diy solar

diy solar

America's melting pot

Here is something to think over:

Life.
With all the technological advances and all of the supposed knowledge, humans can not revive even a single cell. Let alone something as simple as bacteria. Once its dead, its dead. As if its missing the spirit that drives it.
Think on it.
 
As if its missing the spirit that drives it.
aenyc, :oops: you have raised the bar IMO. I can't rap my head around that line yet :oops:

the leaves me wondering if I have a blood transfusion who's spirit do I have :unsure: and does it matter :unsure:

looking, searching
* cut/paste
In many religious and spiritual belief systems, it is commonly held that humans possess a soul or spirit that is separate from the physical body. This soul or spirit is often seen as the essence of a person, the seat of their consciousness, emotions, and identity. According to these beliefs, the body is the vessel that houses the soul during a person's lifetime.

A person’s in-dwelling spirit (soul) does not “connect” to the body in any physical sense, but they do have what might be called a locus of operation at the body’s core, located a few inches below the navel. From there, they emanate to every fiber of the body.

There is nothing particular about the human body that allows a spirit to have the influence they do. It is a capacity they have, as spirit, to affect the mortal life they have chosen to guide.
*

in my chest I have a defibrillator(looks like a third tit), if I die it's job is to restart me and as long as it does before the brain cells die(3 minutes)
I can hang more panels, if not long dirt nap. and because I've had a heart attack while I was awake and have experienced tunneling out
at no time did I catch a glimpse of a soul or spirit.

tunneling out showed me how much of our vision is a product of our brain.
 
Last edited:
And yet, humans are helpless to revive anything that was alive and is dead. Even the most simple organism
 
humans are helpless to revive anything that was alive and is dead.
looking, searching :unsure:



*cut/paste
Cloning

Back in 2021 scientist cloned a black footed ferrit, Elizabeth Ann. This was the first endangered animal in the United States to undergo cloning. She was cloned using frozen cells from a wild female named Willa, a black-footed female ferret who died in the 1980s. Willa had no living descents. “Her cells have been cryopreserved at the Frozen Zoo, a program of San Diego Zoo Global that has collected samples from some 1,100 rare and endangered species". Researchers hope to soon breed Elizabeth Ann eventually introduce her offspring into the wild and bring back the species for good.

Scientists from Yale University have reanimated the cells and organs of pigs that
had been dead for an hour using a treatment involving synthetic blood.


*

this line clicks in my head...
We have pretty much defined death as the irreversible end of life. ie the inability to bring the dead back to life
is an integral part of the definition of death.
 
Last edited:
looking, searching :unsure:



*cut/paste
Cloning

Back in 2021 scientist cloned a black footed ferrit, Elizabeth Ann. This was the first endangered animal in the United States to undergo cloning. She was cloned using frozen cells from a wild female named Willa, a black-footed female ferret who died in the 1980s. Willa had no living descents. “Her cells have been cryopreserved at the Frozen Zoo, a program of San Diego Zoo Global that has collected samples from some 1,100 rare and endangered species". Researchers hope to soon breed Elizabeth Ann eventually introduce her offspring into the wild and bring back the species for good.

Scientists from Yale University have reanimated the cells and organs of pigs that
had been dead for an hour using a treatment involving synthetic blood.


*

this line clicks in my head...
We have pretty much defined death as the irreversible end of life. ie the inability to bring the dead back to life
is an integral part of the definition of death.
Tommy .... Which chat AI are you using?
 
Which chat AI are you using?
Bob, I'm not using any AI, hell I can't even pull off the intelligence part.
I have never tried any AI yet, my son has talked about it.

it gets worse, I've been writing software codes(at least 5 programs per year for 40 years) and I'm still
typing with only 2 finger :oops: 🤪 :sick:
 
Last edited:
Bob, I'm not using any AI, hell I can't even pull off the intelligence part.
I have never tried any AI yet, my son has talked about it.

it gets worse, I've been writing software codes(at least 5 programs per year for 40 years) and I'm still
typing with 2 finger :oops: 🤪 :sick:
Well ..... at least you don't have to do punch cards .... It was a REAL pain getting those right.

The first programming I did involved hard wiring a panel that was swapped in and out of the computer ..... Graduated to paper tape after that.

Maybe you just have exceptional search skills.
 
at least you don't have to do punch cards
Bob, but, but my first program was using apple basic on a 2E(Ohm's law calculator) , hell I was using quick basic all through the 80's
putting one pixel after the other to make user buttons :oops: 🤪 but it did give us 8 screens to work with.
do love me some visual C#, but if the application interfaces with ms excel I would use visual basic still :unsure:

Graduated to paper tape after that
that was my first job for the company I work for still, replacing paper tape for RS232 and BTR boards on CNC machines.(small world)
 
Last edited:
Intelligent design is a form of creationism that lacks empirical support and offers no testable or tenable hypotheses, and is therefore not science.
 
Here is something to think over:

Life.
With all the technological advances and all of the supposed knowledge, humans can not revive even a single cell. Let alone something as simple as bacteria. Once its dead, its dead. As if its missing the spirit that drives it.
Think on it.

I purposely have avoided this exact thought process because it inevitably leads to religion being brought into the discussion, which inevitably leads to the discussion being trainwrecked by people who can't seem to grasp that science and "God" or intelligent design can indeed coexist.

Intelligent design is a form of creationism that lacks empirical support and offers no testable or tenable hypotheses, and is therefore not science.

Nice job quoting Wikipedia. Another example of people not being able to think for themselves.

The same is true of Darwinism, the "Big Bang", etc. regarding no testable or tenable hypotheses. And they are incorrect regarding "empirical support" - it's just not the folks they want to listen to. And that's OK. I don't listen to "Big Bangers" or evolutionists myself.

The problem with most people is they are unwilling to really research and learn, despite having more information at their fingertips than ever in the history of man. Most simply regurgitate what they were "taught" in school and now receive via social media and the "news". So called "scientists" or "experts" make ridiculous claims and stand unchallenged, empowering them to posit outright bullshit as "science".

Read how distances to other stars are "calculated" via parallax. Now take what you were taught in trigonometry and apply it to the method. Tell me how much accuracy there can really be when measuring vast distances from two points relatively close together in our solar system. After that exercise, take a look at the "redshift" measurement system. Note that one of the fundamental premises used is that all galaxies of the same type are the same physical size. Think about that for a moment. We can't accurately measure our own galaxy and now we are saying we can use an unproven data point as a foundation for all of the measurements made. Gee, that sounds scientific and provable, huh?

It's funny - when data proves that a long-held belief is wrong (called theories by people who don't know the true definition), they cling to it like ticks on a rat. Why? Egos? Afraid of losing funding for research that is 100% off-base? Afraid of seeing their life's work being dismissed as wrong?

Be careful listening to people who say things counter to what common sense tells you. For example - the polio vaccine. It is proven to prevent you from getting polio. Period. Because you don't have polio you can't spread polio. It doesn't allow you to get a less intense form of polio. In short - it fits the exact definition of a vaccine - if you happen to have an older dictionary that is.

Now apply that set of rules to the COVID-19 concoction that was injected into billions of people. Somehow, "scientists" called it a vaccine even though it didn't prevent people from contracting it, it didn't stop the spread, etc. It literally did not meet ANY part of the definition for a vaccine, yet it is still talked about and defended today as if it was some great miracle. It was so shitty that Merriam-Webster updated their definition of a vaccine to try and include it. Here's the definition of vaccine from the 2020 version of the dictionary:

"a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease."

Here's the definition from the 2024 version of the same dictionary:
"a preparation that is administered – as by injection – to stimulate the body's immune response against a specific infectious agent or disease."

Voltaire said "If I can make you believe an absurdity, I can make you commit an atrocity." They've done well to make most people believe absurdities. We can only hope the atrocities are not closely following.
 
Bob, I'm not using any AI, hell I can't even pull off the intelligence part.
I have never tried any AI yet, my son has talked about it.

it gets worse, I've been writing software codes(at least 5 programs per year for 40 years) and I'm still
typing with only 2 finger :oops: 🤪 :sick:

I am a two finger typer too !! Although, truth be told, I do throw thumbs into the mix to hit the spacebar on occasion. :) Too funny.
 
TommySr - cloning is not resurrection. Far from it. You are at best making a bad copy of something. You are most definitely NOT returning it to life.
And even at that every single attempt has been an utter and complete failure.
 
cloning is not resurrection. Far from it.
aenyc, but, but the current topic is Intelligent design and the whole first chapter was on
DNA as an information storage, and means of passing that information(sucking on a tit) on
to new generations, could cloning be used to recover that lost information of animals no
longer here :unsure: if so then IMO cloning has something to teach us.

but to your point.
*repost
 
Last edited:
Intelligent design is a form of creationism that lacks empirical support and offers no testable or tenable hypotheses, and is therefore not science.
Bongbong, but what if Intelligent design was able to remove all the dogma associated with creationism, would
that not open up more avenues of discussions :unsure: would that not allow for hypotheses to be up dated :unsure:
I purposely have avoided this exact thought process because it inevitably leads to religion being brought into the discussion,
as B-ManFX4 has pointed out.

B-ManFX4 said: The same is true of Darwinism, the "Big Bang", etc. regarding no testable or tenable hypotheses.
B-ManFX4, I'll give you the "Big Bang" as not testable and using background echoes can have different interpretations
but Darwinism? there are natural processes for recording past life while temperamental and intermittent the information
can be documented tested and repeated, IMO textbook science theory , because as new information is added the time
line can be amended. (textbook science theory)

Bongbong, I would enjoy reading your hypotheses on how life gets started in the universe.:love:
 
Last edited:
aenyc, but, but the current topic is Intelligent design and the whole first chapter was on
DNA as an information storage, and means of passing that information(sucking on a tit) on
to new generations, could cloning be used to recover that lost information of animals no
longer here :unsure: if so then IMO cloning has something to teach us.

but to your point.
*repost

This is not resurrecting.

Here is a hint for you:

Kill a single cell organism, such as this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramecium_caudatum)
Resurrect it.

Good luck.
 
D71, sweet read

*cut/paste
With the entire genome of the 1918 virus now sequenced, the necessary information was in place to reconstruct a live version of the 1918 virus. However, one more intermediate step was needed to start the reverse genetics process, which was to create plasmids for each of the 1918 virus’ eight gene segments.

For reference, there are four biosafety levels that correspond to the degree of risk posed by research, with 1 posing the least risk and 4 posing the greatest risk. Each biosecurity level also corresponds with specific laboratory practices and techniques, personnel training requirements, laboratory equipment, and laboratory facilities that are appropriate for the operations being performed. The stringency of these considerations – again ranging from 1 as the lowest to 4 as the highest — is designed to protect the personnel performing the work, the environment and the community.

In that way, the 1918 virus was special – a uniquely deadly product of nature, evolution and the intermingling of people and animals. It would serve as a portent of nature’s ability to produce future pandemics of varying public health concern and origin.
*
 
Last edited:
D71, sweet read

*cut/paste
With the entire genome of the 1918 virus now sequenced, the necessary information was in place to reconstruct a live version of the 1918 virus. However, one more intermediate step was needed to start the reverse genetics process, which was to create plasmids for each of the 1918 virus’ eight gene segments.
*
Yes the interesting part pneumonia was the main killer attributed to deaths back then - 1918 flu. Pneumonia was also a main killer with 2019 covid. The military was involved with that 1918 reconstruction. Do you think they actually destroyed the most deadly reproduction in the world? 👀😳 Think maybe used it to splice mutate for a weapon? We are the good guys no?

The scientist that dug it up wasn’t concerned. 1 of The big reason we have a lot of rules - laws about disturbing the dead is bringing back old sickness from exposures if go digging around.

Bob got ridiculed for saying we might be introducing alien life forms by visiting other planets and such That was is major concern at nasa. Imagine also we talked - scientist about terra forming mars and such with nukes. Ppl act like we are going to move there tomorrow. Mars like the moon are by best evaluations unlivable. Extreme hostile. Dark side of the moon look at reported conditions. Could we survive there? Hahaha ppl are so full of themselves that when they burp can smell shit.

Moving our life form to mars? Really? Better look at reported conditions there on mars. Elon musk was one of ppl talking about nuking planets to terra form. Our planet by some guess is a star that died out. It has changed time and time again for speculations of how the earth got life. Some say we came from a space rock with goo on it. Maybe we came out of an alien space craft like foreign cock roaches arriving from over seas here.
 
This is for those who make the CHOICE to reject Him.
RussNM, does your god make allowances for them born with no ears, or them that are born
on some small island? you used the words reject him, does that imply before they can risk
"thrown into the lake of fire" they must have first received information on his existence ?

while I went to sunday school as a child, guess I missed some things.
 
Last edited:
D71, what I find most interesting in the exchange you posted above is Bob's response(which seems to be the norm).

you posted a good example of how modern man can/may change the earth's conditions
to the detriment of us and all life that has a footing here on earth.

I'm not sure how to explain it :unsure:

Capture687.PNG
 
because I'm new to solar(only 7 months) I still find myself in awe/wonder.

this is the sun my 4000W of panels(used/second hand) are seeing

camera pointed at the sun.
IMG_4671.JPG

but even with that limited sun exposure I can see over 40A of charging :love:

IMG_4672.JPG
 
Last edited:

diy solar

diy solar
Back
Top