Grey matter vs your eternal soul

[G.T.]

it leaves you two where you belong - together in brain land.

flora has no brain and evolved before fauna

Okay, lady with brain on the brain. I concur with the following:

You're talking about evolutionary biology in plants. Leave me alone, I've seen your caterpillar to butterfly dopey shit before...it's wholly uninteresting to me.

Seriously.

.

Okay, lady with brain on the brain. I concur with the following: seriously

I'm talking about how the mind is the physical brain. You're talking about evolutionary biology in plants. Leave me alone, I've seen your caterpillar to butterfly dopey shit before...it's wholly uninteresting to me.

.
you did not include what I have highlighted in his quote - to begin with. did he refer to either flora or fauna. he is referring to physiology, the statement is inaccurate.
.
View attachment 391660
.
what has the "evolutionary biology in plants" have to do with "I'm talking about how the mind is the physical brain" -

seriously, they have run away and so will you.

You're babbling and not making any coherent sense, to be honest. And this goofy "running away" bravado horse-crap is super lame.

.

You're babbling and not making any coherent sense, to be honest. And this goofy "running away" bravado horse-crap is super lame.

.
you can not account for flora that is relative to your statement about the physiological brain, cns nor offer a response to metamorphosis as a real life example of physiological dynamism indeterminate of a recreated cns you fail to explain - your coherency babel is nothing new as when you have nothing more to contribute.

This thread is about the brain/soul distinction, not about the micro-biology of a plant. You need medication.

.

This thread is about the brain/soul distinction, not about the micro-biology of a plant. You need medication.

wishful thinking ram, physiology the same as its spiritual content are both metaphysical that disappear when either is removed but in their physical state while "living" they are inseparable as no example exist for one or the other.

.
the above is my initial post - where is yours that includes - "brain/soul distinction" (The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain) -

you are disingenuous at best, unable to legitimately discuss the spiritual content of physiology when given physical evidence contrary to your initial statement you offer without the least amount of content.

You didnt provide the evidence you thought, it seems is the problem. An organism experiencing change without a Brain is not evidence of a soul, ya friggin dope.

.

You didnt provide the evidence you thought, it seems is the problem. An organism experiencing change without a Brain is not evidence of a soul, ya friggin dope.

.
as stated with visible evidence the distinct spiritual content in association with physiology: physiology the same as its spiritual content are both metaphysical that disappear when either is removed but in their physical state while "living" they are inseparable as no example exist for one or the other. -

are there blobs of physiology laying on the ground void of spiritual content. something "mindless" you pick up and eat. no.
.
I've noted your lack of links but assume you have them -
.
View attachment 391763
.
I have provided the reasoning and physical proof of the process where physiology is guided by its spiritual content when changing from one being into another - the visual proof is far more than your ambiguous statements about "you are your brain".

particularly when you ignore half the life forms on Earth, flora that has neither a brain nor cns and displays openly its spiritual content - in such a way as knowingly attracting fauna as a means for reproduction.

You're just asserting a soul - there are biological mechanisms that explain everything you're questioning so I'm thinking you're just OCD/odd on the topic.

Your sentences barely make coherent sense, either. Maybe it's just me.

Anyhoo, I wish you the best in your Spiritual Journey.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You're just asserting a soul - there are biological mechanisms that explain everything you're questioning

Preaching, not questioning. Might be an interesting analog road to travel down a short way, were it not always proposed in the same over the top, off putting manner. Never asking how a specific mechanism could be explained biologically. It's buy this used car now because I assure you it's a great deal or fagetaboutit! {logic vs faith}

 

[BreezeWood]

it leaves you two where you belong - together in brain land.

flora has no brain and evolved before fauna

Okay, lady with brain on the brain. I concur with the following:

You're talking about evolutionary biology in plants. Leave me alone, I've seen your caterpillar to butterfly dopey shit before...it's wholly uninteresting to me.

Seriously.

.

Okay, lady with brain on the brain. I concur with the following: seriously

I'm talking about how the mind is the physical brain. You're talking about evolutionary biology in plants. Leave me alone, I've seen your caterpillar to butterfly dopey shit before...it's wholly uninteresting to me.

.
you did not include what I have highlighted in his quote - to begin with. did he refer to either flora or fauna. he is referring to physiology, the statement is inaccurate.
.
View attachment 391660
.
what has the "evolutionary biology in plants" have to do with "I'm talking about how the mind is the physical brain" -

seriously, they have run away and so will you.

You're babbling and not making any coherent sense, to be honest. And this goofy "running away" bravado horse-crap is super lame.

.

You're babbling and not making any coherent sense, to be honest. And this goofy "running away" bravado horse-crap is super lame.

.
you can not account for flora that is relative to your statement about the physiological brain, cns nor offer a response to metamorphosis as a real life example of physiological dynamism indeterminate of a recreated cns you fail to explain - your coherency babel is nothing new as when you have nothing more to contribute.

This thread is about the brain/soul distinction, not about the micro-biology of a plant. You need medication.

.

This thread is about the brain/soul distinction, not about the micro-biology of a plant. You need medication.

wishful thinking ram, physiology the same as its spiritual content are both metaphysical that disappear when either is removed but in their physical state while "living" they are inseparable as no example exist for one or the other.

.
the above is my initial post - where is yours that includes - "brain/soul distinction" (The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain) -

you are disingenuous at best, unable to legitimately discuss the spiritual content of physiology when given physical evidence contrary to your initial statement you offer without the least amount of content.

You didnt provide the evidence you thought, it seems is the problem. An organism experiencing change without a Brain is not evidence of a soul, ya friggin dope.

.

You didnt provide the evidence you thought, it seems is the problem. An organism experiencing change without a Brain is not evidence of a soul, ya friggin dope.

.
as stated with visible evidence the distinct spiritual content in association with physiology: physiology the same as its spiritual content are both metaphysical that disappear when either is removed but in their physical state while "living" they are inseparable as no example exist for one or the other. -

are there blobs of physiology laying on the ground void of spiritual content. something "mindless" you pick up and eat. no.
.
I've noted your lack of links but assume you have them -
.
View attachment 391763
.
I have provided the reasoning and physical proof of the process where physiology is guided by its spiritual content when changing from one being into another - the visual proof is far more than your ambiguous statements about "you are your brain".

particularly when you ignore half the life forms on Earth, flora that has neither a brain nor cns and displays openly its spiritual content - in such a way as knowingly attracting fauna as a means for reproduction.

You're just asserting a soul - there are biological mechanisms that explain everything you're questioning so I'm thinking you're just OCD/odd on the topic.

Your sentences barely make coherent sense, either. Maybe it's just me.

Anyhoo, I wish you the best in your Spiritual Journey.

.

- there are biological mechanisms that explain everything ...

.
are you being serious, you have yet to produce one -

or to explain the ability of becoming a different being from one that already exists from a molten intermediate state.
.

.
no one is talking about a soul but you, your morals are your own they are not the same as mine - physiology and its spiritual component are an inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings made at the onset of life metaphysically and has lasted to this day.

 

[G.T.]

it leaves you two where you belong - together in brain land.

flora has no brain and evolved before fauna

Okay, lady with brain on the brain. I concur with the following:

You're talking about evolutionary biology in plants. Leave me alone, I've seen your caterpillar to butterfly dopey shit before...it's wholly uninteresting to me.

Seriously.

.

Okay, lady with brain on the brain. I concur with the following: seriously

I'm talking about how the mind is the physical brain. You're talking about evolutionary biology in plants. Leave me alone, I've seen your caterpillar to butterfly dopey shit before...it's wholly uninteresting to me.

.
you did not include what I have highlighted in his quote - to begin with. did he refer to either flora or fauna. he is referring to physiology, the statement is inaccurate.
.
View attachment 391660
.
what has the "evolutionary biology in plants" have to do with "I'm talking about how the mind is the physical brain" -

seriously, they have run away and so will you.

You're babbling and not making any coherent sense, to be honest. And this goofy "running away" bravado horse-crap is super lame.

.

You're babbling and not making any coherent sense, to be honest. And this goofy "running away" bravado horse-crap is super lame.

.
you can not account for flora that is relative to your statement about the physiological brain, cns nor offer a response to metamorphosis as a real life example of physiological dynamism indeterminate of a recreated cns you fail to explain - your coherency babel is nothing new as when you have nothing more to contribute.

This thread is about the brain/soul distinction, not about the micro-biology of a plant. You need medication.

.

This thread is about the brain/soul distinction, not about the micro-biology of a plant. You need medication.

wishful thinking ram, physiology the same as its spiritual content are both metaphysical that disappear when either is removed but in their physical state while "living" they are inseparable as no example exist for one or the other.

.
the above is my initial post - where is yours that includes - "brain/soul distinction" (The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain) -

you are disingenuous at best, unable to legitimately discuss the spiritual content of physiology when given physical evidence contrary to your initial statement you offer without the least amount of content.

You didnt provide the evidence you thought, it seems is the problem. An organism experiencing change without a Brain is not evidence of a soul, ya friggin dope.

.

You didnt provide the evidence you thought, it seems is the problem. An organism experiencing change without a Brain is not evidence of a soul, ya friggin dope.

.
as stated with visible evidence the distinct spiritual content in association with physiology: physiology the same as its spiritual content are both metaphysical that disappear when either is removed but in their physical state while "living" they are inseparable as no example exist for one or the other. -

are there blobs of physiology laying on the ground void of spiritual content. something "mindless" you pick up and eat. no.
.
I've noted your lack of links but assume you have them -
.
View attachment 391763
.
I have provided the reasoning and physical proof of the process where physiology is guided by its spiritual content when changing from one being into another - the visual proof is far more than your ambiguous statements about "you are your brain".

particularly when you ignore half the life forms on Earth, flora that has neither a brain nor cns and displays openly its spiritual content - in such a way as knowingly attracting fauna as a means for reproduction.

You're just asserting a soul - there are biological mechanisms that explain everything you're questioning so I'm thinking you're just OCD/odd on the topic.

Your sentences barely make coherent sense, either. Maybe it's just me.

Anyhoo, I wish you the best in your Spiritual Journey.

.

- there are biological mechanisms that explain everything ...

.
are you being serious, you have yet to produce one -

or to explain the ability of becoming a different being from one that already exists from a molten intermediate state.
.
View attachment 391809
.
no one is talking about a soul but you, your morals are your own they are not the same as mine - physiology and its spiritual component are an inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings made at the onset of life metaphysically and has lasted to this day.

You are merely asserting things. I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough. You're not an evolutionary biologist, you have no definition of "soul" that's coherent and that could make future, testable predictions and so whatever it is you think youre saying is not worth one single shit, to me.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

 

[BreezeWood]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

 

[G.T.]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

 

[Grumblenuts]

physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

Okay, but for those of us oddly grounded in reality,

The suffix ology is commonly used in the English language to denote a field of study.

That link provides a long list of -ologies, none hinting of being a substance, let alone something from outer space. The one included for physiology even links to an expansion of that term which further expands upon (non-alien-substance) "human physiology" and "plant physiology" in case you're ever curious about stuff that might actually make sense.

 

[BreezeWood]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

,
your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

- if the brain is not the prerequisite for physiology - what is, obviously it's spiritual component is. as the new being exhibits attributes of the original.

physiology is not a liquid becoming a gas nor is it entirely energy for an end result of a metaphysical being with both physiology and its spiritual identity - for in creating a life experiment would they also have created its unique identity of a living being - or a blob of "inert" physiology whatever that would be.

 

[G.T.]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

,
your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

- if the brain is not the prerequisite for physiology - what is, obviously it's spiritual component is. as the new being exhibits attributes of the original.

physiology is not a liquid becoming a gas nor is it entirely energy for an end result of a metaphysical being with both physiology and its spiritual identity - for in creating a life experiment would they also have created its unique identity of a living being - or a blob of "inert" physiology whatever that would be.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

Your second sentence doesn't logically follow from your first, either.

Last, your lack of understanding of a biological mechanism doesn't affirm a Spirit. It's a spirit of the gaps argument.

This is Child's play, your view is incoherent and there's nothing left to be said about that.

 

[BreezeWood]

physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

Okay, but for those of us oddly grounded in reality,

The suffix ology is commonly used in the English language to denote a field of study.

That link provides a long list of -ologies, none hinting of being a substance, let alone something from outer space. The one included for physiology even links to an expansion of that term which further expands upon (non-alien-substance) "human physiology" and "plant physiology" in case you're ever curious about stuff that might actually make sense.

.

That link provides a long list of -ologies, none hinting of being a substance, let alone something from outer space. The one included for physiology even links to an expansion of that term which further expands upon (non-alien-substance) "human physiology" and "plant physiology" in case you're ever curious about stuff that might actually make sense.

.
physiology can be a reference for the physical, biological components and structure of a distinct individual - flora or fauna - not sure why that does not fit generally in your definition provided. it would be a substance to a compound including a spiritual component.

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process
.
phisiology is a metaphysical substance including its spiritual component that are not native to planet Earth -
.

.
primordial Earth - life in the universe will be created wherever the conditions are made conducive by the metaphysical forces converging and creating the appropriate physical and spiritual components necessary for survival.

what non alien substances can you be referring to - the periodic elements are endemic to the entire universe.

 

[BreezeWood]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

,
your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

- if the brain is not the prerequisite for physiology - what is, obviously it's spiritual component is. as the new being exhibits attributes of the original.

physiology is not a liquid becoming a gas nor is it entirely energy for an end result of a metaphysical being with both physiology and its spiritual identity - for in creating a life experiment would they also have created its unique identity of a living being - or a blob of "inert" physiology whatever that would be.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

Your second sentence doesn't logically follow from your first, either.

Last, your lack of understanding of a biological mechanism doesn't affirm a Spirit. It's a spirit of the gaps argument.

This is Child's play, your view is incoherent and there's nothing left to be said about that.

.

your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

.
The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

care to explain - how a dissolved brain is performing its "function" as defined by your post ...

* thought not - your good at dodgeball.

 

[G.T.]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

,
your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

- if the brain is not the prerequisite for physiology - what is, obviously it's spiritual component is. as the new being exhibits attributes of the original.

physiology is not a liquid becoming a gas nor is it entirely energy for an end result of a metaphysical being with both physiology and its spiritual identity - for in creating a life experiment would they also have created its unique identity of a living being - or a blob of "inert" physiology whatever that would be.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

Your second sentence doesn't logically follow from your first, either.

Last, your lack of understanding of a biological mechanism doesn't affirm a Spirit. It's a spirit of the gaps argument.

This is Child's play, your view is incoherent and there's nothing left to be said about that.

.

your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

.
The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

care to explain - how a dissolved brain is performing its "function" as defined by your post ...

* thought not - your good at dodgeball.

Yeah, the reason you're having so much fucking trouble with my comment is because my comment doesn't imply that a mind or brain IS NECESSARY for all biological processes. That's why you're conflating my comment with some dipshit view that you have that flowers have minds. It's just a baseless assertion, nobody cares and you've been whining about metamorphosis on this board for years. Get a new hobby/schtick.

 

[Grumblenuts]

It's in the Genes.

A gene named broad is essential for the pupal stage of complete metamorphosis. If you knock out this gene, a caterpillar never forms a pupa and fails to become a butterfly. The same gene is important for molting during the nymphal stage of incomplete metamorphosis, corroborating the equivalence of nymph and pupa. Likewise, both pro-nymphs and larvae have high levels of juvenile hormone, which is known to suppress the development of adult features. In insects that undergo incomplete metamorphosis, levels of juvenile hormone dip before the pro-nymph molts into the nymph; in complete metamorphosis, however, juvenile hormone continues to flood the larva's body until just before it pupates. The evolution of incomplete metamorphosis into complete metamorphosis likely involved a genetic tweak that bathed the embryo in juvenile hormone sooner than usual and kept levels of the hormone high for an unusually long time.

 

[Grumblenuts]

phisiology is a metaphysical substance including its spiritual component that are not native to planet Earth -
.

.
primordial Earth - life in the universe will be created wherever the conditions are made conducive by the metaphysical forces converging and creating the appropriate physical and spiritual components necessary for survival.

Nice lemon. Sorry, I remain stuck in an appears to make sense rut.

 

[G.T.]

phisiology is a metaphysical substance including its spiritual component that are not native to planet Earth -
.

.
primordial Earth - life in the universe will be created wherever the conditions are made conducive by the metaphysical forces converging and creating the appropriate physical and spiritual components necessary for survival.

Nice lemon. Sorry, I remain stuck in an appears to make sense rut.

yupp, nothing metaphysical about it.

 

[BreezeWood]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

,
your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

- if the brain is not the prerequisite for physiology - what is, obviously it's spiritual component is. as the new being exhibits attributes of the original.

physiology is not a liquid becoming a gas nor is it entirely energy for an end result of a metaphysical being with both physiology and its spiritual identity - for in creating a life experiment would they also have created its unique identity of a living being - or a blob of "inert" physiology whatever that would be.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

Your second sentence doesn't logically follow from your first, either.

Last, your lack of understanding of a biological mechanism doesn't affirm a Spirit. It's a spirit of the gaps argument.

This is Child's play, your view is incoherent and there's nothing left to be said about that.

.

your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

.
The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

care to explain - how a dissolved brain is performing its "function" as defined by your post ...

* thought not - your good at dodgeball.

Yeah, the reason you're having so much fucking trouble with my comment is because my comment doesn't imply that a mind or brain IS NECESSARY for all biological processes. That's why you're conflating my comment with some dipshit view that you have that flowers have minds. It's just a baseless assertion, nobody cares and you've been whining about metamorphosis on this board for years. Get a new hobby/schtick.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain. There's also manipulation (physical manipulation) of memory done in experiments which solidifies this hypothesi

* thought not - your good at dodgeball.

Yeah, the reason you're having so much fucking trouble with my comment is because my comment doesn't imply that a mind or brain IS NECESSARY for all biological processes.

.

.
this is about your opening post you have yet to defend ... "oh not everything" bla bla ...
.

That's why you're conflating my comment with some dipshit view that you have that flowers have minds.

.
there you go again -
.

.
empty, nothing to back up your statement as usual - to say the waterlilly hasn't a spiritual content to its physiology is simply the words of a braindead, mindless lunatic. gt.

- and lours fauna for its reproduction.

 

[G.T.]

Hmm.? Strange how Webster's

Definition of physiology
1: a branch of biology that deals with the functions and activities of life or of living matter (such as organs, tissues, or cells) and of the physical and chemical phenomena involved
— compare ANATOMY
2: the organic processes and phenomena of an organism or any of its parts or of a particular bodily process

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

Must be a special purpose definition for very special purpose beings.

.

fails to mention any hint of "spiritual component" nor this "inseparable interdependence similar in all living beings", let alone "onset of life metaphysically"?

.
physiology is a metaphysical substance not native to planet Earth and when its spiritual component is removed disappears from existence - physiology is the physical presence of the life sustaining spiritual content. - the brain is not what becomes hungry, hunger is the spiritual that keeps the being alive.

the spiritual is what maintains the metaphoric process to its conclusion in dissolving and recreating the new organs - brain.

the soul is not being discussed and obviously would be a component of the spiritual.
.

I linked to the biological explanation of metamorphosis, wasn't good enough.

.
there were several responses to that link - you did not respond to the intermediary state of a molten fluid that had been the previous being in transition to becoming something entirely different - without a cns - brain being involved.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

A brain being "involved" is not a prerequisite. All thats required is energy. Does a liquod become a gas because of a brain? Just be quiet.

,
your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

- if the brain is not the prerequisite for physiology - what is, obviously it's spiritual component is. as the new being exhibits attributes of the original.

physiology is not a liquid becoming a gas nor is it entirely energy for an end result of a metaphysical being with both physiology and its spiritual identity - for in creating a life experiment would they also have created its unique identity of a living being - or a blob of "inert" physiology whatever that would be.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

Your second sentence doesn't logically follow from your first, either.

Last, your lack of understanding of a biological mechanism doesn't affirm a Spirit. It's a spirit of the gaps argument.

This is Child's play, your view is incoherent and there's nothing left to be said about that.

.

your initial post leaves no other conclusion that the brain would be required to transform from one being to another - that is not the case, the brain is dissolved.

Your first sentence is a misrepresentation of what I said.

.
The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain.

care to explain - how a dissolved brain is performing its "function" as defined by your post ...

* thought not - your good at dodgeball.

Yeah, the reason you're having so much fucking trouble with my comment is because my comment doesn't imply that a mind or brain IS NECESSARY for all biological processes. That's why you're conflating my comment with some dipshit view that you have that flowers have minds. It's just a baseless assertion, nobody cares and you've been whining about metamorphosis on this board for years. Get a new hobby/schtick.

.

The consensus in Neurology is that the mind is merely the brain. There's also manipulation (physical manipulation) of memory done in experiments which solidifies this hypothesi

* thought not - your good at dodgeball.

Yeah, the reason you're having so much fucking trouble with my comment is because my comment doesn't imply that a mind or brain IS NECESSARY for all biological processes.

.

.
this is about your opening post you have yet to defend ... "oh not everything" bla bla ...
.

That's why you're conflating my comment with some dipshit view that you have that flowers have minds.

.
there you go again -
.
View attachment 392068
.
empty, nothing to back up your statement as usual - to say the waterlilly hasn't a spiritual content to its physiology is simply the words of a braindead, mindless lunatic. gt.

- and lours fauna for its reproduction.

The mind being the brain has nothing to do with mind/brain free processes in flowers, dumb dumb.

 

[BreezeWood]

It's in the Genes.

A gene named broad is essential for the pupal stage of complete metamorphosis. If you knock out this gene, a caterpillar never forms a pupa and fails to become a butterfly. The same gene is important for molting during the nymphal stage of incomplete metamorphosis, corroborating the equivalence of nymph and pupa. Likewise, both pro-nymphs and larvae have high levels of juvenile hormone, which is known to suppress the development of adult features. In insects that undergo incomplete metamorphosis, levels of juvenile hormone dip before the pro-nymph molts into the nymph; in complete metamorphosis, however, juvenile hormone continues to flood the larva's body until just before it pupates. The evolution of incomplete metamorphosis into complete metamorphosis likely involved a genetic tweak that bathed the embryo in juvenile hormone sooner than usual and kept levels of the hormone high for an unusually long time.

.

A gene named broad

is essential for the pupal stage of complete metamorphosis.

.
sorry nuts, essential is only a fraction for a whole program - orchestrated by the spiritual content from beginning to end all facets of physiological development during the process. within the cocoon.

 

[Grumblenuts]

sorry nuts, essential is only a fraction for a whole program

Sorry Wood, indeed what's essential is only a fraction of the whole program - the majority, non-gene parts of the DNA ("Junk DNA") add up to much more in terms of subconscious, every day control and processing. Not brain. Not spirit. Mind? - possibly, again partly.