Harrot

You perform a data regression, but the people from whom the data comes explicitly say you can't do it. https://data.unccd.int/countries-affected-by-drought?epoch=e5

What's more, the proposal to eliminate “less human” undesirables, in the sense of “less good”, suffers from the bias of thinking that the “standard human” is good, and that only some of them contradict this behavior. In fact, when you look at the whole history of mankind, it's exactly the opposite: a violent, self-centered, xenophobic being that ravages everything it can. Only Christians (and some other minority) argues for a different kind of behavior that defines what a good man is. So, if the proposal is to use the Christian definition of the good man, in order to legitimize the murder of the “bad man”, this contradicts the Christian rules, which say exactly the opposite: Love your enemy, let the other kill you, and so on: Because real life is elsewhere, not on earth. But if the proposal is to use the evolutionary definition, i.e. the “good man” definition of material life, which says that “the best” remains in the end, we have nothing new. Animals fight for life and compete, leading in some cases to intraspecific killing. Here the proposal is to extend this behavior at a much larger scale... loosing probably a lot of genetic diversity because behaviour is probably not only linked to education. However, I see a difference with the natural process: here you are proposing a selection that could be called “intelligent design” and the “god” who would do the designing would be ... you. Sounds frightening for the survival of humanity. Joking aside: look at what intelligent human design has come up with :

The problem with the reasoning : Being a good human consist of being so or so, therefore i need to kill the others, is that doing so i pretend that i can or other peoples can kill me because i am so or so or he is so or so. Of course it can not have a beneficial effect on society to kill poeples this way because poeple know each other, love each other and have famillly relationship that are independant of the reason we would need to kill each other. I you kill my father because he think the wrong way, i am not happy and say : Oh yes, now we have a fine society !

A very good local treatment was experimented around 2021, which could be widely used in the future for a large kind of viruses if as efficient as it looks like, is to use “false” cells, such as vesicles. In this way, the virus attaches itself to the vesicle, opens its envelope and sends its genetic material into the vesicle, thus becoming harmless, reducing the virus load. Side effects are actually studied, because nothing is simple in biology, and it's obviously not possible to fill the body with vesicles to save the patient. It's easy to kill the virus, but harder not to kill the patient at the same time. https://presse.curie.fr/covid-19-early-results-of-a-large-scale-study-on-the-immune-response-against-sars-cov-2-conducted-with-the-help-of-institut-curie-staff/?lang=en

Yes it is wrong to use words instead of others or we end up loosing some concepts. It is not because lot of people is doing a mistakes that it become right to do so. Therefore i try here to explain that faith is not belief. The two words are not here for aesthetic purpose, they really mean something else. You see, here per example (i show it just here for some reference purpose, not for proselitism) it is said that faith is... faith and that this is not a question of quantity. Saying that you could have "as little faith as a mustard seed", so little as nothing, is to be understand as "you can have as small faith as it could be", faith is faith, so only THE FACT FAITH is required, with no consideration of any quantity, to do the biggest thing that could be done (like here moving a mountain). It is straightforward to understand, isn't it ?

I dont think faith is something that can be more or less. There is no value to faith between some kind of limits; this would be "belief", not "faith". Because, in my opinion, faith is a fact, not a skill. There IS faith when "Someone want something related to God's will <=> it occur." It occur or it does not occur, there is no quantity involved. The fact is or it is not. Or course if someone want too much or too less of something, it can happens that it does not occur, but it is not because it can't, due to the "weakness" of the faith, (like some Jedi trying to bend reality to his will 😄) , but it is because it is not related to God's will. God want it more or less and the faith need to correspond to his will, thats all. So "faith" is some kind of "being an actor in the name of God".

This is also why you can call it "a movement", no ?🙃 In fact, in a general sense, christians are peoples who try to follow the teaching of Jesus Christ, so the name "christians". The first adepts of Jesus dident call themselves "christians" ( they were jews at first place that believed that Jesus was THE saver who was already anounced by the jews. And yes, only the "now called christians" believe that Jesus was the one that was announced. The other jews are actually stil waiting to their saver to appear and continue the old tradition (so they are still jews). So yes, and it is not a joke, the things peoples have to do to be christians can change over time, because christians need to attein some goals, like poverty, non condemning, etc : They just have to follow what Jesus said using parables on the mountain, and how to do so can change over time... because world and mind change over time too, of course. Now, why is it confusing and Jesus speaking lead to various interpretation over time ? Jesus has answered this to his disciples : https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/topical-studies/why-did-jesus-teach-using-parables.html It is confused by purpose.... for those who can't understand. This is based on some sort of special logic, more powerful than the one we use on Earth, working in two directions, the cause and the effect are not ordered in time. So it is said that God is not one-eyed.

Biology research. Because the only AGI model that actually work worldwide and within a lot of species is made of cells. In fact, and i only give you my opinion here, the intelligence provided by biological network is probably primary only a side effect of some other more profund behavior. Like the feather was at the first place used to do temperature regulation leading to flight. Here the brain was at the first place used to connect actor to sensor without "overheating", leading to complex prediction ability. The prediction ability that makes "the brain" (of all kind) effectiv within "mental tasks", is initialy the mean the cells have found, at organization level, to reduce the flow of current from sensor to actor. Unless the simple computional model of the neural network, the biological network is working fully parallel. The cells have to be seen as agents working together, sending current to ...counteract the sensor current. Per example, you get a current coming from sensor every 1 second. The brain cells organize themselves to create a counter current every 1 second, so as to stop the current entering the brain by sensors (or other group of cells)... or it would heat (in fact it would accumulate charges too much and this would kill the cells or at least hinder the sending of the sensor) Therefore, when the sensor stop to send the current, the brain send the same current, but this time it is not counteracted, so it act as "a surprise" => A "new Knowledge" is the ability to identify à disrupture in standard condition., and a "knowledge" is the structure itself that permit to cancel the disrupture in standard condition. Knowledge is structual. The brain notice a change in the "pattern", the normal behavior of the sensor (or other group of cells) and this is how "it knows" that somenthing NEW occur. Then the cells LEARN again (organize themselves to send current) to counteract the new pattern of current, and so on, leading to electroneutrality. This is why you have WAVES of current in the brain (alpha, beta,gamma etc) and nothing of that kind in the computational model of neural network. The thermoregulation or more generaly speaking the homeostais is the key in both cases because it gives an évolutionary advantage to have steady temperature and steady current flow. So the mental ability is a side effect of the homeostasis using the brain cell...like the flight is a side effect of the homeostasis using the feather. [QUOTE ]Thermoregulation is a homeostatic process that maintains a steady internal body temperature despite changes in external conditions. Maintaining a body temperature within a tight range (between 36.5 to 37.5°C) allows for the enzymes and immune responses of the body to maintain proper functionality.[10]30 juil. 2023 [/QUOTE] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507838/ The brain try to maintain homeostasis DESPITE of changes in EXTERNAL conditions (... and internally of course too because the brain is big) And this is what we call intelligence at a cellular level => the ability to maintain the structure DESPITE of "external agression." Some kind of proof of this is that, if the brain can not recognize a pattern from his external sensors (internally it is already organised, so the information coming from it has necesserally a pattern unless illness), ... because there is no pattern at all (behavior tests have been done with cats per example)...then it faces what we call stress, This kind of stress is deadly, leading to brain damage at cellular level, and also to every other organs connected to the brain. High level being, like humans, have of course developped some behavior to reduce somewhat the effect of such random "blank noise" but the effect has to be taken seriously. Per example one possibility to evacuate the current that has not be internally counteracted, is to send it to the actors without delay, therfore the laughting, using musculatur near the brain is some good way to do it. Nervous laugthing when stressed or even when "surprised" by something new and unattended (what we call a joke), is common in human behavior. Evacuating the current by this ways in the meantime the brain organize itself is very efficient.

Every unresolved question when explored by unsuccesfull researchers seem to be complex. You know you have the solution when everything become clear. Here, you have to understand where the word "Intelligence" come from. When a human walk on some others feet, most of them say something that can be interpreted like : "I feel pain". This happens for anyone in every civilisation. So, "ouch" , "aie", "aoua" or any word you like for it, refer to the pain you endure in some situation. But what is pain ??? Yeah... you begin to understand why i talk about that... "Pain is of course complex and contains unresolved issues and activ research." The really funny thing is : We have a word handy, but nobody is really able to define it , so why did we even invent it ??? What the heck ?!! Is it a joke ? (that was my first tought when i ran into this contradiction.) But if you try to understand further, you discover that there are many other words (the problemn is not only for intelligence), related to distinct concepts that lead to never ending discussions And this happens since man can discuss about that (philosopher like to discuss a lot). So, trying to find out what those concepts have in common reveal the rason why .. YOU CAN NOT GIVE A MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION OF INTELLIGENCE. Because intelligence, belong to the category of words that reflect the SENSATION, like pain, mightiness, liberty, beauty, etc. And when you discuss these notions, nobody can ever demonstrate you that he has the right definition. There is no formal definition for a SENSATION. INTELLIGENCE refer to some kind of FEELING that human people have (ordinary) in common, but at least they have a feeling that is specific to it, and that distinguish it from the feeling they have when they feel beauty, per example. So, when you are facing something, you can FEEL that it is INTELLIGENT without making any calculation or reasoning. Some other peoples can feel it too, ... or not, dépending on their own feeling, that it is intelligent or not. Now, why do you have the feeling that something is "intelligent" ? This is the real question that need to be answered, and to be clear, this is relativ to oneself. So, no one is intelligent by himself, he is considered intelligent using arbitrary convention that other peoples have created in common... because they have similar feeling about that. Probably the things only some of us can do and most can not, give use the feeling that the one that can do it is intelligent. This work also when we say that someone is strong i supppose.

This reasoning is obviously wrong because this would mean that there can not be any true christians at all... How could there be christians before the bible was writen if you need to understand the bible to be a christian ?!!?