CSDC

Center of Scientific Divulgation about Consciousness





 Home
 Presentation
 Italian
 FAQ: Answers to
visitors' questions
 Comments by
our visitors
 E-mail: questions,
comments or ...

LET'S DISCOVER
MATTER!


Comments by visitors


u 5/4/03 Marco, your insite was one I had not considered. Thanks, George.

u 3/5/03 Marco... I am completely speechless by your answer, it REALLY made me think and even to reconsider (favorabily I think) my views and positons on several issues. Jaime

u 13/9/03 Now I am able to look at this matter from a different point of view. Steve

u 8/11/03 Wow! Didn't expect such an indepth discussion. Thanks! Jason

u 9/12/03 Wow! what wonderful thorough explanations on things... I've coppied your articles and I'm going to look more into a lot of it. Very insightful....I love the part about the brain and science....it makes perfect sense. Amy.

u 5/02/2004 Dear Dr. Biagini, I have read with great interest your arguments, and I fully agree.

Prof. Antonino Cucinotta     www.peoplephysics.com



u 18/02/2004 I have often wondered how a freak accident of particles etc. can have a conscience and emotions, it doesn't seem right. Thank you for your articles.

u 23/02/2004 I really enjoyed the articles, I found them to be open-minded and honest, and to provide good reasons to reject a materialism that reduces consciousness to chemical processes and material interactions. Keep up the good work! thanks, -JMB

u 24/02/2004 Thank you so much for this wonderful site! God bless you and guide you in your efforts. Your sister in Christ, Virginia Roberts.

u 26/02/2004 There are some very interesting observations here. You are on to some important topics. Kindly, T. J. Trenn

u 28/02/2004 Dear Dr. Biagini, my chief research interest is in neuroethics, so I plan to visit your site often! Sincerely, Linda K. Bevington, Director of Research, The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity

u 29/02/2004 I agree with you Marco. Maybe not that it could be considered proof, but there are things in what you say that are logical proof - whether or not science say so. Vibrations in air has no sound. Waves of light has no color. The brain don't see anything, it doesn't hear anything. The mind is not the brain. Do we really need proof for that? Even though the brain do have a role, so does the mind. We don't "feel" the chemicals, we don't "feel" electrical signals, we don't "feel" patterns.

u 01/03/2004 Thank you so much for all the information. You not only answered my question but provided me with additional information and provoking even more thought and questions. I will definitely contact you again!! Jennifer

u 02/03/2004 I have visited your site and liked your studies a lot. Regards. Jack Holder

u 05/03/2004 Marco, your "note about the theory of evolution" caught my attention. You say "So, even if our organism derived from a previous animal organism, we could have no conscious psychical life if God had not created in each of us a soul." This is what I believe, too - that the human physical body evolved, but the human soul was created in a loving act by God Almighty. Somehow God creates a soul for each new baby and infuses the soul into the baby's body for life. Our soul goes to heaven (or hell) when we die, but our physical body stays behind. This understanding seems to work well with the Biblical text (Genesis). Although we are created "in the image of God", it's not a physical image because God is a spirit. Our soul is in the image of God's spirit: we think, feel, and love. In Christ's service, Carl Drews

u 15/03/2004 Dear Prof. Biagini, I agree with much of what you write, especially the non-reductionist aspect of consciousness. I do wonder whether in the light of the research by Frans de Waal and others on chimpanzees, etc., we can draw such a sharp distinction between human and animal consciousness, or whether, in your terms, a kind of animal soul is also necessary. And I always wonder at any direct proof of the existence of God from an absence of physical explanation, so I am less convinced by your final paragraph. However, I found that much of what you wrote well described the problem of consciousness, one not apparently solved by physics. with kind regards,

Chris Corbally, SJ
Adjunct Associate Professor
The University of Arizona,
Department of Astronomy and Steward Observatory


u 24/03/2004 Dear Mr. Biagini, Thank you very much for your information on CSDC which should now save materialists and non-materialists a lot of tears and exasperation in their debate. Warm regards, Polly

u 29/03/2004 Thank you so much for answering my email- it really changed my mind! John.

u 31/03/2004 I liked your essay. I have an undergraduate degree in Math with a minor in Physics. That was a beautiful essay. Thank you. The problem of von Neumann's infinite regress in Quantum Theory is solved, as Wigner postulated, if one allows a non-material conciousness to affect the material universe. Keep up the good work! Salvador T. Cordova

u 01/04/2004 Marco is quite right in telling us that quantum electrodynamics is the only theory we need to explain chemistry, including biochemistry and none of those explanations ever need to mention consciousness, sensation or awareness. E&M

u 02/04/2004 Dear Marco, Thank you for some interesting papers. I certainly share your understanding that "Biology and neurology are examples of phenomenological theories, while physics is the only first-principle theory, from which all the other natural sciences derive." As I read your papers, a few comments came to mind. First, I thought of this quote from one of Hugh Ross' books: "Perhaps astrophysicist Robert Jastrow, a self-proclaimed agnostic, best described what has happened to his colleagues as they have measured the cosmos: 'For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.'" Yes, we have known for millennia that God transcends this physical realm, and so does that part of us which comes from God's realm. Second, as you said, "Consciousness transcends the laws of physics," and you made your comments about evolutionism's inability to show any evidence of "consciousness", it occurred to me that you might want to consider the connection between consciousness and language, and see whether human speech might possibly be an historical marker for consciousness. Raphael

u 05/04/2004 I thank you so much for your profound words! You litterly helped me to become re-connected with my faith! John.

u 14/04/2004 Marco was excellent and used great detail and preciseness to answer my question. I would recomment anyone to ask him and expect a quality response. Thanks. Michael.

u 23/04/2004 Marco, thank you for your long, detailed discussion. I had never seen a proof of the existence of God based on the psychical life, and I found it very interesting.

Karl Kuhn,
Professor Emeritus,
Eastern Kentucky University,
Department of Physics.


u 26/04/2004 Thank you Marco for your great help! Your inputs are amazing! John.

u 21/05/2004 A nice writing on the existence of God! Marco did also an excellent job in answering a very difficult question, nearly impossible to answer. Thanks, Jason.

u 09/06/2004 Hi Marco how are u?? i read your paper, i really found it really interesting and make me think a lot of things...have a nice day nacho.

u 14/06/2004 Very good explanation.

u 06/07/2004 Thanks Marco. I notice the word consciousness coming up in this article quite a bit. Consciousness is light, the light in me is the spirit. Joe

u 18/07/2004 Consciousness is indeed a mystery.... no amount of symolizing ones and zeros and no amount of speed of processing will ever allow a computer to feel pain nor pleasure...which to me is the main thing that makes us players rather thans just part of the game board... we CARE about the outcome of our moves, unlike any computer that does not care one way or the other, there is no one home.
The Turing stopping problems showed that logically no computer can ever do what we seem able to do, namely see and understand a program which has an infinite loop within it.--thus knowing in advance that it will never stop.
We know that we are dreaming at the very least, and for there to be a dream there must be a dreamer... that the dreamer is not made out of the stuff found within the dream is obvious, what he is made out of is not so obvious.


u 21/07/2004 WOW Marco, That was the best explanation for proving the existence of God i have ever heard.I really appreciate that, i didn't even think of it. Barrett

u 20/09/2004 Thanks, very helpful. Lisa

u 02/10/2004 Dear Sir, Compliments! I like your site. The topics are very interesting and of course, the questions of the visitors. Best regards, Edwin

u 06/10/2004 This website is excellent, very interesting. Sam

u 12/10/04 Very indepth and well focused insights on Creation and Biblical truths. Ed

u 14/10/04 Greetings Dr. Biagini, I just finished reading your article, Mind and brain: A scientific discussion leading to the existence of the soul, and found it extremely interesting! I am not studied, to any appreciable degree, in the field of Physics but I was able to understand the majority of the article and agree with your conclusion. Sincerely, Dean Pardo

u 24/10/04 Hi Marco, There is much food for thought here. Will have to read your text over again. Thank you so much! Fr. Dan Gauthier

u 29/10/04 Thank you sir for your reply.Your answer to my question has given me some insights with regard to my question.Also you have been very kind to give me an interpretation of another concept which also has always been a problem for me.I am going through your explanations.I have a lot of other haunting philosophical problems for which I shall be requesting your help.--With thanks and prayers--Joseph.

u 02/11/04 Outstanding, incredible knowledge! Muchas Gracias! Grace.

u 10/11/04 Excellent answer. I appreciate it very much. Gary.

u 22/11/04 Thank you so much for your thoughtful answer. Jean.

u 25/11/04 Thanks for all the writings! They are remarkable. Sincerely, Terence.

u 11/12/04 Thank you, Marco. "Seek and ye shall find." What a well thought-out answer. Melinda

u 12/12/04 Wow! Thank you so much for your cogent and valuable writings! How kind of you to share the wealth! May the Good God bless you and your family, both in time and eternity. In the Joy of His Service, Joe.

u 17/01/05 Dear Marco, Thank you for your thourough response, it has and will help me immensly.

u 02/02/05 Thanks a lot Marco, very interesting! Taylor

u 15/02/05 Consciousness of the mind seems to be big now in physics. Your inputs and perspectives will be invaluable.

u 17/02/05 I like your arguments for God's existence Dr. Biagini, you seem to have thought them through!

u 24/02/05 Thank you so much Marco!! it was really of great help, you let me clarified a lot of stuff, thanks!! Kenny.

u 12/03/05 Wow, that is some really awesome stuff. I'm about halfway through it and I've learned a ton. It refutes many claims I have heard from athiests about emotions and out souls. Joel

u 19/03/05 Very informative answer. I really liked it, Kay.

u 17/04/05 Brother Marco: Thankyou for your response to my question. Something I didn't expect. Your insights are truly rare. You have helped me to understand something I have been pondering for years. Love, Ferdinand

u 06/07/05 Thanks Marco, for the in-depth reply. I'll be getting back with you with some more questions sometime. I appreciate your time in this matter. Sicerely, Mike

u 17/09/05 What a reply. I thank you deeply for your help. Mike.

u 1/12/05 Thank you very very much. Your explanation was excellent. Very clear. Thank you. Jefferson.

u 5/12/05 Thank you Marco, for that wonderful, lengthy, and informative reply! I can't thank you enough for such an in depth answer. Your explanation how things like televisions should have emotions/feelings if the psyche was due to electromagnetic phenomena was so interesting...a simple statement, but it got me to thinking in a way I never had before. I had heard of the "Miracle at Fatima" and I appreciate your analysis of it. Best Regards, Mike.

u 14/12/05 Wow! I must admit I'm most impressed! Geoff

u 15/12/05 Enormous thanks. I appreciate the intellectual sharing on HIS existence. Greg

u 15/02/06 Thank you so much. You answered all of my questions. I will be sure and come back to you if I have any more questions. Thanks again and God bless. Tom

u 09/03/06 Marco, Thanks for the very thorough and thoughtful answer. Your words make a lot of sense. I appreciate your help. Kent.

u 02/05/06 Great help, thank you for your time to answer my question. Truly great answer. God bless. Andy

u 29/06/06 Thank you. This was an excellent answer! Johann

u 29/08/06 Thank you for your loving answer! Merens

u 25/09/06 Thank you so much for your response. It was very encouraging and just what I hoped would be true. We have come back to the church and your answer means so much to us. God Bless you for the work you do. John

u 16/11/06 Great insight, fast response, thank you so much! Meri

u 30/11/06 Your articles on the existance of the Soul and God are great! It's nice to have someone on the Theistic side to explain why Science only goes so far as to our exsistance, and that God is very real and we have a Soul.

u 06/12/06 It is wonderful to have someone so well educated in science defend our faith. God Bless You. Jennaveve.

u 05/01/07 Your site is very enlightening. Ava

u 20/03/07 Thank you for a wonderful answer which I need to read again to more clearly understand the key points. There is a significance in your reply that I have to thank God for.

u 18/05/07 Thank you for your very thorough reply. You have given me a lot to think about! Jamie

u 14/07/07 I would like to say personally thank you very much, as you have been extremely helpful and your enthusiasm of the subject is inspiring. Seb

u 27/09/07 I have never heard a better argument against absolute materialism. It is obvious that you have great knowledge in both chemistry and physics. I am a student of biochemistry and I must say I absolutely agree that materialism cannot and will not explain sentience, for mulecules and atoms trully canít feel! Robert.

u 16/11/07 Professor Biagini, I finally have a way to reach out to the poor people who have been tricked by materialist lies and philosophical speculation! You have shown very accurately, that there is a great difference between human beings and programmed computers: Both can respond to stimuli and both are made up of the same matter and governed by the same principles, but only humans can be self-aware and know of their existence. We have a physical property but also a non-physical property. Anthony

u 13/05/08 Hi Marco, Your articles are great, i'm impressed with your critical view on materialism. I hope you can write more articles of that high quality. Best regards! Luis

u 22/08/08 Dear Dr. Biagini..... I enjoyed your article on "Brain and Mind" and support your conclusions wholeheartedly. As a neuroscientist by training, I was always aware of the separation of mind from brain on the bases of my many clinical experiences doing brain surgery on tumor patients, and removing large sections of diseased brain, afterward noting little or no change in mental function. I can remember one patient in particular with a large, malignant tumor of the right frontal lobe of the brain, very anterior. I decided to do a radical resection and amputated the brain well posteriorly, just in front of the premotor cortex, perhaps 5+ inches backward from the frontal pole. He lost essentially a total of 1/4 of his entire brain matter. The next morning after surgery, I walked into his hospital room, and found him reading the newspaper, with full mental functions, intact intellect, and fluent communications on bedside testing. Nothing had happened to his mind. It was functioning normally despite the fact that 25% or more of his brain was removed. I have also seen this in others with severe frontal brain injuries where gyri were contused and hemorrhagic, rendered nonfunctional, yet with excellent mentation on discharge. Therefore, there is much clinical evidence to support your conclusion. Interestingly, however, in the problem of diffuse head injury or brainstem injury, where there is total loss of consciousness and coma, it appears that the reason for this is that it is neurologically well established that for consciousness to be expressed through the brain as a soul-manifestation, the neuro-electrical circuits of the brainstem and hemispheres must be intact for the expression of it. Clinically speaking, all neurologists and neurosurgeons know that to loose consciousness, the interrupting lesion must either be in both hemispheres at the same time, or a single lesion in the brainstem at the level of the "reticular activating system" which is the neural circuitry which allows manifestation of consciousness in or through the brain for the purpose of sensory input and communication. But unconsciousness and disruption of these brain function does in no way imply that the soul is not conscious, because there have been reports in the medical literature of comatose patients who, after coming out of coma, have reported to their physicians all that they heard while in a coma. In order for them to have heard what was being talked about at their bedside while they were in coma, there had to be consciousness and conscious awareness to have received and understood what was heard. Although the science of neurosurgery is phenomenological, as you say, it is delightful to have personally experienced confirmations to your conclusions of quantum mechanics as the 1st principle origin. I am personally of the opinion that the quantum electromagnetic fields seem to be the interface between the physical realm and the spiritual realm, and that it is either a point of meeting or interpenetration.

Bern Zumpano, MD
Professor and Chairman, Division of Neurosurgery (Retired)
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Psychiatry
Oral Roberts University School of Medicine
Tulsa, Oklahoma


u 11/02/09 Dear Marco, your articles on materialism are the best that I've ever read. Jurgen