| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"StarDragonNight" |
| Date: |
29 Dec 2005 07:41:01 AM |
| Object: |
TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
.
|
|
| User: "DH" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 10:12:51 AM |
|
|
"StarDragonNight" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com...
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
1. Your writing is nearly incomprehensible.
2. You have no understanding of actual science, you merely parrot, badly,
blurbs from religious fundamentalists.
3. Richard Dawkins' philosophy does not necessarily represent that of all
evolutionary biologists, let alone all those who think that the theory of
evolution is the best explanation for how we came to be in our current
forms.
4. You are rude and obnoxious to bother rec.ponds with this claptrap
(groups trimmed).
Study some real science, learn how evolution is really thought to work,
learn the real points of disagreement, get familiar with all the evidence.
Yes, it's hard work. Real learning often is. Then get back to us.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 03:33:04 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 10:12:51 -0600, "DH" <dh@stargate.com> wrote:
"StarDragonNight" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com...
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
1. Your writing is nearly incomprehensible.
2. You have no understanding of actual science, you merely parrot, badly,
blurbs from religious fundamentalists.
3. Richard Dawkins' philosophy does not necessarily represent that of all
evolutionary biologists, let alone all those who think that the theory of
evolution is the best explanation for how we came to be in our current
forms.
4. You are rude and obnoxious to bother rec.ponds with this claptrap
(groups trimmed).
Study some real science, learn how evolution is really thought to work,
learn the real points of disagreement, get familiar with all the evidence.
Yes, it's hard work. Real learning often is. Then get back to us.
You're arguing with Jabriol. It's pointless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 11:39:05 PM |
|
|
"StarDragonNight" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com...
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
(Ike said) That's a total distortion of what science is. There are several
things I would like to take issue with. First the question of faith. I have
faith that you are wrong and therefore I don't believe anything you are
saying. The reason I have faith that you are wrong is because you lie to
yourself and everyone else. In other words if you say totally malicious and
stupid statements, chances are that anything you say should be true in its
opposite statement.
Origin of life "doctrines" you are probably paling about are based on
observation of replicable phenoma extrapolated to logically deduce how life
may have and theoretically could have arisen by what you call "chance", but
isn't. Not "chance but observable repeatable physical and chemical
phenomena.
Then you call it "blind belief". You are the one with blind belief but
should and probably on some level know better and are therefore a liar.
Then you are accusing scientists of implying amorality of some sort,
probably meaning that they are beyond your control of their self-expression.
Amorality is not addressed by science, that I know of. It is a fascist
political concept having nothing to do wih science.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Goodness Godless" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 03:14:47 PM |
|
|
"StarDragonNight" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com...
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
You don't understand how science works, and I doubt if you understand how
religion works. Like most belivers who speak English, I bet you believe in
the Jebus Mumbo Jumbo, like mommy did?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 03:24:25 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 23:14:47 +0200, in alt.atheism
"Goodness Godless" <cla@cwcom.net> wrote in
<dp1jkj$njq$1@usenet.otenet.gr>:
"StarDragonNight" <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com...
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
You don't understand how science works, and I doubt if you understand how
religion works. Like most belivers who speak English, I bet you believe in
the Jebus Mumbo Jumbo, like mommy did?
Jabs, whose nym seems to change daily, is a 'special' student at
Watchtower. Pay him no mind.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 11:22:43 PM |
|
|
In <f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com>,
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their own
kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life, most
evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain "doctrines."
Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use the weight of their
authority to impose blind belief in evolution, they are in reality
implying: 'You are not responsible for your morality because you are
merely the product of biology, chemistry, and physics.' Biologist Richard
Dawkins says that in the universe 'there is no design, no purpose, no evil
and no good, nothing but pointless indifference.'
Morality is a product of evolution.
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
So much for that "storm of the century" excuse
http://makeashorterlink.com/?A3992495C
NO held hostage by oil corporations,
ANWR demanded as ransom
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J5C92195C
White House balks at spending on US citizens,
needs more billions for Iraq!
http://makeashorterlink.com/?G1D93595C
(Tell me again how much we spent bailing out the S&Ls?)
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Just Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
30 Dec 2005 11:36:05 AM |
|
|
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:P8idnbQySPa-WSnenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@megapath.net...
In <f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com>,
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own
kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life, most
evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain "doctrines."
Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use the weight of
their
authority to impose blind belief in evolution, they are in reality
implying: 'You are not responsible for your morality because you are
merely the product of biology, chemistry, and physics.' Biologist Richard
Dawkins says that in the universe 'there is no design, no purpose, no
evil
and no good, nothing but pointless indifference.'
Morality is a product of evolution.
Hey....
That's what *I* said. Only I got all wordy, and stuff.
Which means that you're smarter 'n me. Damn!
I'm such a LOser! :-P
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
31 Dec 2005 09:53:10 PM |
|
|
In <9eetf.258085$tD4.133991@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>, "Just Mark"
<nobody@noplace.com> wrote:
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:P8idnbQySPa-WSnenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@megapath.net...
In <f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com>,
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own
kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life, most
evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use the
weight of their
authority to impose blind belief in evolution, they are in reality
implying: 'You are not responsible for your morality because you are
merely the product of biology, chemistry, and physics.' Biologist
Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there is no design, no
purpose, no evil
and no good, nothing but pointless indifference.'
Morality is a product of evolution.
Hey....
That's what *I* said. Only I got all wordy, and stuff.
Which means that you're smarter 'n me. Damn!
Or lazier than you?
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
So much for that "storm of the century" excuse
http://makeashorterlink.com/?A3992495C
NO held hostage by oil corporations,
ANWR demanded as ransom
http://makeashorterlink.com/?J5C92195C
White House balks at spending on US citizens,
needs more billions for Iraq!
http://makeashorterlink.com/?G1D93595C
(Tell me again how much we spent bailing out the S&Ls?)
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Grinder" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
30 Dec 2005 01:19:09 PM |
|
|
Just Mark wrote:
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:P8idnbQySPa-WSnenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@megapath.net...
In <f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com>,
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own
kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life, most
evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain "doctrines."
Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use the weight of
their
authority to impose blind belief in evolution, they are in reality
implying: 'You are not responsible for your morality because you are
merely the product of biology, chemistry, and physics.' Biologist Richard
Dawkins says that in the universe 'there is no design, no purpose, no
evil
and no good, nothing but pointless indifference.'
Morality is a product of evolution.
Hey....
That's what *I* said. Only I got all wordy, and stuff.
Which means that you're smarter 'n me. Damn!
I'm such a LOser! :-P
Don't finish that lyric, John Weatherly might oblige you.
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/beck/15293.html
Have you seen the violent fantasy he posted to Robibnikoff?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.christnet.public/msg/15c9178c64a2b286?hl=en&
.
|
|
|
| User: "Just Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
30 Dec 2005 01:31:50 PM |
|
|
"Grinder" <grinder@no.spam.maam.com> wrote in message
news:NKftf.687690$xm3.679893@attbi_s21...
Just Mark wrote:
"Mark K. Bilbo" <alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in message
news:P8idnbQySPa-WSnenZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@megapath.net...
In <f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com>,
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own
kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life, most
evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain "doctrines."
Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use the weight of
their
authority to impose blind belief in evolution, they are in reality
implying: 'You are not responsible for your morality because you are
merely the product of biology, chemistry, and physics.' Biologist
Richard
Dawkins says that in the universe 'there is no design, no purpose, no
evil
and no good, nothing but pointless indifference.'
Morality is a product of evolution.
Hey....
That's what *I* said. Only I got all wordy, and stuff.
Which means that you're smarter 'n me. Damn!
I'm such a LOser! :-P
Don't finish that lyric, John Weatherly might oblige you.
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/beck/15293.html
Have you seen the violent fantasy he posted to Robibnikoff?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.christnet.public/msg/15c9178c64a2b286?hl=en&
Well, isn't that special.... The "mind of Christ" and the "leading of the
Spirit" inspire that, did they?
I think Mr. Grumpy McGrumpy-pants could use a long nap....and a break from
usenet.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 09:15:17 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 08:41:01 -0500, StarDragonNight
<Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
Complete and utter *****. What is it with you liars? Science takes
no faith - just explanations which work objectively in the real world.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SeppoP" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 09:21:12 AM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 08:41:01 -0500, StarDragonNight
<Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
Complete and utter *****. What is it with you liars? Science takes
no faith - just explanations which work objectively in the real world.
That's Jabriol for you...
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 07:23:22 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 08:41:01 -0500, StarDragonNight
<Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
Whatever philosophical conclusions one wishes to draw from a given
scientific theory are irrelevant to the truth or falsity of said
theory. Your point was?
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 01:46:56 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 08:41:01 -0500, in alt.atheism , StarDragonNight
<Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> in
<f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com> wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith.
The primary faith in science, which is testable and tested, is that
the rules that seem to operate here and now operated there and then.
For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories.
Sort of like when we say that two fronts colliding cause the rain we
are getting?
And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
And, yet, somehow, Jabriol, you failed to say what faith was involved
in the science of abiogenesis. Oh well.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Conspiracy of Doves" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 08:11:55 AM |
|
|
Richard Dawkins also said that humans are the only species on the
planet capable of rebelling against our DNA and choosing our own
actions.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 04:05:28 PM |
|
|
So a single individual that agrees that the theory of evolution is well
proven and also has moral values will disprove your hypothesis.
Here I am. Flasifiable hypothesis falsified.
Next?
Lee Jay
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 04:05:32 PM |
|
|
So a single individual that agrees that the theory of evolution is well
proven and also has moral values will disprove your hypothesis.
Here I am. Flasifiable hypothesis falsified.
Next?
Lee Jay
.
|
|
|
| User: "Just Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 04:12:05 PM |
|
|
<ljfinger@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1135893932.425816.102080@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
So a single individual that agrees that the theory of evolution is well
proven and also has moral values will disprove your hypothesis.
Here I am. Flasifiable hypothesis falsified.
Next?
Lee Jay
::smirk::
You seem to have forgotten the main rule of arguing with a fundamentalist:
if the fundy doesn't understand a word or concept, then it's off-limits.
"Falsifiable". Feh! [rolls eyes]
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jesus H Christ" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 10:40:27 AM |
|
|
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith.
"Seem to" isn't "do".
For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines."
No, it does not. Faith isn't involved. Competing hypotheses don't
require faith. They require arguments and evidence in their favour.
Facts are mixed with theories.
You really need to go and study what the scientific process is.
Facts - evidence, observations - are used to evaluate competing
hypotheses. Those hypotheses that pass the scientific process of
observing, further hypothesising and testing then eventually become
theories.
And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
Belief in evolution isn't based on 'blind belief' since it's rooted in
fact. The theory of evolution is derived from proposing scientific
explanations to suit the facts. Not the other way around.
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.'
No they are not.
They are *stating* you *are* responsible for your morality because the
biology, chemistry and physics are not enough to completely determine
human behaviour.
Scientific studies of adopted twins have been undertaken to test exactly
this kind of hypothesis. Nurture trumps nature, most of the time.
Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
The universe is indifferent to US. How WE behave to IT is largely up to
our individual intellects.
jesus!
.
|
|
|
| User: "SeppoP" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 09:47:40 AM |
|
|
Jesus H Christ wrote:
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith.
"Seem to" isn't "do".
For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines."
No, it does not. Faith isn't involved. Competing hypotheses don't
require faith. They require arguments and evidence in their favour.
Facts are mixed with theories.
You really need to go and study what the scientific process is.
Facts - evidence, observations - are used to evaluate competing
hypotheses. Those hypotheses that pass the scientific process of
observing, further hypothesising and testing then eventually become
theories.
And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
Belief in evolution isn't based on 'blind belief' since it's rooted in
fact. The theory of evolution is derived from proposing scientific
explanations to suit the facts. Not the other way around.
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.'
No they are not.
They are *stating* you *are* responsible for your morality because the
biology, chemistry and physics are not enough to completely determine
human behaviour.
Scientific studies of adopted twins have been undertaken to test exactly
this kind of hypothesis. Nurture trumps nature, most of the time.
Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
The universe is indifferent to US. How WE behave to IT is largely up to
our individual intellects.
jesus!
Forget the shitbag. Jabriol is into ape-sex.
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 10:13:19 AM |
|
|
"SeppoP" <seppo_pietikainen@xyahoox.com> wrote in message
news:41ieosF1epp6cU3@individual.net...
Jesus H Christ wrote:
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith.
"Seem to" isn't "do".
For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines."
No, it does not. Faith isn't involved. Competing hypotheses don't
require faith. They require arguments and evidence in their favour.
Facts are mixed with theories.
You really need to go and study what the scientific process is.
Facts - evidence, observations - are used to evaluate competing
hypotheses. Those hypotheses that pass the scientific process of
observing, further hypothesising and testing then eventually become
theories.
And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
Belief in evolution isn't based on 'blind belief' since it's rooted in
fact. The theory of evolution is derived from proposing scientific
explanations to suit the facts. Not the other way around.
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.'
No they are not. They are *stating* you *are* responsible for your
morality because the biology, chemistry and physics are not enough to
completely determine human behaviour. Scientific studies of adopted
twins have been undertaken to test exactly this kind of hypothesis.
Nurture trumps nature, most of the time.
Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
The universe is indifferent to US. How WE behave to IT is largely up to
our individual intellects. jesus!
Forget the shitbag. Jabriol is into ape-sex.
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
probably the only kind he can get
.
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 05:19:11 PM |
|
|
"kathryn" <nospam@here.com> wrote in
news:dp11uv$hve$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com:
<SNIP>
The universe is indifferent to US. How WE behave to IT is largely up
to our individual intellects. jesus!
Forget the shitbag. Jabriol is into ape-sex.
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
probably the only kind he can get
Not even that. The chimps rejected him too.
Klazmon.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jesus H Christ" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 10:21:07 PM |
|
|
Llanzlan Klazmon <Klazmon@llurdiaxorb.govt> wrote in
news:Xns973C7D53287DCKlazmonllurdiaxorbgo@203.97.37.6:
Klazmon.
Dude, your name rings a bell. Skylark?
jesus
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Llanzlan Klazmon" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 03:29:44 PM |
|
|
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith.
Equivocation fallacy. You are using a different meaning of the word faith
to that used with respect to religious faith. The faith which applies to
science is the same faith that you have which prevents you from thinking
you can safely leap from a hundred story building. Faith as applied to
science is actually a conclusion based on experience, reasoning and
empirical evidence. This is anathema to religious faith, which is accepting
thing purely on the authority of priests etc. Remember in the buybull where
Thomas was chastised for requesting evidence. In actual fact he was the
only character in the whole book who had any merit whatsoever. A pity even
he wasn't up to realising it what a scam it was.
Klazmon.
<SNIP>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "R. Pierce Butler" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 07:46:41 AM |
|
|
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
And your point is what?
.
|
|
|
| User: "=?iso-8859-1?B?QXLlY2jx1WWk?=" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 09:51:08 AM |
|
|
"R. Pierce Butler" <spamsucks@google.com> wrote in message
news:Xns973B4F29D60D1mc2500183316chgoill@10.232.1.1...
StarDragonNight <Use-Author-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in
news:f61e0e1e0512290541k45ac68b1ueb5697fa0baa663c@mail.gmail.com:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
And your point is what?
======================
He's looking to get TIME on his Watchtower time-card rather than go out an
knock on doors like he's supposed to do.......
--
Ar......
L Perez bleated: BEWARE! there are people on this newsgroup who are only
here to slander and
lie about Jehovah's Witnesses. They do not offer any alternative
organization...
Note: No other organization can even come close to the WTS' record of six,
false-alarm end-of-the world predictions in the 20th century.
(Credit to RLM)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "explainer" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 05:03:29 PM |
|
|
StarDragonNight wrote in the Subject box:
TOE requires faith and amoral values.
I'm here to learn. Please help me! What is an amoral value?
All the best, gordon Hill
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "SeppoP" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 08:46:49 AM |
|
|
StarDragonNight wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
I think it is a "good idea" (tm) to check the headers when an ostensibly "new" writer appears on the market.
Odds are that it is the same old, nym-shifting slimeball.
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
30 Dec 2005 09:07:09 AM |
|
|
SeppoP wrote:
StarDragonNight wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
I think it is a "good idea" (tm) to check the headers when an ostensibly
"new" writer appears on the market.
Odds are that it is the same old, nym-shifting slimeball.
Especially if rec.ponds is in there and he then starts talking about how
much he loves rape
.
|
|
|
| User: "SeppoP" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
30 Dec 2005 10:26:20 AM |
|
|
Ash wrote:
SeppoP wrote:
StarDragonNight wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
I think it is a "good idea" (tm) to check the headers when an
ostensibly "new" writer appears on the market.
Odds are that it is the same old, nym-shifting slimeball.
Especially if rec.ponds is in there and he then starts talking about how
much he loves rape
Yeah...
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "SeppoP" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
29 Dec 2005 08:33:14 AM |
|
|
StarDragonNight wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
Why don't you go playing with your apes, Jabbie.
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: TOE requires faith and amoral values. |
30 Dec 2005 09:05:39 AM |
|
|
StarDragonNight wrote:
Scientists' theories often seem to rely on premises that require their
own kind of faith. For example, when it comes to the origin of life,
most evolutionists adhere to ideas that require faith in certain
"doctrines." Facts are mixed with theories. And when scientists use
the weight of their authority to impose blind belief in evolution,
they are in reality implying: 'You are not responsible for your
morality because you are merely the product of biology, chemistry, and
physics.' Biologist Richard Dawkins says that in the universe 'there
is no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pointless
indifference.'
You forgot to include the point again
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
