from the article,
"No other creature on this planet has extended its conscious experience as far out into the cosmos or as down deeply into the workings of the fundamental forces as much as we have. As we evolved towards the attainment of cultural evolution so the universe became more objectified, deeper reflected upon. We can never attain true access to objective reality (many would say that there is no such thing), but I believe that, in the sentient universe I have outlined, humanity can be said to be the strongest protagonist in the great narrative that is reality."
1)
"No other creature on this planet has extended its conscious experience as far out into the cosmos or as down deeply into the workings of the fundamental forces as much as we have."
We know nothing of the Cosmos, we are not even sure whether or not "dark matter" exists. I think it doesn't. We also know nothing of the fundamental forces of nature. What is gravity: a force, a particle, a physical curvature of a 4 dimensional Space-Time? What is an atom of gold made of? Gold? No. Gold is made of atoms, atoms are energy, oh, I forgot. Energy is the modern word scientists use to say: I haver no idea.
The best simple argument against Theory of Relativity. Years ago, I tried to refute what this fellow says, I failed. Perhaps he is right?
Can Mass Really Increase with Velocity, as Claimed by theTheory of Relativity?
2)
"We can never attain true access to objective reality (many would say that there is no such thing)..."
There is no such thing.
3)
"...humanity can be said to be the strongest protagonist in the great narrative that is reality."
What if we wipe out all humanity overnight? Does our Universe still exist? Will we ever know? There is a simple answer to my question, which is: before "humanity" was ever born on Earth, Earth existed, plants, animal life also existed. In consequence, I doubt that we are the "strongest protagonists" in reality (whatever reality is). If we are all wiped out, the Universe will keep existing, without us. We mean nothing. We think we do, but we are wrong. This reminds me of the so called Anthropic Principle (which I think it is false).
