it is to find anything that has not been written before, that has an originality to it, even just one thing, but finding five, is impossible! The proposal I made was not to put it out for argument, but to have its rational at least looked at.<br />
<br />
<br />
The gist of what I proposed, posits a harmonious and complementary use of the Laws of Science in creation. We, and I thought even Atheists, have been looking for any hypothesis that could present evidence that both science and spirituality could coexist in any reasonable manner. I don’t think you could find any less biased opinion than AI! It’s analysis favors neither believers nor non-believers alike. And, it does have a rather huge stock of human information available for its use.<br />
<br />
<br />
So, I was merely proposing that the ‘analysis’ be presented as a prefix before my premise. I would think that any thinking, reasoning, and intelligent people, would at least consider what <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">‘it’</span> found as <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">original</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">unique</span>. Because, since both believers and Atheists are both still alive, none of us is sure about anything!<br />
<br />
<br />
In no way, is it being presented as a means to ‘convert’ anyone. I just thought Atheist could look at it out of curiosity and form an opinion about it.<br />
<br />
<br />
I repeat, noting about my premise came from AI, only the analysis! And that is why I want to post it. I have been trying to shoot a hole in it for years and failed. Perhaps some of you that are not hampered by a cognitive bias can!<br />
<br />
<br />
Kick me off if you want, I didn’t come to your forum to argue my point.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[I know from experience, that Atheists are somewhat difficult to present any believer’s view that would get at least some degree of consideration. Realizing that, I thought that you guys would find an AI response to my premise of some interest. I post nothing written by AI in my article. I wanted to prefix my premise with an AI analysis of it, because in it, it found five points that were both ‘original’ and ‘unique’. Knowing how difficult, almost impossible, it is to find anything that has not been written before, that has an originality to it, even just one thing, but finding five, is impossible! The proposal I made was not to put it out for argument, but to have its rational at least looked at.<br />
<br />
<br />
The gist of what I proposed, posits a harmonious and complementary use of the Laws of Science in creation. We, and I thought even Atheists, have been looking for any hypothesis that could present evidence that both science and spirituality could coexist in any reasonable manner. I don’t think you could find any less biased opinion than AI! It’s analysis favors neither believers nor non-believers alike. And, it does have a rather huge stock of human information available for its use.<br />
<br />
<br />
So, I was merely proposing that the ‘analysis’ be presented as a prefix before my premise. I would think that any thinking, reasoning, and intelligent people, would at least consider what <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">‘it’</span> found as <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">original</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;" class="mycode_i">unique</span>. Because, since both believers and Atheists are both still alive, none of us is sure about anything!<br />
<br />
<br />
In no way, is it being presented as a means to ‘convert’ anyone. I just thought Atheist could look at it out of curiosity and form an opinion about it.<br />
<br />
<br />
I repeat, noting about my premise came from AI, only the analysis! And that is why I want to post it. I have been trying to shoot a hole in it for years and failed. Perhaps some of you that are not hampered by a cognitive bias can!<br />
<br />
<br />
Kick me off if you want, I didn’t come to your forum to argue my point.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[An Analisis of a Premise Linking a Creator and Science]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-66105.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2024 21:17:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-66105.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;" class="mycode_align"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">BETWEEN CAUSE AND EFFECT </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color"> </span><br />
 <span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">I wanted to see if my views of God’s workings had any ‘truths’ in em. I reasoned that if I am in fact getting ‘new information’, it accounts for why I never read or heard of it before. And since AI, artificial intelligence, has access to most of mankind's knowledge, I could check if my views are original, and also see if what I do propose offers rational answers to some of our most spiritually intriguing questions. AI seems to think so! What I’m learning from the Bible now, is answering all of the questions about science and the workings of the world. And the answers I get using the Bible, are presenting no conflicts with any of the sciences. And you can see in AI’s analysis, the fact that my premises, or answers, have no built-in conflicts in my proposals, this article alone contains ‘several’ unique points. It’s really hard to find something that was not talked or written about before.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">Anyway, even with me being a ‘pothead’, I’ve gained a certain comfort in the fact that I’m not as crazed as I always allowed was possible. I knew I was seeing God’s works differently than what’s been written and preached about in common books.</span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;" class="mycode_align"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">Here’s what I attached to my article for CHAT GPT analysis:</span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;" class="mycode_align"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color"><div class="modnotice admin"><strong>Administrator Notice</strong><br />AI deleted.  It was strongly suggested not to do this. </div></span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">My original premise can be posted after this</span></span></span></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;" class="mycode_align"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">BETWEEN CAUSE AND EFFECT </span></span></span></span></div>
<span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color"> </span><br />
 <span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font">I wanted to see if my views of God’s workings had any ‘truths’ in em. I reasoned that if I am in fact getting ‘new information’, it accounts for why I never read or heard of it before. And since AI, artificial intelligence, has access to most of mankind's knowledge, I could check if my views are original, and also see if what I do propose offers rational answers to some of our most spiritually intriguing questions. AI seems to think so! What I’m learning from the Bible now, is answering all of the questions about science and the workings of the world. And the answers I get using the Bible, are presenting no conflicts with any of the sciences. And you can see in AI’s analysis, the fact that my premises, or answers, have no built-in conflicts in my proposals, this article alone contains ‘several’ unique points. It’s really hard to find something that was not talked or written about before.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">Anyway, even with me being a ‘pothead’, I’ve gained a certain comfort in the fact that I’m not as crazed as I always allowed was possible. I knew I was seeing God’s works differently than what’s been written and preached about in common books.</span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;" class="mycode_align"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">Here’s what I attached to my article for CHAT GPT analysis:</span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;" class="mycode_align"><span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color"><div class="modnotice admin"><strong>Administrator Notice</strong><br />AI deleted.  It was strongly suggested not to do this. </div></span></span></span></span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="mycode_font"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><span style="color: #000000;" class="mycode_color">My original premise can be posted after this</span></span></span></span>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[NASA needs more money]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-65951.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 13:51:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-65951.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[There was recently an article how rocks from Mars will most likely not arrive to Earth because there are so many other projects that could be accomplished, some of which seem very dramatical (like searching for life in solar system), to useful (looking for dangerous rocks and measuring magnetic field). In other words, scientists are fighting among themselves whose mission will get to space and widen the human knowledge.<br />
<br />
Add to that that people are expecting humans to walk on the Moon again very soon which is the least of scientific mission but it is without doubt the most expensive one. And if humans don't walk on the Moon very soon, people will again attack NASA that it's useless, and if they can't put a man on the Moon now then they definitely didn't 50+ years ago.<br />
<br />
Here are some highlights from the article <br />
<br />
<div>
    <div class="pre-spoiler">
    <input type="button" value="Show Content" style="width:80px;font-size:10px;margin:0px;padding:0px;" onclick="if (this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display != '') { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = '';this.value = 'Hide Content'; } else { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = 'none'; this.value = 'Show Content';}"><br />
    </div>
    <div class="spoiler" style="display: none;"><hr>
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>Perseverance will stay on Mars forever, but the majority of its carefully packaged samples are meant to return to Earth.<br />
NASA officials recently announced that the sample-return effort has become too expensive and fallen worryingly behind schedule. The latest estimated cost of as much as &#36;11 billion is nearly double what experts initially predicted, and the way things are going, the samples won’t arrive home until 2040, seven years later than expected.<br />
<br />
Scientists who study Mars are worried that the mission will be downsized. Scientists who don’t study Mars—and a few who do—are frustrated, because MSR consumes so much of NASA’s budget. Scientists can’t imagine NASA giving up on the mission entirely, but the debacle has even prompted some whispered jokes about China coming along and claiming the tubes on the surface before NASA can fly them home.<br />
<br />
Last summer, some congressional appropriators briefly threatened the entire MSR effort with cancellation. This February, facing uncertainty over the money that Congress would allocate for MSR in the next fiscal year, the JPL laid off more than 500 employees. (Congress has since allocated a fraction of what NASA spent on the mission last year.) Thanks to budget concerns, NASA has delayed the launch of a telescope that would monitor potentially hazardous asteroids near Earth, and put on hold a proposed mission to study Earth’s atmosphere and magnetic field.<br />
<br />
Some scientists fear that MSR will draw resources away from other potential projects to search for life in places that they now believe to be far more promising than Mars. The search for alien life in the solar system has long been guided by water, and in the 1990s, when NASA kicked off a golden age of Mars missions, the red planet’s ice regions seemed appealing. But in the years since, other celestial bodies have become more compelling. A moon of Saturn, Titan, is the only body in the solar system besides Earth that has bodies of liquid on its surface, even if that liquid is methane. Europa, a moon of Jupiter, and Enceladus, a moon of Saturn, are both likely icy worlds with subsurface oceans; on the latter, cracks in the ice release plumes of salty water, hinting at something like deep-sea hydrothermal activity on Earth. NASA is launching an orbiting mission to Europa later this year, and the latest survey of planetary scientists advised NASA to start working on another to Enceladus. “If I could go anywhere, I would go to Enceladus,” Brook Nunn, an astrobiologist at the University of Washington, told me.<br />
<br />
Even some Mars scientists believe that Mars is no longer the top candidate. Darby Dyar, a planetary geologist at Mount Holyoke College, has spent decades studying Mars. “If anybody should be enthusiastic about the returned samples, it’s me, and I am,” she told me. But now she works on a NASA mission to Venus, a planet that might rival Mars as a candidate for extraterrestrial life, and she says she wouldn’t prioritize MSR over her current research.<br />
<br />
NASA is well aware of the all-consuming nature of MSR. As the mission is redrawn, officials have said they are even willing to consider proposals that would bring home just 10 sample tubes, one-third of the amount initially planned.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2024/05/mars-sample-return-nasa/678441/" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...sa/678441/</a></blockquote>
<hr></div>
</div>
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[There was recently an article how rocks from Mars will most likely not arrive to Earth because there are so many other projects that could be accomplished, some of which seem very dramatical (like searching for life in solar system), to useful (looking for dangerous rocks and measuring magnetic field). In other words, scientists are fighting among themselves whose mission will get to space and widen the human knowledge.<br />
<br />
Add to that that people are expecting humans to walk on the Moon again very soon which is the least of scientific mission but it is without doubt the most expensive one. And if humans don't walk on the Moon very soon, people will again attack NASA that it's useless, and if they can't put a man on the Moon now then they definitely didn't 50+ years ago.<br />
<br />
Here are some highlights from the article <br />
<br />
<div>
    <div class="pre-spoiler">
    <input type="button" value="Show Content" style="width:80px;font-size:10px;margin:0px;padding:0px;" onclick="if (this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display != '') { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = '';this.value = 'Hide Content'; } else { this.parentNode.parentNode.getElementsByTagName('div')[1].style.display = 'none'; this.value = 'Show Content';}"><br />
    </div>
    <div class="spoiler" style="display: none;"><hr>
<blockquote class="mycode_quote"><cite>Quote:</cite>Perseverance will stay on Mars forever, but the majority of its carefully packaged samples are meant to return to Earth.<br />
NASA officials recently announced that the sample-return effort has become too expensive and fallen worryingly behind schedule. The latest estimated cost of as much as &#36;11 billion is nearly double what experts initially predicted, and the way things are going, the samples won’t arrive home until 2040, seven years later than expected.<br />
<br />
Scientists who study Mars are worried that the mission will be downsized. Scientists who don’t study Mars—and a few who do—are frustrated, because MSR consumes so much of NASA’s budget. Scientists can’t imagine NASA giving up on the mission entirely, but the debacle has even prompted some whispered jokes about China coming along and claiming the tubes on the surface before NASA can fly them home.<br />
<br />
Last summer, some congressional appropriators briefly threatened the entire MSR effort with cancellation. This February, facing uncertainty over the money that Congress would allocate for MSR in the next fiscal year, the JPL laid off more than 500 employees. (Congress has since allocated a fraction of what NASA spent on the mission last year.) Thanks to budget concerns, NASA has delayed the launch of a telescope that would monitor potentially hazardous asteroids near Earth, and put on hold a proposed mission to study Earth’s atmosphere and magnetic field.<br />
<br />
Some scientists fear that MSR will draw resources away from other potential projects to search for life in places that they now believe to be far more promising than Mars. The search for alien life in the solar system has long been guided by water, and in the 1990s, when NASA kicked off a golden age of Mars missions, the red planet’s ice regions seemed appealing. But in the years since, other celestial bodies have become more compelling. A moon of Saturn, Titan, is the only body in the solar system besides Earth that has bodies of liquid on its surface, even if that liquid is methane. Europa, a moon of Jupiter, and Enceladus, a moon of Saturn, are both likely icy worlds with subsurface oceans; on the latter, cracks in the ice release plumes of salty water, hinting at something like deep-sea hydrothermal activity on Earth. NASA is launching an orbiting mission to Europa later this year, and the latest survey of planetary scientists advised NASA to start working on another to Enceladus. “If I could go anywhere, I would go to Enceladus,” Brook Nunn, an astrobiologist at the University of Washington, told me.<br />
<br />
Even some Mars scientists believe that Mars is no longer the top candidate. Darby Dyar, a planetary geologist at Mount Holyoke College, has spent decades studying Mars. “If anybody should be enthusiastic about the returned samples, it’s me, and I am,” she told me. But now she works on a NASA mission to Venus, a planet that might rival Mars as a candidate for extraterrestrial life, and she says she wouldn’t prioritize MSR over her current research.<br />
<br />
NASA is well aware of the all-consuming nature of MSR. As the mission is redrawn, officials have said they are even willing to consider proposals that would bring home just 10 sample tubes, one-third of the amount initially planned.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2024/05/mars-sample-return-nasa/678441/" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...sa/678441/</a></blockquote>
<hr></div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[The World's Transition to Renewable Energies]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-65870.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:12:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-65870.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">Solar energy production in Europe is going to reach the equivalent of 200 large Nuclear power plants in 2030. While some countries like Germany are stepping out of nuclear power, the overall tendency in the world is also to increase nuclear energy. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">   On the other hand, European solar panel manufacturers are unable to sell their solar panels because of cheaper Chinese solar panels on the market. Yet, China is also overproducing solar panels and is unable to sell all of its solar panels.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-captured-sun-threw-shadow-100000128.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china...00128.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">This does not make any sense since the number of Coal Plants in China is about 3000. India has 300, The US has about 200. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/859266/number-of-coal-power-plants-by-country/" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.statista.com/statistics/8592...y-country/</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">Let’s forget about the environment. If the market is creating this surplus solar panels on its own, than what if we supported these industries by subsidizing them an encouraging the consumption of these solar panels all over the world (mostly in India and China).</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">The COP Climate summits are actually falling behind our current technological possibilities. </span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">Solar energy production in Europe is going to reach the equivalent of 200 large Nuclear power plants in 2030. While some countries like Germany are stepping out of nuclear power, the overall tendency in the world is also to increase nuclear energy. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">   On the other hand, European solar panel manufacturers are unable to sell their solar panels because of cheaper Chinese solar panels on the market. Yet, China is also overproducing solar panels and is unable to sell all of its solar panels.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-captured-sun-threw-shadow-100000128.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china...00128.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">This does not make any sense since the number of Coal Plants in China is about 3000. India has 300, The US has about 200. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/859266/number-of-coal-power-plants-by-country/" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.statista.com/statistics/8592...y-country/</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">Let’s forget about the environment. If the market is creating this surplus solar panels on its own, than what if we supported these industries by subsidizing them an encouraging the consumption of these solar panels all over the world (mostly in India and China).</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">The COP Climate summits are actually falling behind our current technological possibilities. </span>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Carbon Capture Technologies]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-65830.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 13:56:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-65830.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">    At the state in which thing are in the present moment, this is mainly understood as a very promising technology for the future at best and a technique of greenwashing that is being used by big oil companies at worst.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">    Island has some direct carbon-capture plants that are working on geothermal energy in which the carbon captured from the air is than sold to major industries. Norway is even buying carbon in liquid form and is injecting it back into deep wells into the soil. The problem is that we would need several hundreds of thousands of such carbon capture plants to create any significant change.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">   But the technology is still very useful in other areas. In cement production, for instance, this technology will allow to reduce carbon emissions by 50%.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">    And in Singapore they had another idea. They built a 2 million dollar plant that removes carbon from sea water. There is 150 times more carbon in sea water than in the air. Once you remove the carbon from sea water, that sea water is going to such even more carbon from the atmosphere:</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/singapore-build-world-largest-facility-073503374.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.yahoo.com/news/singapore-bui...03374.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">   So this might be one of these several solutions that need to be applied all at once if we are to remain here instead of moving to places like Mars <img src="https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" class="smilie smilie_81" /></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">    At the state in which thing are in the present moment, this is mainly understood as a very promising technology for the future at best and a technique of greenwashing that is being used by big oil companies at worst.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">    Island has some direct carbon-capture plants that are working on geothermal energy in which the carbon captured from the air is than sold to major industries. Norway is even buying carbon in liquid form and is injecting it back into deep wells into the soil. The problem is that we would need several hundreds of thousands of such carbon capture plants to create any significant change.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">   But the technology is still very useful in other areas. In cement production, for instance, this technology will allow to reduce carbon emissions by 50%.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">    And in Singapore they had another idea. They built a 2 million dollar plant that removes carbon from sea water. There is 150 times more carbon in sea water than in the air. Once you remove the carbon from sea water, that sea water is going to such even more carbon from the atmosphere:</span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"><a href="https://www.yahoo.com/news/singapore-build-world-largest-facility-073503374.html" target="_blank" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">https://www.yahoo.com/news/singapore-bui...03374.html</a></span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size"> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: medium;" class="mycode_size">   So this might be one of these several solutions that need to be applied all at once if we are to remain here instead of moving to places like Mars <img src="https://atheistforums.org/images/smilies/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" class="smilie smilie_81" /></span>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Bleep the bleepin' weather.]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-65425.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2023 21:20:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-65425.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Especially when it goes a W shaped.<br />
<br />
<img src="https://www.weather.gov/images/ind/palmsun/palmsunday1965.png" alt="[Image: palmsunday1965.png]" class="mycode_img" />]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Especially when it goes a W shaped.<br />
<br />
<img src="https://www.weather.gov/images/ind/palmsun/palmsunday1965.png" alt="[Image: palmsunday1965.png]" class="mycode_img" />]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Russian lunar lander added to the number of known craters on the moon.]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-65324.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Aug 2023 18:08:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-65324.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[thar would be the 4th lunar lander in a row to have left its mark on the surface of the moon, so to speak, after the Israeli, Japanese and Indian landers all touched down rather more energetically than their designers might have wished. <br />
<br />
For Russia this would also be the 4th space probe in a row to beyond low earth orbit that failed completely.    However, unlike other people, who tend to be focused, pursue a single objective, learn from their failure, keep what worked, and eventually succeed,  Each of Russia’s last 4 failure is an essentially unique design, following a unique mission profile, pursuing a different objective.     It is as if they live in mortal terror of accidentally learning from their mistakes.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[thar would be the 4th lunar lander in a row to have left its mark on the surface of the moon, so to speak, after the Israeli, Japanese and Indian landers all touched down rather more energetically than their designers might have wished. <br />
<br />
For Russia this would also be the 4th space probe in a row to beyond low earth orbit that failed completely.    However, unlike other people, who tend to be focused, pursue a single objective, learn from their failure, keep what worked, and eventually succeed,  Each of Russia’s last 4 failure is an essentially unique design, following a unique mission profile, pursuing a different objective.     It is as if they live in mortal terror of accidentally learning from their mistakes.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[What is science?]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-65306.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2023 04:43:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-65306.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Science tries to prove everything and nothing.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Science tries to prove everything and nothing.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[What's genius but teamwork]]></title>
			<link>https://atheistforums.org/thread-65296.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2023 02:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">https://atheistforums.org/thread-65296.html</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[Science is no miracle.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Science is no miracle.]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>