canuckistani
Members-
Posts
2,769 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by canuckistani
-
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
Ignorance is not in the eye of the beholder, it is objective lack of empirical facts in a scenario. There is no 'eye of the beholder' to whether you are ignorant of fact X or not. Its an objective determination. There is no 'eye of the beholder' if you are ignorant about black holes, gamma radiation, egyptian art, plant consciousness etc. You are either ignorant or you are not. They may be individuals but their dogma is linear, making their ignorance, in said topic, linear. Just like with any religion or ideology - composed of individuals who spew mostly the same creed. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
Well a chick trying to flee a grinder is no different than a plant sending distress signals when hearing the buzz-saw. Unlike you, i use reason and scientific facts to guide my morality, not my senses alone,which because i am an animal, will always be biassed in favor of animals. Vegan guilt trip and empathy is not true empathy, it is just bias of one animal ( humans) towards other animals. True empathy comes from empathizing with things you do not share a bias with. Loving your kid is not empathy, its bias. Same way, going 'oo' to seeing a cow being hacked up, isnt empathy if you don't feel the same about plants, its just animal bias. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
They have defined, as in they have been at the forefront of compassion & empathy than any other ideology, for far longer. I guess you lack the quality of respecting matured ideals but then again, that is yet another classic fail of western world ( lack of respect towards what has been there prior to them - ideas, people, etc). Says logic and math. A position can be tested for logic and if it fails, then its inferior to the position that does not. Every damn thing possible. Except a few super-bitter things and durian fruit. But then agian, i am not ignorant enough like vegans to associate morality to food that is in violation of our own biology. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
You can repeat it a million times and it will not make it so a million times. 1. What 'qualities' of animals require moral consideration over plants ? Your answer has been ' phenomenal experience'. I have proven that phenomenal experience cannot be a cause, because greater/lesser phenomenal experience does not accord greater/lesser rights to human beings. If there is zero difference in moral rights based on factor X, then factor X does not matter for said rights. Again, this is mathematically demonstrable. 2. There is greater/lesser. Killing a cow is not the same moral consideration as killing a human being. Even to vegans. 1. Prove that they are different. You saying they are different does not make it so. Plants demonstrate capability of mental life in the form of PTSD response similar to many animals. 2. It is not an important distinction, because it is not an important distinction for people. if it is not an important distinction for people, then it cannot be an important distinction for other life-forms. if it is, then the argument is specis-istic discrimination, not morally consistent. Prove it. Plants having PTSD reponse shows that they have mental state of not wanting to be in pain, as PTSD can only be valid with memory based response. Again, basic signal processing theory awaits you. You are just regurgitating vegan dogma, that is objectively agaist the evidence. False. They do. A mustard plant is capable of the same PTSD response as a cow, once vertibral bias of observation is removed. It is not required, it is not even necessary, as proven by the fact that there is no greater/lesser consideration for people with greater/lesser phenomenal capacity. Proven false by PTSD response. PTSD requires memory processing. Again, basic signal processing theory 101. you know nothing of it and stand in violation of the evidence we have. NOPE. False. And how do you know this ? What do you know of signal processing ? No, eventually you will figure it out that you are talking nonsense, way out of your depth and you repeating your religious held beliefs, judging articles before reading them or talking about what signal processing theory says/does not say despite not knowing a lick of it, is being exposed as religious dogma peddling, not intelligent discourse. Talking to you is identical to talking to a creationist new earther, who does not know physics but want to run their mouth about it, just like you are running your mouth about signal theory while knowing NOTHING of it. There is no error in my reasoning, which i can mathematically demonstrate. You are afraid of your reasoning being showed as flawed mathematically, which is why you skirt the offer to argue this axiomatically. Recognizing logical conditions is the strong suite of a mathematics inclined engineer, programmer. This is why when the equation to moral culpability yeilds no different result based on the application of 'phenomneal experience' towards humans, then it becomes clear, that phenomenal experience is irrelevant to the equation, else it produces a difference in the outcome. Again, it is mathematically demonstrable, would you like a demonstration ? Sure, replace the word 'intelligence' with consciousness and the argument stands. I mispoke. I posted a paper on plant consciousness. You vegans have a vested interest in wanting to devalue plant consciousness over animal ones hence you do it in the dogmatic ways as underlined above. Nice cop-out to the fact that you are guilty of eugenics and judging what lives are worth living and what are not, like a Eugenicist. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
But if i can prove that XYZ is broken in culture ABC due to logical inconsistency/ignorance of facts, then yes, i CAN say that its wrong. Just like how apartheid can and should be held as a symptom of broken culture of South Africa prior to 1991. Okay then your culture's superiority to Nazi Germany is also 'in the eye of the beholder'. Subjective. Yes, you are expertly skirting the question why it is, when i question Canadian culture over XYZ ( say education standards or veganism), i should be wary of biting the hand that feeds me, but when you whine about Canadian culture over ABC ( housing prices in Van), you are not guilty of the same. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
So tell me why criticizing something about Canada for me is 'biting the hand that feeds me' but it isn't for you ? If anything, you are more dependent on the Canadian hand than I am - i am far more likely to pack up shop and leave if things turn unbearable here - you are far more likely to stay and suffer. So are you also biting the hand that is feeding you when you complain something about Canada ? -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
1. if lettuce has a limited lifespan, so does meat. They all rot if not consumed before time X. 2. there are many plants that can yeild food without being killed, same with animals - being milked. 3. As i said, these are not MY morals. These are morals that exist in the world, in this case, amongst a group of people that have defined compassion, empathy and have been at the forefront of it for 2600 years. Their doctrine is pretty simple - ALL life is sacred, saying life-form X deserves to die for what they biologically are, while life-form Y does not and its cruel to kill Y but not X, is logically inconsistent. In recent times, the data is being clearer and clearer that plants are capable of sentience and are intelligent, feeling creatures. That is why they can experience PTSD, which is an emotion based on memory and reaction to memory. Therefore, by their doctrine, killing ANY being for eating it, is abhorrable. Mathematically, logically and ethically, they are far superior to vegan ideology, which is self-serving sanctimonious nonsense they use to feel superior to rest of the omnivore populace. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
i have said this to you before, i will say this to you again: I have as much right to criticize western stuff as you do. If you criticizing xyz culture is not 'biting the hand that feeds you', then its equally valid for me. Unless you think that immigrants should STFU and not criticize their host countries. If you do, say so. They are following an idiotic ideology which can be mathematically proven as logically flawed. Whether they are idiots or just dogmatic & brainwashed as most people are when it comes to ideology, i cannot tell - that requires getting to know the subjects. compassion and empathy of vegans are just symptomatic in most cases, which is why they show empathy and compassion based on heirarchy and not based on information. They care more about a cow's fluttering eyes than that of a distress response of a jellyfish. Because their compassion & empathy is evoked on the basis of a bias, not objective reason or facts. Sure. The individual who i am addressing is a vegan and vegans are officially a moral position based on eugenics-style heirarchy of worthyness of life. Go read the vegan doctrine - if you eat a plant based diet due to health reasons, vegans will object to you calling yourself a vegan. Vegan organizations make it clear that to be called a vegan, you must not only eat like a vegan, you must also agree to their dogma that some life forms ( plants) are worthy of murder while some are not ( animals). I can prove this, by citing the various vegan orgs. Telling how somehting is broken in culture A isn't bigotry, its simply having a more global allegience than a local one. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
Your nonsense vegan dogma is at full exposure. To recap: Me: plants have sentience You: no Me: here is evidence You: (does not read evidence) Evidence is flawed me: How so? You: coz i say so, the evidence is nebulous Me: how so? state how so, do you undertsand section x,y,z? You: ignore question, coz i say so. Phenomenal experience matters, plants cannot have phenomenal experience Me: proves how phenomenal experience is irrelevant You: Phenomenal experience still matters, plants are not sentient Me: (qualified in signal processing) Digital logic & signal processing confirms plants are sentient You: ( who is not qualified in it) lies This is vegan religious dogma 101. You want to peddle the view that plants deserve less moral consideration because plants do not have phenomenal experiences and phenomneal experiences are the basis to which you deem plants inferior to animals. I just PROVED to you that phenomenal experience cannot be deemed a criterion for inferior/superior morality, if so, then we enter Eugenics territory, where people with greater/lesser phenomenal experience will be deemed greater/lesser than other people. So you obfuscate with ' i didn't say it matters', yet it is the ONLY reason you are peddling for why plants deserve lesser morality than animals. As i said, i laugh at western vegan dogma and their illogical nonsense. The Jains are far superior to you morally, because they DO care about not hurting living things, but unlike western ignorant & logic fail vegans, they are not idiots who wish to think taking one life is okay, while taking another isn't. As such,they avoid taking ALL life and do not eat foods that involve killing beings - animals or plants (such as in the case of root vegetables). Western vegans are nothing more than sanctimonious illogical idiots, as proven in this thread. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
They are not relevant because you admitted that a human with lesser phenomenal experience does not require less moral consideration. If greater or lesser capacity to phenomenal experience does not make our moral consideration to humans greater/lesser, then ability to have greater or lesser phenomenal experience is irrelevant. Would you like a mathematical demonstration of said logic ?? Yes, it does. Its straightforward logic: if ability to have phenomenal experience gives a greater moral consideration, then the people who have the capacity for greater phenomenal experience are morally superior to ones who are not so capable. That is your belief. Pain registers are the same response in all living creatures. That is false, since we've been able to correlate PTSD false alarms - that is a cognitive/mental state. There is no such thing. Your eugenics judgement is abhorrent. A moss, a fungii are equally entitled to live a life as you, me, a quadruplegic or whatever. The objective empirical evidence that people choose life despite unspeakable hardship and disability, proves the point that there is no such thing that there is a life of so low quality that it is not worth living. YOU or I may have a personal benchmark to what quality of life is worth living or not for *us*. It does not entail an objective observation for another living organism/being. There is no strawman. The logic is straightforward: if phenomenal experience deserves moral consideration, then greater phenomenal experience deserves greater moral consideration, lesser phenomenal experience deserves lesser moral consideration. This is a nonsense answer. Prove that the subjective mental state of a deaf, dumb, mute, leper baby with no tongue is greater than that of a cow, pig, mustard plant or a fungii. Don't talk nonsense. Are you a person who holds a degree in electrical/electronic or computer engineering ? If not, then STFU and don't presume to tell one who does. I repeat: in signal theory, based on the nature of outputs produced, we can deduce whether the source is algorithmic, emotional or white noise. This means, there is an objective signal output benchmark to emotional presence. PLANTS HAVE SATISIFIED THAT CRITERIA. Stop lying and double-talking. I can quote you many a time where you said phenomenal experience deserves moral consideration. It does not play a big part at all. Demonstrated as such, in the opening statement to this post. if it played a big part, then individuals with lesser phenomenal experience capacity would deserve lesser moral consideration. The fact that they do not, means that it plays NO PART WHATSOEVER. No, those are conclusions to YOUR idea that phenomenal experience deserves moral consideration. There are plenty of disabled people who are objectively capable of lesser phenomenal experience than the non-disabled. A blind man cannot see ( ie, no visual phenomneal experience), a deaf cannot hear ( ie no auditory phenomenal experience). A Leper cannot feel any skin related sensation ( touch, pain, burning, etc) . Ie, they are objectively capable of lesser phenomenal experience than the non-disabled. They do not require lesser moral consideration ( according to you, according to me, according to our laws, etc). Therefore, capacity for phenomenal experience does not entail any moral consideration. This is mathematically consistent. Saying 'there are other considerations' is obfuscation and trying to be wishy washy to the point that if people with lesser capacity for phenomenal experiences do not deserve lesser moral consideration, then phenomenal experiences does not deserve moral consideration. Yes, you have. You have created a heirarchy where plant intelligence is lesser than animal intelligence and plants deserve less than animals in order to support your BS vegan ideology. By your logic there is. If plant pain is less important than animal pain because plants are incapable of phenomenal experience ( according to you, when in reality they show evidence of phenomenal experience such as PTSD), then a blind person in pain is less important than a person with perfect vision, in pain, because the former has lesser phenomenal experience than the latter. I do get it. you are an eugenicist and you think that you have the right to judge the worthiness of other's lives. What YOU don't get, is your opinion on what life is worth living and what is not, is not objective, it cannot be objective and it is fundamentally a subjective decision of the life-form in concern. You may think that a life with X amount of hardship/pain is for sure enough for you to end it (if it were yours) and I may think else. You may think that getting raped every single day while tied to your bed-post and force-fed oatmeal, getting beaten every day equates to 'life not worth living', i will say precisely the opposite - if its me, well, my life sucks, but its still better than no life. -
The Gripen has an Achilles heel : it is quite literally the most patchwork, frankeinstien fighter in the world, in terms of # of vendors for parts, spread across too many nations. Their engines are American, Its avionics suite is British + Israeli +Swedish. Its airframe gets manufactured in France, Germany and Sweden. Its actuators are American, its sensors are also American.Its weapons load is a mix of French and American. As the saying goes , 'too many moving parts' there. Its failed in a few bids precisely due to this problem : buying the Gripen and dealing with its lifecycle upgrades + repairs etc. involves dealing with too many nations. Going with US, French or Russian would ideally be much, much easier. Ideally, Canada should buy Japan's F-15 fleet. They want to offload it, as they want to transition into the F-35 scene. For them, it makes operational sense: they get to prioritize stealth and much greater signal noise/power issues due to a much more radar & ECM saturation zone of their operational theatre (ie, East China Sea). We don't need that. What we need, are air superiority fighters to protect the vast Canadian air space and be able to project power into the arctic ocean as it thaws and becomes a shipping hot spot. F-15s have a ferry range of 5000kms and are basically an older air-frame Su-30. The Russians will be using Su-35s and Su-51s in the region for the concievable future, where Su-35s are basically superior Su-30s and Su-51s are stealthier versions of those, though apparently 'not as stealthy' as F-35, let alone F-22. Japan will be looking to offload this fleet at a bargain and they got enough for our needs. They got about 155 of them, thats the equivalent of 8-10 squadrons. Probably can be had at a bargain price of 40 million each or near abouts 0.75 billion. In terms of cost to benefits ratio for Canada, these second hand F-15s will be extremely hard to beat. But Trudeau will not go this direction likely, as there is always money to be made by offering mega-bucks in defense deals, the world over.
-
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
Obfuscation. You keep dancing around the idea that phenomenal experiences are relevant, then when i bring up the fact that there are amongst us those who have inferior phenomenal experience, therefore your POV is eugenics against them, you obfuscate with ' there are other considerations'. If there are other considerations, then this consideration is not vital/integral to the discussion. Ergo, summarily dismissed. In anycase, you are quoting a section regarding pain senasation. Its a biologically demonstrable fact that all living organisms react to pain. Ergo, all of them are capable of feeling pain. Sure. But it does not make their personal choice any less valid than the ones who want to live at all cost and will continue to live even if severely compromised. Your position is insulting and de-meaning to those who want to live and yet do not satisfy your eugenics criteria. Yet another obfuscation. You asked me a question, i answered the question. My answer, which is also shared by millions of people, is that any life is worth living and i am not going to want to die, no-matter what I am subjected to. So what makes a mute, deaf, dumb baby a 'person' but not a plant, in 'ethics' ? Doesn't change the fact that the your views here is subjective and irrelevant to objectivism. Not different at all from plants, which my article decisively proves re: plant cognition. False. My former degree is in electrical engineering and signal theory can indicate intelligent as well as adaptive emotional behavior. As i said and you ignored ( because you are ignorant on the topic), in signal processing, we can determine if the source is emotional, AI, living or non-living by the nature of responses put out. This decisively puts an objective benchmark criteria for plants being sentient and they've met said criteria. Yet more obfuscation.Refer to the first paragraph, that proves your phenomenal experience is not a required criterion for sentience or morality. if its a REQUIRED criteria and not an ancillary criteria, then people with disabilities are morally less. This conclusion is mathematically demonstrable in logic. Irrelevant. Thats a personal choice. There are plenty of people with identical terminal illnesses who choose life over death. Ergo, there is no objective benchmark to whether a life is worth living or not. Its up to the individual to decide. Sure. And to many its worth living. Making the whole 'is it worth living this life' a useless musing. It doesn't change the fact that if phenoemnal experience is required for sentience ( ie,one of the decisive criteria, not an ancillary criteria), then you stand guilty of eugenics. It is irrelevant to muse about it, because the answer is an individual opinion, in each and every case, up to the individual. Yet another unscientific musing nonsense from you. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
Experiencing pain in phenomenal sense is irrelevant. A person with leprosy also does not experience pain in a phenomenal sense. Plants, bacteria etc. all satisfy the definition of experincing pain. No, they cannot be. There is no objective basis to quantify desire to live. I can easily say that as long as i live, i have hope that my situation will get better one day and that is sufficient. My answer will be what it'd be for millions of people who've undergone similar experiences in war - i will want to live, no matter what. nope. I already demonstrated that if phenomenal experiences deserve moral consideration, then the baby who can feel nothing, not see, hear or taste, is inferior to the baby who can. You ran away from that yet again. My comprehension skills say that what you are saying is obfuscation. Name said considerations. That is a subjective opinion, not empiric reality. There are plenty of ethical schools that deem phenomenal experience as unnecessary to moral consideration. What is the basis of said respect ? Why does a blind, deaf, tongueless baby with leprosy get respect and not a plant ? If you'd read it, you'd see it satisfies scientific basis of sentience in plants. As i said, signal theory also concurs. Valid for humans and beings with CNS. Not valid for discussion over consciousness in its entirity. Yet another subjective opinion. I am beginning to suspect you have zero education in science. Nothing gibberish. You just want to dodge because i exposed your ideology as eugenics. There is no objective basis on concluding what life is worth living and what life is not. People who did that, were called the Nazis and the program that did it, is called eugenics. Whether a life is worth living or not, is an individualistic determination, based on their subjective reality. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
There is nothing obvious about it. It doesn't matter. And if it does, i toss your vertibral bias of pain out of the window and can demonstrate that every living thing, including bacteria, are capable of registering pain. Not dodging, deferring. Whether a life is worth living or not, is a subjective definition, not objective. And burden of academic honesty is on you. As i said, i am not going to present level 5 proof before you are capable of digesting even level 1 article. Something you trashed without even reading it first, evidence of your dogma. There is nothing rational about phenomenal experience. Already demonstrated and debunked. If phenomenal experience is object of moral consideration, then the baby who feels no pain due to leprosy, is deaf, blind and mute is morally less valid than a normal baby. Ie, eugenics. This is what your stance amounts to. There is nothing crazy about trashing a subjective notion, that has been demonstrated as false already. If phenomenal experiences matter, then those with superior capacity of phenomenal experiences are worth more. Same argument was made by Hitler in his eugenics program. The scientific study on phenomenal experiences is irrelevant to the scientific position on consciousness. Yes, it is worth living. A life that is not pampered and is devoid of suffering is the only one worth living ? well since all living beings suffer in their existence, the objective fact is, any life is worth living and the worth of a life is decieded only by the subject experiencing the life. Not you. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
Its not morally relevant. If it is,then the baby with no eyes, ears and born with leprosy is morally less relevant than a fully functional one. Ie, eugenics. What you term 'broad consciousness', is the definition of consciousness sans vertibral bias. Whether its worth living or not, is not for you to decide. First digest the far simpler paper i quoted. You are failing to walk and you want to read things that are far more complicated. First lets quiz you on your understanding of the article quoted. Explain McClintok's intelligent cell and how it aligns (or does not align) with consciousness vs AI algorithm in digital logic. Pfft. You are the one who is dancing around irrelevant nonsense like phenomenal experience being relevant and then retreating when given example of how phenomenal experience benchmark is nothing more than discrimination. No. I can and i just did. If phenomenal experience is relevant, then the humans with greater capacity for phenomenal experience are morally superior to others. and the position that any life is worth living, is equally valid supposition to yours. Your question leads to eugenics. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
You have argued that phenomenal experience deserves moral consideration and phenomenal experience is crucial to consciousness. i can quote you on this. Leprosy means you cannot feel pain. So is this baby lesser morally than a fully perceptive baby ? False. The paper proves that plants are conscious. You can dance around the word phenomenal or such nonsense, but the paper is decisive evidence of plants being conscious. PTSD in mustard plants is decisive evidence of consciousness, as consciousness is required to feel fear. Your bettings are irrelevant, since you cannot even understand basic science. A paper has already been provided that plants are conscious by an expert and you trash it for your religious belief. Since you have proven incapable of understanding basic science presented in this paper, i am afraid, the study on mustard plants and their PTSD response would be quite lost on you - its significantly more complicated as it involves significant understanding of signal processing theory. I suggest you begin first with digital logic and basic signal processing theory before jumping into something you are incapable of digesting. No scientist claims that being able to see, hear, taste etc. are fundamental to consciousness, like the random p-consciousness you argued to. No it isn't. Thats your opinion, subjected to vertibral bias, nothing more. That is not an empiric deduction, either . If our pehnomenal experience is crucial, then the baby with less phenomenal experience is a lesser being. The logical concusion of such is inescapable. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
That is YOUR argument, not mine. I didn't insert the phenomenal nonsense into measuring consciousness of living entities, YOU did. That phenomenal experience as defined by vertibral bias, is irrelevant to determination of consciousness. Nor does phenomenal experience make consciousness any superior morally -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
I clearly understand the distinction, which is why i brought it up. Inability of sensory perception does not entailing lack of consciousness clearly demolishes this confused thinking you presented earlier: "Moving from synonyms to examples, we have P-conscious states when we see, hear, smell, taste and have pains. P-conscious properties include the experiential properties of sensations, feelings and perceptions, but I would also include thoughts, wants and emotions. " Ergo, by your own citation of P-consciousness (which is scientifically nonsense), a mute, dumb, deaf baby with leprosy is not satisfying any experiential property. So a deaf, dumb, mute baby with leprosy is unable to experience phenomenal consciousness. Which makes your phenomenal criterion on consciousness completely irrelevant. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
And none of them contradict what i am saying. Anthony Zador was one of the peer reviewers of Trwavas's paper, FYI. Ergo PTSD response of stress, fear and false alarm signal output in plants satisfies consciousness theory. You are also conviniently side-stepping the 'mute, deaf, dumb and tongueless baby with leprosy' scenario - by your ludicrous and unscientific phenomenal experiences paradigm, the baby is not capable of phenomenal experience, ergo, not conscious. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
phenomenal experiences are irrelevant to consciousness. Quoting a random unscientific guy with a degree in philosophy wont change that. Your argument is akin to saying a mute, tongueless, deaf and dumb baby with leprosy is not conscious. That baby satisfies no criteria of phenomenal experiences ( can't see, can't talk, can't hear, can't taste and can't feel). This is demonstrable proof that your ideology re: consciousness if flawed and therefore, unscientific. -
Vegan Firefighter Files Human Right Complaint Over Food Served
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
And they show evidence of phenomenal experience in plants. As i said, you are completely ignorant of the fact that plant consciousness satisfies signal processing methods and theories, based on which i can assess a transmission to be conscious, algorithmic or white noise. That is a nonsensical definition, that is forever biassed in favor of vertibrates. Seeing, taste, smelling are not evidence of phenomenal experiences anymore than feeling vibrations, being able to see in infra-red, sensing temperature change, etc. They make no reference to phenomenal experience, because as i have proved, phenomenal experiences is a nebulous, unscientific concept promoted by biassed people who have lack of scientific understanding or mathematical quantification of the process. Except the case of PTSD response in plants have already proven that it is identical response to an entity posessing memory, processing, fear and false alarm signal outputs. THat satisfies the process adequately. -
The UCP Alberta Government - Threatens to Turn off Oil Taps
canuckistani replied to DonLever's topic in Off-Topic General
still does not make any sense. Just because you need income assistance does not mean you get to directly raid the income of the rich.