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

[oracleslave]

wim, is that you?

I had erased him from memory

[doodab]

There are REALLY BIG philosophical and religious questions going on RIGHT NOW that are stumping cosmologists, philosophers and the religious.

Surely this is what metaphysics ought to be about.

[masonryan]

Morality has no dependency on religion nor does law. Indeed western law which is based on Roman law was first codified in aprox 450 BCE with no recourse to any religion.

I suppose you've never heard of the Ten commandments and so on, but remain ignorant if you prefer.

[masonryan]

You just don't get it, evolution is a fact! It has been proven beyond any doubt.

What has been proven beyond any doubt exactly? I don't think you even know.

[masonryan]

Now you've demonstrated real stupidity. Firstly, I don't 'hate religion', but that's besides the point. What I object to is 'unchanging pillars'; unchaging pillars are evidence of stupidity. Science changes all the time; the understanding of nature developed through many centuries of experimentation and empiricism changes because new insights are gained all the time.

So you don't accept the laws of logic then, as you claim unchanging pillars are evidence of stupidity. Explain how science works without the unchanging laws of logic? Thanks.

[masonryan]

It's also obvious that if some arrangements of those atoms and molecules are more feasible & stable than others, and some spontaneously arrange themselves into emergent complex structures such as phospholipids spontaneously arranging themselves into a membrane, or RNA spontaneously polymerising when catalysed by clay, and others will spontaneously reproduce themselves, then life not only "just happened" but it's an absolutely unavoidable consequence of the way the universe works.

We evolved from the condensation of energy into matter that followed the big bang. Pondscum was just a stepping stone.

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

[Mich the Tester]

So you don't accept the laws of logic then, as you claim unchanging pillars are evidence of stupidity. Explain how science works without the unchanging laws of logic? Thanks.

The 'laws of logic' as you call them evolve too. There are whole fields of research involved in developing 'logic'. What is considered logical argument now and what is considered to be acceptable evidence for a hypothesis is not the same as it was in the past. That's how science works. There aren't any 'unchanging pillars', but there are a few pillars that you'd find difficult to change, and if you did provide so much evidence you can persuade lots of scientists to change them, scientists would give you a nobel prize and you'd be celebrated as a genius.

[doodab]

I suppose you've never heard of the Ten commandments and so on, but remain ignorant if you prefer.

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.

[russell]

scientists would give you a nobel prize and you'd be celebrated as a genius.

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

[masonryan]

The 'laws of logic' as you call them evolve too. There are whole fields of research involved in developing 'logic'. What is considered logical argument now and what is considered to be acceptable evidence for a hypothesis is not the same as it was in the past. That's how science works.

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.