Is the theory of evolution moral and ethical

[As I was saying]

It is probably safe to say that when people debate the "theory of evolution" they say almost nothing about any actual scientific work. It would not surprise me if a sociological investigation found that 90% of discussions of "evolution" are entirely about politics, cultural issues, legal issues, etc. and barely consider any actual scientific work.

What I have been reading in books about evolution it is all about philosophical arguments. There's very little science in it. Its primary aim is to get God out of the picture and replace him with man as in "we will not have this man to reign over us."

 

[Poster0]

Actually its not accepted by the vast majority of Scientists, but is accepted by the majority of biologists. However, its their doctrine. THey actually use it like doctrine, and they try to prove it, yet they cannot, so they merely assert that it is proven.

 

[As I was saying]

Again, nothing in science is ever proven. To say otherwise only shows one doesn't understand how science works.

In that case, the world is full of atheists who do not understand how science works as most claim that what they say is proven i.e fossil record, and what anyone else says is false.

 

[Poster0]

This has really got me foxed. If every theory is unproven why is it that atheists and evolutionaries spend so much time on Christian sites demanding that their theories are facts and our so called theories are fiction?

That's a good point.

 

[Armoured]

That doesn't mean it is credible. Watch Mr. Berlinski's interview, it will shine light on the truth.

Like I say, give us the main points? Why is Mr. Berlinski's opinion more credible than some hundreds of thousands of scientists?

 

[As I was saying]

Assuming for the sake of argument that is true, then that at most makes Margaret Sanger immoral, not evolution.

Sorry Moderators but do you specialise in making ridiculous claims Armoured?

 

[Armoured]

In that case, the world is full of atheists who do not understand how science works as most claim that what they say is proven i.e fossil record, and what anyone else says is false.

If that's what they say, good for them. No one said that atheists can't misunderstand science or terminology.

The fact, however, is that science simply doesn't deal in proof, but rather evidence either for or against. If anyone talks about science "proving" anything, they are either using it as a shorthand, or they misunderstand the term. I'm sure this has been explained to you before, but if not, glad I could clear it up for you.

 

[Poster0]

In that case, the world is full of atheists who do not understand how science works as most claim that what they say is proven i.e fossil record, and what anyone else says is false.

Yes, they often try to make others look stupid by suggesting that they don't understand such things, however your common sense easily refutes their fallacy. Thank you.

 

[Armoured]

Sorry Moderators but do you specialise in making ridiculous claims Armoured?

What's ridiculous about explaining to you how morality works?

Theories are neither moral nor immoral. They are inherently amoral. How people apply them can be moral or immoral, but not the theory.

 

[As I was saying]

The theory of evolution is neither moral nor immoral, nor does it strive to be either; it is just fact. Edudaimonia, Mark

The theory of evolution is what you want to be. Most atheists use it to get God out of the picture and Margaret Sanger of Planned Parenthood used it to justify the slaughter of little innocent babies in the womb.

 

[Armoured]

Yes, they often try to make others look stupid by suggesting that they don't understand such things, however your common sense easily refutes their fallacy. Thank you.

Fallacy fallacy.

 

[Armoured]

The theory of evolution is what you want to be. Most atheists use it to get God out of the picture and Margaret Sanger of Planned Parenthood used it to justify the slaughter of little innocent babies in the womb.

Once again, even if what you say is true, that doesn't effect the morality or otherwise of the theory of evolution.

 

[Poster0]

If that's what they say, good for them. No one said that atheists can't misunderstand science or terminology.

The fact, however, is that science simply doesn't deal in proof, but rather evidence either for or against. If anyone talks about science "proving" anything, they are either using it as a shorthand, or they misunderstand the term. I'm sure this has been explained to you before, but if not, glad I could clear it up for you.

Please, your assertion is not true. Its merely a tactic used to justify ridiculous theories that cannot be proven.

 

[As I was saying]

I think I couldn´t be any clearer: No, this is not what evolution theory says.

So what does it say apart from the claim of some atheists that it says whatever you want it to say and bearing in mind that no atheist speaks for another (so I am told)?

 

[Poster0]

Fallacy fallacy.

Your assertion is fallacious.

 

[Armoured]

Please, your assertion is not true. Its merely a tactic used to justify ridiculous theories that cannot be proven.

No, it's a fundamental quality of the scientific method. Which you may like to research a little since it seems to exercise you so much.

 

[Armoured]

So what does it say apart from the claim of some atheists that it says whatever you want it to say and bearing in mind that no atheist speaks for another (so I am told)?

"The theory of evolution by natural selection, first formulated in Darwin's book "On the Origin of Species" in 1859, is the process by which organisms change over time as a result of changes in heritable physical or behavioral traits. Changes that allow an organism to better adapt to its environment will help it survive and have more offspring. "
http://www.livescience.com/474-controversy-evolution-works.html

 

[Armoured]

Your assertion is fallacious.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy

 

[As I was saying]

Christians make up ~1/3 of the human population. I have no idea if the majority of the 7 billion people on the planet that accept evolution are Christian, it is true that the majority of Christians accept evolution.

Come on. You have got to do better than this. You cannot make claims that the majority of christians accept evolution when you have no evidence at all that it is true. All you can say it is my opinion that the majority of christians accept evolution but I have no proof so it is no more than my opinion.

 

[As I was saying]

Please, your assertion is not true. Its merely a tactic used to justify ridiculous theories that cannot be proven.

If, as they claim science doesn't deal in proof, they have to stop saying that the fossil record is proof of evolution.