Sarah Palin critical of the Pope for not being enough of an extremist nutjob

[doodab]

Obviously none of that has been observed, but don't let me bother your religious views here.

Really? Are you sure about that? Why don't you check just to make sure?

[masonryan]

Let's face it moronryan is unlikely to read a book let alone win any science prize.

And you've offered nothing but abuse and insults. How intelligent and educated - not.

[russell]

What did Moses do for morals before he received the ten commandments?

Apparently after he received them he ordered his tribe to kill about 3,000 people including women and children. If that was an improvement he must have been a right **** to start with.

Also the Greeks debated ethics before or at least not knowing about any 10 commandments and were more moral than any Christian.

[masonryan]

Really? Are you sure about that? Why don't you check just to make sure?

Get back to me when you have observations of life 'just happening'.

[masonryan]

What did Moses do for morals before he received the ten commandments?

Apparently after he received them he ordered his tribe to kill about 3,000 people including women and children. If that was an improvement he must have been a right **** to start with.

God created us with a conscience so that we can tell right from wrong. Over time obviously things have become corrupt but still we have a conscience that is in tune with God's moral laws.

I doubt you even believe an absolute right or wrong exists yet here you are pontificating about morals and laws.

[russell]

And you've offered nothing but abuse and insults. How intelligent and educated - not.

I can't debate stupidity I insult you because that's what people like you deserve, you should be made to feel ashamed of being so ignorant. Science was held back untold centuries because of religions and still you are at it.

[masonryan]

I can't debate stupidity

Not very clever then are you

[Mich the Tester]

No you're completely wrong, you seem not to be understanding my point. Science is founded on unchanging pillars too. If the laws of logic are violated then so do the theories which sit upon them.

No you're completely wrong, you seem not to be understanding my point. Science is founded on pillars that have changed and evolved and that in itself is the great strength of science. The 'laws of logic' are actually unknown to mankind, that's why we have branches of philosophy concerned with trying to define and refine our understanding of logic. In other words, if scientists knew everything, they'd stop.

[doodab]

No you're completely wrong, you seem not to be understanding my point. Science is founded on unchanging pillars too. If the laws of logic are violated then so do the theories which sit upon them.

No, he's completely right. The "laws of logic" as you call them are investigated and their limits probed all the time. Those that are in practical use by scientists remain fairly constant over time because they work, not because they are considered inviolable.

You seem to not have much of a clue what you are talking about.

[masonryan]

No you're completely wrong, you seem not to be understanding my point. Science is founded on pillars that have changed

so are you claiming science is not based on the absolute laws of logic? If so, you have a major misunderstanding of what science is or why it works.

The 'laws of logic' are actually unknown to mankind, that's why we have branches of philosophy concerned with trying to define and refine our understanding of logic. In other words, if scientists knew everything, they'd stop.

The laws of logic already exist, as do the scientific laws based upon them, we are discovering them.