Nope. Humans make better tiles. The "tiles" at Giant's Causeway would be terrible tiles - they are really columns rather than tiles, and they aren't very regular.
Only for the intentionally ignorant.
And the qualitative superiority (outside of human aesthetics) between different structures (regardless whether they be columns or tiles or planets or stones), is what, exactly?
Feel free to clean up the wiki pages on the subject then. There is an array of differing ideas on what the precise process is, what to speak of dusting down specifics of variables within them. It's not a case of me disagreeing with your overly- simplistic ideas of science. Rather, it is the case of experts (whom we take as authoritative on the subject) as espousing several different versions of events over the past few decades (with no clear conclusion), disagreeing amongst themselves (or at least, having enough modesty to refrain from labelling their ideas as "factual", unlike yourself).
You are speaking BS.
No one claims that. You claim that there is sentience involved because it is mathematical.
Then limit yourself to the same standard, ok?
You just don't get it. You are trying to weave a superfluous extraneous player into the fabric of spacetime.
Whether they work for the purpose intended. Quite simple, really. Try to tile a floor with commercial 1/4" thick hexagonal tiles. Now try it with "tiles" that are between six inches and forty feet thick. And are all slightly different shapes.
Wow that was fast! Only two posts to change the goalposts from "you cannot factually establish or even name the timescale, nor the variables" to "what the precise process is!" That, sir, is some VERY fast backpedaling. Bravo.
Agreed. And anti-vaxxers claim that vaccine efficacy and safety is "the science people use as a platform to speculate."
Sounds like the claims of every climate change denier, anti-vaxxer, flat Earther and Truther out there. You are in good company.
Ok
Try use tiles on the sea shore that will persist for thousands of years.
So you can't be precise with your facts.
If you can't recognize the variegated epustemological strengths within science, you don't understand science.
Cram 4 billion years of global chemistry into a laboratory over 300 years and you expect answers?
So when brains are left in an impaired state do to injury or disease, and there is a direct relationship between the the affected areas and resultant neurological capability, that’s not an example of causation?
The study of behavior is the cornerstone of every branch of science and philosophy. Behavior would be one of, if not the most significant quality of any object or system.
Unfortunately since the soul, like any other mystical element, cannot be rationally argued or demonstrated, any discussion of it has to be done on what ever subjective interpretation is put forward. So which subjective interpretation did you have in mind?
Like I said earlier, the soul can be whatever you want it to be. In the land of make believe one conception is just as legitimate as the next.
What I or any human considers intelligent is derived from our cultural norms. And it would be one of countless possible perspectives that exist in the universe. I wouldn’t expect a human perspective on intelligence to be the best informed in the universe, but then again who knows?
Whatever suits your fancy.
Are you? You seem awfully certain that you are in that position.
You are aware that before modern medicine many more babies and mothers died naturally before, during, or after child-birth than today.
More like I can't run fast enough to keep up with your rapidly moving goalposts.
Let's see here. First we'll start with Nobels in fields related to abiogenesis:
I didn't call anybody stupid. I called their arguments stupid.
More to the point, can you locate a post of mine where I did?
Musika doesn't want to know about enzymes. He wants proof of someone getting a Nobel prize for creating a complete human being, like God did.
!Well, I suspected he was going to move his goalposts from "Nobels in fields related to the factual processes of life arising from matter" to "Nobels for creating life without using intelligence" or some such nonsense - but I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Careful, he'll take it and won't return it!
That might make a good topic. Why don't you start one?
Post some excerpts......
Is deliberate obfuscation not lying?