But lets discuss some of his actual statements:

My favorite part was the description of a childhood memory, with the revelation that not a single molecule of our present person was there at the time. That fact is truly awesome. How do memories manifest if the storage media is in constannt flux. Even if it is electromagnetic patterns between the neurons, the transcription and recall of the data is wonderous.

I also enjoyed the information about bats hearing in color and dogs smelling the length of a carbon chain. That changes our definition of the word “color” too. That can be amazing or disappointing at the same time. Amazing because everything we see is present in only a very small portion of the EM spectrum. Being able to subdivide that small portion of the scale into the infinite images of life is amazing. But it’s disappointing because we can only experience that 1% of the spectrum….how much we must be missing.

And to pick a third nugget from the pile of ore, I wonder if anyone heard the short editorial comment that Mr. Dawkins makes about life in the universe. He says something like (and I paraphrase here), the odds of life being 100 million billion, makes the odds of finding extraterrestrial life unlikely (two islands not knowing the other exists). He makes a comment indicating that is a rather disappointing fact. I agree with him, but I still like Star Trek.

Life is remarkable. Perception is reality. Dreams ARE real, how can you have a fake one?

WOW! What conversation Mr. Dawkins’ ideas stimulate! I think you all are underscoring the fact there is much to think about when pondering this universe of ours, and the ways we have thought about how it works are not necessarily what they seem. As Mr. Dawkins says, it’s queerer than we ever imagined. Science has been suggesting this for decades now, that the more we understand on some level, the ‘curiouser and curiouser’ things get on others. I have to admit that I just looked up a word Steve used, ‘frangible,’ and for anyone who doesn’t know what it means already, here’s the definition: ‘capable of being easily broken.’ We know the earth is pretty resilient, but we also know the beings that inhabit the earth come and go like the tides, and are quite fragile indeed. I agree our biggest problem may be over-population of humans and the corollary — the vanishing species of non-humans. It seems we have a pattern, as conscious beings, of making big mistakes that eventually result in raising our consciousness. At least, that’s how it often works. We do, then we understand what we just did by observing the consequences. Aren’t we all hoping to raise our consciousness beyond our experience in the future, to solve what lies ahead? Do we know enough to anticipate the future, and are we strong enough to take action to get ourselves back in line with the laws of nature? Thank heaven for the efforts to raise our awareness proposed by thinking individuals like Dawkins and his audience like Sam, Steve and Socratus. Your thoughtful comments are most appreciated, and we look forward to hearing more!

The secret of words ‘God’, ’soul ‘, ‘religion’,
Existence’, ‘dualism of consciousness’, ‘human being’
hide in the “Theory of Light quanta”.
Because, from all particles, only and only
the quantum of light is a privileged particle.
========================

Another superb blog. Thanks.

Richard Dawkins’ work is terrific, not doubt about it. But what he reports about the universe, when he is not talking strangely about delusional thinking, appears not at all queer. Sam makes this very point so well, just above.

At least to me, what does appear to dangerously deviate from what Dr. Dawkins presents as well as from what is natural, normal or expected are certain unbridled over-growth activities of the human species that are now overspreading the surface of the Earth. Perhaps Dr. Dawkins and others would be willing to comment on these questionable, seemingly “outlier” behaviors.

Perhaps a question is useful here. Can you think of a time in recorded history when a single generation, like my own, has so efficiently ravaged the finite resources of the Earth, so conspicuously consumed what it has self-righteously commandeered, so polluted the environment and left so little of what is sacred for its own children and coming generations? And, of all things, we call ourselves masters of the universe and the greatest generation while we religiously pursue this “primrose path,” one that mainly diminishes life, degrades the planet and glorifies the profane.

The distinctly human behaviors of 1) per capita overconsumption, 2) the seemingly endless increase of industrialization and economic globalization in a relatively small world with limited resources and frangible ecosystem services and 3) overpopulation, to which I draw attention, do look as if they are reasonably and sensibly apprehended as approaching a point in time when they can be described as suspicious, off-centered, unbalanced and of an odd nature.

With hope of discussion,

Steve