- Joined
- Aug 29, 2019
Thanks for clearing that up. Don't know where I picked up the wife's-name bit of lore here. Apologies, folks.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
THERE is a fascinating article in The World in 2012 on how scientists will this year begin mapping the human brain. The author, Alun Anderson (one of Britain's most distinguished science writers) asserts that the brain is the most complex object in the universe—and who is Cassandra, whose knowledge of science is abysmal, to disagree? However, one of our readers does disagree, hence this very well argued letter.
Sirs -
In your "The World in 2012" issue, the statement is made (in "Brain work," Alun Anderson, p. 153) that "[h]uman brains are the most complex objects in the known universe."
With due respect, this statement is silly - for two reasons. First, we lack any rigorous definition of "complexity," rendering comparisons by that measure meaningless. Second (even if we ignore the lack of quantitative measures) there are countless examples of systems which surpass the putative "complexity" of the human mind. From the quantum interactions of the constituents of even a small protein molecule - which are sufficiently computationally intractable to be essentially incomputable by any known human technologies - to the deeply enchained interactions amongst living amongst the vast numbers of living beings in, say, a 10-liter bucket of living seawater - and through the fluid dynamical behavior of superheated gases at the surface of our Sun, the "visible universe" is in fact replete with exquisitely "complex" systems at all scales and groupings.
Instead, what the assumption that our primate brains are the apex of complexity in the known universe tells us, perhaps, is something much less proud (though perhaps all the more important): the one thing at which humanity unquestionably excels is a solipsistic worship of its own, self-declared primacy in the universe (and on our living planet). In other words, we're exquisitely good at coming up with metrics by which we can claim ourselves to be the most, greatest, or biggest inhabitant of our perceived surroundings. That's a far cry from being, in fact, any of these things; self-delusion is not equivalent to genuine primacy.
Respectfully,
D.B. LeConte-Spink
(Douglas Bryan LeConte-Spink
founder, Deep Symbiosis Institute)
And here is Alun's elegant riposte:
From: Alun Anderson
To: World InEditor
Subject: Re: Letter (on behalf of Douglas Spink)
Thanks for this letter from the Deep Symbiosis Institute.
I understand the purpose of his argument, which is to get away from human "exceptionalism" by arguing that on some measure, a bucket of sea water is as complex as a human brain (maybe you would measure the number of viruses it contains or something). This kind of argument leads you to respect all things as somehow equal, which is a nice enough sentiment, and perhaps even to believe that everything is conscious.
I think the bucket of sea water is not an "object" in the same way a brain is, nor is it as complex in terms of "interconnectedness" as used as the measure in the article. So although I don't t think his argument is correct I don't mind at all to see it aired in Cassandra, as there are lots of people aruging for oness with everything in the Universe!
(NB The Deep Symbiosis Institute works towards expanded awareness and appreciation of truly bidirectional, reciprocal, respectful relationships between Homo sapiens and other sentient, self-aware species)
Best,
Alun
Thank you for the posts.Toad McKinley did a documentary on Spink. This is the second documentary is a series of three
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlV-qisK3vQ
Part 1
View attachment 1820678
Part 2
View attachment 1820683
Toad's first documentary is here.
If you watch the last few minutes (2m40s or so into Part 2 above) Toad doesn't believe Spink is dead - there's no obituary or death certificate and Spink obviously has a lot of reasons for dropping off the radar - the zoo charges and the fact he's probably narced out a cocaine kingpin. The only people who say he's dead are his zoo buddies. Toad pointed out there was activity on Spink's social media accounts after his supposed death.
In the third part of his series he's going to look into the evidence for Spink being alive.
Definitely. It wouldn't surprise me if he reappeared under a different name. Or got arrested in Canada for illegally entering the country and deported back to the US. Something which he's already done.Thank you for the posts.
The possibility of Spink being alive is horrifying. Maybe we need to monitor this further?
We kind of have been. Nobody has really believed he's dead since months passed after the original announcement of his death and literally nada has showed up to back it up.The possibility of Spink being alive is horrifying. Maybe we need to monitor this further?
I did a little bit of research from a different angle - and I found his IT colleagues were consistent in the belief of his death.We kind of have been. Nobody has really believed he's dead since months passed after the original announcement of his death and literally nada has showed up to back it up.
She was as degenerate and an animal rapist apologist so I doubt she'd post anything that may be suspicious about him.People could ask the author of the book based on his life to contact the government for records about his death. As a person who wrote a book about him, she'd be able to get the information pretty easily.
I think I remember that.She was as degenerate and an animal rapist apologist so I doubt she'd post anything that may be suspicious about him.
I think she showed up in this thread at one point.
Her account is @CarreenMaloney.She was as degenerate and an animal rapist apologist so I doubt she'd post anything that may be suspicious about him.
I think she showed up in this thread at one point.