how are those moral absolutes identified?
What absolutes? All moral statements are provisional.
after being brought up a jw, going to mts, bethel, pioneer school multiple times, serving in foreign assignments and having been an elder for decades my conclusion is that i am now pima, physically in mentally agnostic.. agnostic means you think it can’t be proven either way creation or evolution.
i do tend to lean towards evolution but creation at the very start because you can’t get life from dead matter.
but i’m open to the possibility of chance theory at the origin of it all.
how are those moral absolutes identified?
What absolutes? All moral statements are provisional.
after being brought up a jw, going to mts, bethel, pioneer school multiple times, serving in foreign assignments and having been an elder for decades my conclusion is that i am now pima, physically in mentally agnostic.. agnostic means you think it can’t be proven either way creation or evolution.
i do tend to lean towards evolution but creation at the very start because you can’t get life from dead matter.
but i’m open to the possibility of chance theory at the origin of it all.
There are moral facts that do not depend on either personal opinion or divine law-givers.
Big Dog - Chatgpt wrote your post didn't it?
after being brought up a jw, going to mts, bethel, pioneer school multiple times, serving in foreign assignments and having been an elder for decades my conclusion is that i am now pima, physically in mentally agnostic.. agnostic means you think it can’t be proven either way creation or evolution.
i do tend to lean towards evolution but creation at the very start because you can’t get life from dead matter.
but i’m open to the possibility of chance theory at the origin of it all.
You may as well go and steal and scam people, it’s all just blind chance anyway
If superstition is the only thing stopping you from hurting others you have some serious moral deficiencies.
it's been a while since i've been online here so, forgive me if i seem clueless.
i found a doc with a link newchapter posted several years ago.
she was writing about violence and abortion and gave quite a few stats.
I can't recall the circumstances but she 'left' a while ago. She still posts on Facebook. Very astute and formidable debater.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
Let's image for a moment that Darwin and every biologist since was a racist and a misogynist.
It would make not one iota of difference to the veracity of evolution.
If Newton was a racist gravity would still be a fact.
If Einstein was a racist relativity would still be true.
Science cares only about facts. It has no regard for your feelings.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
Oh dear EP has been vomiting all over my thread again
Totally ignored the evidence of course.Troll
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
Thanks.
Just for the record I'm going to answer the question EP was afraid of.
Obviously a teacher would find it difficult to prove cheating by comparing essays if the students simply claim that their identical answers are just a result of using the same sources.
In a similar way creationists claim that the amazing correlation between animal genomes are simply a result of having the the same creative source.
Our professor has a simple technique available to confirm her suspicions. By carefully comparing the errors in each essay plagiarism can be proven beyond all doubt. For example if all the students write that the first world war began in 1975 it is inconceivable that they did not cheat - there are countless ways to be wrong!
In the same way it is by examining the tiny quirks in genomes that we can prove common ancestry. For example very occasionally a virus will get itself copies into a sex cell of its host and be copied into future generations. The exact place where this viral DNA ends up is almost - but not totally - arbitrary. When we find the same viral DNA in precisely the same place in species, and when we can repeat that for multiple endogenous retro viruses, we have proof that those species share a common ancestor.
This is very similar to the proof that is used in courts every day to prove paternity and convict rapists.
This is the difference between science and ideology. This is why ideologues like EP run away from actual debates.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
EP knew exactly where my question was going. She ducked it three times and then ran away.
Typical ideologue
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
EP - Put yourself in the place of the teacher.
There is a very easy way you can compare the essays and prove conclusively that there is cheating going on. Clue - It isn't about the identically correct answers.
re-posting this for reference.. #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..
#2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..
#3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..
You think I'm just going to sit here and watch you spout a bunch of lies when I know evolution isn't true?
That's exactly what you are doing. I have produced dozens of pages of thoroughly researched scientific evidence on this forum. I have posted a link to 3.7 MILLION peer reviewed papers.
All you do is rant and rave. You admit having never read a single book on biological evolution in your life and yet you shout your facile opinions. You demonstrate the contrast between science and ideology every time you post.
Engage with the evidence!
Three times I have asked you the same question and three times you have declined to answer it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Imagine you are a teacher and you suspect that some of your pupils have been copying each other's essays. When you challenge them they claim that they are innocent and the similarities only show that they all used the same sources for their research.
How would you prove beyond all doubt that one or more of your students had in fact been cheating?