TED Community » Ajay Appaden

Comments

• TEDCred score: +0.50 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• +2

  A comment on Conversation: What have you accomplished in response to a TEDTalk?

  Jun 19 2012: Ive done a lot of things in response to a number of TED vids, TED has in essence become the part of my life that the rest of it gravitates around. I joined Kiva in response to Jessica Jackley's talk but unfortunately couldnt make enough to give a loan but found a local version of kiva here in India called Milaap and gave my first loan on my birthday. I purchased a clay nonstick frying pan after watching Anil Gupta's talk on the hotbeds of innovation. I am currently working on a prototype of a vertical axis wind turbine for domestic power generation after watching a whole bunch of talks and piecing stuff together. I started being more loud about things I considered right and started fighting for basic human rights for everyone after watching a whole lot of vids including Richard Dawkins'.
  I owe the way I live my life now and the development I hope to bring about in the near future to TED. My next wish is to actually attend a conference in person which I havent been able to do yet unfortunately, but hope to soon.

• A comment on Conversation: Why evolution could never solve aging?

  Dec 5 2011: Denomyar01,To be honest, I must say that, Yes it did feel good to bring tony in line. I was simply reminding him of the fact that this is not a theological argument but rather a SCIENTIFIC discussion.
  
  And about the lines that we draw for the categorization of various things like your example of life, there is a line, just that it isn't a distinct line but a fuzzy line. In the words of Jane Goodall, "it's a very wuzzy line, and its getting wuzzier all the time". Ofcourse she was talking about the divide between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom. Yes classification is difficult and we have things that fall on either side and some that dont find a side to fall on, a typical example being the one stated by Tony in his first post, the Virus, it becomes inanimate when in harsh conditions and animate again when favourable conditions prevail.
  
  To address the last issue you brought up, The religious being courageous enough...hmm.. hiding from simple facts of life and death and crediting an imaginary being for everything good that happens, then depending on the said being to give you presents if you're good... sounds very courageous indeed. I was religious, untill I started THINKING for MYSELF. never turned back ever since, because I get real answers from science and not answers like "That's just how it is" or "god did it".
  
  Please look into the actual working of the Big Bang theory and quantum physics before you assert that real SCIENTIFIC theories are just made up by a bunch of people as fictional writing. I would suggest a reading of Hawking's 'A brief history of time'. Brilliantly written for the lay man to understand. You could watch his documentaries too if required (which I honestly feel might be required), and if you're even going to venture say that he's not qualified enough to talk on the topic, Im sorry my friend, I have nothing else to say to you.
  Have a good day.

• A comment on Conversation: Why evolution could never solve aging?

  Dec 4 2011: Honestly Tony, When I saw you comment in a discussion of such high stature,(I hold TED to be of very high stature). I did not expect you to fall so low to the level of trying character assassination. I honestly thought you would understand that bringing theology into a scientific argument is baseless and irresponsible, and yet even while trying to insult me over here you bring it up over here. Now I truly am ashamed to be a part of a conversation where such and ignorant and childish attitude can be entertained. I'd like to wish you all the best in your endeavors to try and convert people. I dont insult people till I know them, so have a great day. This will be the last time I waste my time on you. Cheers
• +2

  A reply on Conversation: Why evolution could never solve aging?

  Nov 29 2011: Tony, I'd like to ask you just one thing. Are you here to preach or to contribute to the conversation here.
  We are talking about scientific facts of evolution and not about theological hocus pocus. Forgive me for being so crude but, I believe its necessary. You have brought up the irrelevant topic of christian mythology, about god and satan here when we are talking about evolution increasing longevity of evolved creatures. I dont think you quite understand the topic here, We are talking about random mutations that occur in living organisms that allow them to survive in their surroundings better. Its not something that the organism chooses to do or makes an effort to do. Evolution is based absolute randomness. When you bring in gods and satan into the picture you're effectively bringing intelligent design into the argument which, is absolute nonsense in itself. If all organisms were designed as version 1.0 and 2.0 we should see less random vestigial organs and vestigial construction in the biological makeup of organisms. For the time being I can give a few examples with regard to us humans, the human eye has its photo-receptors : the cones and rods facing backward with the retinal nerve passing right through it which creates the blind spot. Another being the vestigial organs such as the appendix, coccyx, nipples in males etc.
  Good and evil is a social construct and not something that the natural world exhibits. It might be disheartening but there is no other purpose that anyone is born with in life other than to ensure the species survives. All purpose that we find are what we give ourselves. So I urge you to give yourself purpose rather than to wait for it, and to indulge in a scientific debate when we are discussing science. Its good to believe in things that make you feel good, but one must always know when to draw the line as to the limit that it governs your understanding and way of life. You should govern your beliefs and not let your beliefs govern you. Cheers
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Why evolution could never solve aging?

  Nov 24 2011: I'm not an expert,but I feel that the answer to the question of "Why evolution hasnt solved the issue of aging." is a simple one. The answer lies in what exactly evolution is : Evolution is the modification of features in a species over generations, governed by the concept of natural selection and survival of the fittest. When an organism doesnt die, a new generation of the species does not arise, and so evolution cannot occur. Slight mutations in every generation is what leads to evolution.Bye definition the next generation that does survive has to be better equipped to survive than the previous one. The younger organisms of the species have almost no chance of survival without initial support from the mature of the species.That said, I feel that evolution had almost come to a snails pace in comparison to it previous snails pace, which makes it extremely slow in the case of Homo sapiens, thanks to medicine. Its not just the fittest who survive and reproduce but rather almost everyone does, regardless of their strengths or weaknesses. But evolution is still taking place, the rise and fall in the number cancer cases might be an indicator to this. The body is trying to advance in its ability to repair damaged tissue. But the mutations have not reached a stable maturity for the species to move in a particular direction, by having the weaker part of the species overtaken by the stronger. Besides modern medicine would allow us to replicate it in the weaker set of our species too once it stabilizes if we dont artificially find a way to stabilize it first.