In a creationist church

[Split Rock]

The name is misleading and anti-Biblical -- in my opinion.

So? Its still just a name.

 

[knowledgeIsPower]

Then why vote at all?

If that's all it is is rhetoric, what's the big deal?

And if that's all it is is air through the vocal chords, I take it you won't mind if I go ahead and consider Pluto our 9th planet?

If fact -- you'll even support my right to think that too, won't you?

(Or have I been ostracized?)

You can call it a ball of rice for all I care. You are perfectly entitled to your opinion.

You're still using the wrong words though and your opinion doesn't change that. We as a society have decided to change the definition of Pluto. You don't need to accept it and can keep functioning on the old system but I just wonder why you want to do this with planets but not with things like currency exchange rates and inflation. Why do you accept the changing value of a dollar? Why not just keep telling everyone that the dollar is worth what it was in the 1920s because you refuse to accept society's outlook? After all you didn't get a say in the changing value of a dollar either.

It seems silly. If just for the sake of preventing confusion and enabling effective communication just use the definitions of words and concepts that everyone else uses. At least that way we can communicate effectively. You may not be ostracised physically but carry on the way you are and eventually you are going to be effectively ostracised because you can't communicate with the rest of us.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Well, I don't sit and stare at the sun like astronomers and hippies on LSD do.

We just sat around listening to music and watching people act weird........


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auDv6cf2PBMhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVpVlf4q8so

 

[Split Rock]

I just get tired of Internet scientists telling me what is and what isn't, when they themselves are told what to think.

Maybe you should not be posting in a Dicussion Forum.

Had I come on here in 2004 telling these guys Pluto is not a planet, they would have ostracized me; probably with the same words they ostracize creationists.

If you had good reason to do so, you would not have been "ostracized." Do you have any good reason to call Pluto a Planet? Do you have a good reason to call it something else? Do you have a good reason to continue to repeat "Pluto" over and over in threads where it isn't even relevant?

 

[AV1611VET]

Then stop worrying about whether Pluto is a "planet" versus a "dwarf planet".

What's that old saying?

First scientists came for our planets, and we did nothing.

Then they came for our neighbors, and we did nothing.

Now they're coming for us, and there's no one to turn to.

(Something like that.)

 

[knowledgeIsPower]

If you had good reason to do so, you would not have been "ostracized." Do you have any good reason to call Pluto a Planet? Do you have a good reason to call it something else? Do you have a good reason to continue to repeat "Pluto" over and over in threads where it isn't even relevant?

I don't get his obsession with Pluto and what it is called. It is a planet. It isn't a planet. Who cares. It is just a definition. Pluto is no different now than it was 10 years ago, we just classify it differently. Big deal.

AVET suck it up and get over it. Stop being a whiny baby about it.

BTW what the heck is a "blessing"?

 

[knowledgeIsPower]

What's that old saying?

First scientists came for our planets, and we did nothing.

Then they came for our neighbors, and we did nothing.

Now they're coming for us, and there's no one to turn to.

(Something like that.)

OH NO! You mean scientists will CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF OUR NEIGHBOURS?!?! We will call them "dudes that live next to me" instead?!?!? Oh the horror!!!!

What the hell are you on about.

 

[Split Rock]

What's that old saying?

First scientists came for our planets, and we did nothing.

Then they came for our neighbors, and we did nothing.

Now they're coming for us, and there's no one to turn to.

(Something like that.)

Yes, AVET. Scientists are just like The Nazis. In fact, the Nazis were the "scientists" of their time. This means they were evil.. or that scientists are evil... or something like that. In any case, we have decided to stop pretending. Yes, we are evil. Yes, we are doing SATAN's work. Yes, we killed off Pluto as a planet. You are next. You know too much. We are coming for you now, AVET. Be Afraid.

 

[laconicstudent]

What's that old saying?

First scientists came for our planets, and we did nothing.

Then they came for our neighbors, and we did nothing.

Now they're coming for us, and there's no one to turn to.

(Something like that.)

What in the name of cheezburgerz are you going on about?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Wow....I think I will just lurk awhile

 

[Split Rock]

What in the name of cheezburgerz are you going on about?

He is twisting the words of a German Pastor, who originally supported the Nazis and them came to oppose them:

"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me-- and there was no one left to speak out for me."
- Pastor Martin Niemoeller

 

[driewerf]

The name is misleading and anti-Biblical -- in my opinion.

The name Homo sapiens was coined by Lineaus, who was hailed as an outstanding christian and creationist by your brethren of the ICR.

Bible-Believing Scientists of the Past

So far for the anti-biblical nature of Homo sapiens.

 

[AV1611VET]

The name Homo sapiens was coined by Lineaus, who was hailed as an outstanding christian and creationist by your brethren of the ICR.

Good -- I'm glad to hear that about Linnaeus.

That doesn't mean Linnaeus was immaculate.

 

[tanzanos]

Good -- I'm glad to hear that about Linnaeus.

That doesn't mean Linnaeus was immaculate.

I am sure he must have had a spot or two. After all, melanin does tend to do that!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by driewerf The name Homo sapiens was coined by Lineaus, who was hailed as an outstanding christian and creationist by your brethren of the ICR.

Good -- I'm glad to hear that about Linnaeus.
That doesn't mean Linnaeus was immaculate.

Tis true.....there is none good but God

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

Young) 2 Timothy 4:21 be diligent to come before winter. Salute thee doth Eubulus, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren.

(linus)
occurs 1 time in 1 verse in the KJV

3044. Linos lee'-nos perhaps from 3043; Linus, a Christian:--Linus.

 

[marktheblake]

You tell me. You were the one claiming that Tomatoman was ignoring data.

No, I did not say he was ignoring data, I said he will interpret data through his own framework.

Your assertion that accepting that the universe is made of mass + energy and nothing else means there is no morality is what we are discussing.

Where do you get your moral standard from? Who tells you what is right or wrong?

Exactly. I suspect the missing part is God, since most fundies believe there can be no morality without their god.

You misunderstand. We say that can be no moral absolutes if there is no god. Not the same thing at all.

 

[Tomatoman]

No, I did not say he was ignoring data, I said he will interpret data through his own framework.

And I explained why you were wrong. I went on to explain why you were in fact guilty of the very thing you accused me of, but I don't know whether it meant anything to you.

Where do you get your moral standard from? Who tells you what is right or wrong?

The way you phrased this question and the fact that you think the only possible answer is god is depressing.

You misunderstand. We say that can be no moral absolutes if there is no god. Not the same thing at all.

Morality is obviously an evolved trait. Different human societies have different moral codes, but the fact that there are morals common to all of them (though a lot vary) is clearly a result of evolution.

 

[Split Rock]

No, I did not say he was ignoring data, I said he will interpret data through his own framework.

And ignore any data that went against it. You were making an assumption, based on your prejudices.

Where do you get your moral standard from? Who tells you what is right or wrong?

I learned it from my parents, teachers and society. Where did you learn yours from?

You misunderstand. We say that can be no moral absolutes if there is no god. Not the same thing at all.

Different societies have different moral standards. Thus, there are no moral absolutes.

 

[Mike Elphick]

Your assertion that accepting that the universe is made of mass + energy and nothing else means there is no morality is what we are discussing. Tell us what you think is missing.

Where do you get your moral standard from? Who tells you what is right or wrong?

We get them from our culture handed down from generation to generation. There is also likely to be a genetic element. If we are normal, we will know in ourselves what is 'right and wrong' and we are guided by our parents, elders and peers.

I already explained, on the basis of complex biochemical interactions, how behaviour might depend on the way organisms relate to one another.

Whereas evolution is normally viewed from the point of view of fitness of individuals, human society depends on cooperation and interdependencies where the success of the group or tribe becomes paramount and the evolutionary drive of selfish individual behaviour has to take second place.

The evolution of morality refers to the emergence of human moral behavior over the course of human evolution. Morality can be defined as a system of ideas about right and wrong conduct. In everyday life, morality is typically associated with human behavior and not much thought is given to the social conducts of other creatures. The emerging fields of evolutionary biology and in particular sociobiology have demonstrated that, though human social behaviors are complex, the precursors of human morality can be traced to the behaviors of many other social animals. Evolution of morality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm of the opinion that religions developed from a pre-existing framework of socially evolved moral behaviour. By formalising it and introducing supernatural punishments and rewards this would tend to enhance non-selfish behaviour and social cohesion.

By asking these questions, you seem to have fallen for the YECist lie that atheists can't have any 'moral' standards to live by, which is total nonsense.