Re: Do AGI-BOTS indicate Life After Death exists?

On 05/11/2025 01:42 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:

On 5/6/25 11:47 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 05/05/2025 08:32 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:

On 5/5/25 7:56 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 05/05/2025 09:23 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:

On 5/4/25 5:10 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:

On 5/4/25 3:04 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 05/04/2025 11:58 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:

On 5/3/25 9:51 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

That the meso-Americans and Mediterraneans were connected
by the Atlanteans in the ante-Deluvean Bronze Age cross-Atlantic
Bronze Age trade, circa 5000-10000 BC, and that the meso-Americans
and Mediterreans share both languages and scripts and pyramids
and as from the trail from Peru as with regards to the separate
Northern population what is of the red, yellow, white, and brown
peoples of about the Noachic and Vedic variously, is a bit lost
in the mists of time yet definitely has that the meso-Americans
and Mediterraneans have a cross-Atlantic bridge not explained
by the Alaska land bridge, nor Micro-nesian island hopping.

>
>
>
Could you give a source for that.

>
Maybe you'd like Allen's "Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning",
or something like on Atlantis studies.
>
Mostly commonalities in the names and legends of astronomy,
and as well the written scripts, then what most survived
is Bronze Age artifacts, all up and down the Missouri,
including to the Great Lakes, and not just around the Mediterranean,
also pretty much all the coast of Europe, Bronze Age.
>
There are archaeological discoveries about the scripts and
cultures and artifacts and what could not simply be coincidence.
More than merely the pyramids.
>
>
Allen's "Star Names" helps explore the world-wide commonalities,
since the pre-historical, and various studies of Bronze Age
of the pre-historical, yet archaeologically evident in crafts
and particularly scripts, and in language.
>
Mostly Bronze Age artifacts, and particularly surviving elements
of scripts, besides things like the pyramid builders.
>
>
People these days can't see much of stars on the sky or celestial
objects, yet since antiquity it was the common open book,
and the names and stories are remarkably common in all cultures.
>
>
Not my business and not relevant here: that mathematics and
natural science though is also common since antiquity, and
the premier theories of the day are a remarkable combination
of profound depth of data and a too-severe abstraction,
and periods of destruction, vandalism, and appropriation.
>
>

>
>
I downloaded the book. A large book written in 1800's !... I'm not
that sure it doesn't miss a ton of newer facts known since. But I'll
give it a try reading it. If you didn't see me on usenet, I've been
reading this book. Kosmanson is an exception though. Kosmanson rules
my usenet activity for now.
>
>

>
>
No. Too old.
>
One of those books that I'd read only if I'm incarcerated, with no
other
book whatsoever within reach.
>
There has to be a newer better book on the subject. Better thought
over.
Better researched.
>
>

>
That's the one there is.
>
I'm pretty sure that one's the best in class.
>
(All the historical names of the stars, and about stories
about, for example, the Pleiades, a survey of the visible sky.)
>
It's not meant to be something like Herschel's catalog
or all of Messier's objects.
>
Is that a, usual condition?
>
>
Why don't you just read ads abs?
https://adsabs.harvard.edu/ads_abstracts.html
>
>
>
Do AGI-BOTS ponder the ineffable?  Yeah, they may.
>
>

>
>
How the hell did you even find this book? Do you inherit an underground
library below your house where you still keep your great grandfather's
books in? How can one come across this book in a logical way?
>
Did you swipe it in the Vatican?
>
Hehe :) I'm not being silly.
>
>

>
I found that edition at a book store, or perhaps book fair.
>
I've collected about a ton of books, thousands and thousands.
>
I'm pretty discriminating, not discriminatory/incriminatory,
in what I think is a good book.
>
(I haven't bought anything on-line, at all, since about
ten years, though, acquired several thousands volumes books.)
>
The book-collecting is sort of a lifetime pastime.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_collecting
>
I found it from looking for good books.
>
>
One time Carl Sagan wrote a book, and in it,
he wrote, that besides the cranial capacity,
the only reason humans have intelligence, is books.
>
Of course he probably said that a bunch of times.
>
A usual practiced reader's reading is on the order
of ten-infinity times as fast as the maximum rate
of the spoken word.
>
>
Try spending a few days in a university library,
it's called learning something.
>
>
I suppose it's like the idea of "the royal road to
geometry", whether there's a royal road, i.e., an
easy way, to geometry.
>
There is: the long way to the top.
>
>

>
>
>
Access to papers in a university library is nice, and is closer to
"learning something" than piling tons of books. The latter is Tsundoku.
Look it up. It is just a collecting hobby, not learning.
>
>
>
>

Oh, you mean a university library?
Or just a relevant technical section?
A representative sampling? A thorough coverage?
I already have a library, thanks though.
Descartes in his preface to his The Principles of Philosophy,
the other day, emitted this sort of utterance.
"There have been, indeed, in all ages great minds who
endeavored to find a fifth road to wisdom, incomparably
more sure and elevated than the other four. The path they
essayed was the search of first causes and true principles;
from which might be deduced the reasons of all that can
be known by man; and it is to them the appellation of
philosophers has been more especially accorded. I am not
aware of any up to the present who has succeeded in this
enterprise."
There's a great bit about half-Aristotleans.
That Aristotle would disown them, ....
"I well know, likewise, that many ages may elapse ere all
the truths deducible from these principles are evolved out
of them, as well because the greater number of such are
as remain to be discovered depend on certain particular
experiments that never occur by chance, but which require
to be investigated with care and expense by men of the
highest intelligence, as because it will hardly happen that
the same persons who have a sagacity to make a right use
of them, will possess also the means of making them, and
also because the majority of the best minds have formed so
low an estimate of philosophy in general, from the imperfections
they have remarked in the kind in vogue up to the present time,
that they cannot apply themselves to the search after truth.
But, in conclusion if the difference discernible between
the principles in question and those of every other system,
and the great array of truths deducible from them, lead them
to discerning the importance of continuing the search after
these truths, and to observe the degree of wisdom, the
perfection and felicity of life, to which they are fitted to
conduct us, I venture to believe that there will not be found
one who is not ready to labour hard in so profitable a study,
or at least to favour and aid with all his might those who
shall devote themselves to it with success.
The height of my wishes is, that posterity may sometime
behold the happy issue of it, etc." -- Renee "Renatus" DesCartes
Yeah, thanks DesCartes.
"Sagacity", it's called.