| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"jabriol" |
| Date: |
27 Aug 2003 09:08:37 AM |
| Object: |
TOBS\ what is acceptable behaviour? |
From: darktalon (darktalon@arwz.cjb.net)
Darktalon wrote:
All sorts of unacceptable behaviour is still done.
This doesn't mean that evolutionists consider it
acceptable. Unless you think that humans and our
society have done as much evolving as they can and
both are now perfect. And if you believe that, then
you are quite frankly stupid.
[Jabriol replies in brackets: "And this is the crux de
mater,
human behaviour is it evolved?, is it a process of
natural selection or not?
Can Moral behaviour be seperated by biological
behaviour?
should it? And if so.. who determines, what is
acceptable and what is not?]
==============================================================
Evolution is a scientific theory, written by
scientists. It makes no attempt to say what acceptable
behaviour in our society is - that's what we have
moral philosophers for.
[what about natural selection?]
============================================================
2. What kind of twisted, f-up schools do you
have that teach that
such behaviour is remotely acceptable?
every single school in america that teaches
evolution is a fact, therfeore
our behaviour was used in order for the survival
of the species..
No competent teacher would teach it as fact. They
teach evolution as a
scientific theory. Look up "scientific method" in
the dictionary.
no.. it is taught as a fact.. alternative are
disallowed..
I don't know what tinpot excuses for schools you're
used to, but the scientific method is at the heart of
science education in every school I've attended. As it
should be.
[Dont know if you are in the States, but if you are,
You should be aware of the different legal battles in
the bible belt states, and one issue that constanly
comes up is that many school teaches evolution as a
scientific fact.]
------------------------------------------------------------
And "alternatives are disallowed" is directly contrary
to that scientific method.
[Another issue has to do with the scientific method.
Evolution taught as a fact on the origin of man, does
not pass the criterias in totality of the scientific
method... Up to date nobody can make the cclaim that
it does, Nobody can give a simple yes or no reply,
with evidence to support the "Yes".
Many bring up Speciation as a valid reply, yet they
failed (intentionally or not) to define which of the
more that 5 defintion of speciation they are referring
to. (talk.origins faq on speciation).]
--------------------------------------------------------------
If someone came up with an alternative to
evolutionary theory (or anything, for that matter)
which explained the observed facts better, then I am
sure that it would be accepted.
[yet evolution as the origin of man, can not be
observed, in fact.. there is no observation of any
creature, evolving into another.. the process if the
theory is correct, is to long, and to my knowledge,
excluding computer models, no one has ever accelarated
evolution]
---------------------------------------------------------------
However, people opposed to evolution have taken refuge
in mythology instead of trying to come up with a
plausible alternative, forgetting which theory
evolution replaced anyway.
[ many scholars believed, that Mythology has their
root in certain truthful events, that may have taken
place. However We can say that every historical
journal or writtings could be mythology.. Alexander
the great, Julius Caesar.. could all been Myth]
---------------------------------------------------------------
Everything I was taught in science classes was taught
as a theory. And this didn't stop social education
classes telling us (rightly) about the wrongs of
domestic violence and similar unpleasantness.
Maybe I was just lucky. Maybe other schools aren't as
good. I don't know.
[ I can agree with your last three words]
-------------------------------------------
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
.
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS\ what is acceptable behaviour? |
27 Aug 2003 12:01:11 PM |
|
|
"jabriol" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote
Evolution is a scientific theory, written by
scientists. It makes no attempt to say what acceptable
behaviour in our society is - that's what we have
moral philosophers for.
[what about natural selection?]
What about it?
It's a term... a phrase... a convenient label... not the description
of a deliberate act.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS\ what is acceptable behaviour? |
28 Aug 2003 05:41:37 PM |
|
|
jabriol <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote
Who cares what he lied about this time?
And before you blather more lies, ***** and assininity on this
topic, you need to catch up on your previous moronic displays first.
Define and detail what the "colossal holes" are in the Theory of
Evolution. I have been waiting some consdierable time to see you list
them. Can you or can you not? If you can, then do so. If you
cannot, then admit that you are doing nothing but spreading lies with
your clueless posts.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
