Evolution V Creation

[chatpilot]

rjh4 said:"So while I agree that man is not "blameless" from my worldview, I wonder why with your atheistic worldview you would make such a moral judgement. It seems like you are borrowing from a theistic worldview to make/support such a moral judgement."

Wow!! The old morals comes from god argument. This is nothing more than another fallacy just like your faith. God has nothing to do with morals as is evident in your holy book where god himself showed how immoral he can be. Morality comes from society, culture, and upbringing, I am sure there are some other factors but I think that these play major roles. In some cultures it was okay to sacrifice humans to god, eat one another, etc. These are appalling to us but to those cultures from which they were derived it was as natural as defecation. And man is part of the animal kingdom, just ask a chimpanzee lol.

[KichigaiNeko]

Evolution = the BEST collections of FACTS that humanity has atm to explain the Origins of the species we find in the world today.

Creationism = the infantile fictional "stories" designed to explain the world to a child.
complete with bogeymans, wars, killings and a bunch of goathearders who claim to have won a war by some magical might. (cue: Harry Potter)

[Edwardo Piet]

When Rjh4 says this: "Man is greater....by far (because he is not an animal)."

It just makes me despair even further at humanity (because of religion mostly and this being another sad example). Apparently we are greater than (OTHER) animals by definition. And who makes definitions anyway? Us. :S Very depressing in my view.

I'll give you an example why OTHER apes could be thought to be superior (not more intelligent or sophisticated, but superior) to us.... : They don't have stupid fucking religions.

EvF

[Zen Badger]

[
Man is greater....by far (because he is not an animal).

---

Indeed?

And on what evidence do you base that claim?

[chatpilot]

He bases all of his assertions on the fables he learned in the bible.

[rjh4 is back]

[
Man is greater....by far (because he is not an animal).

---

Indeed?

And on what evidence do you base that claim?

I do base it on what God told us in the Bible.

If you disagree, I invite you to answer the following two questions, which CP has not chosen to do.

Do you think that the killing of ants and slugs, and the like, are equivalent to the killing of humans such that you think, for example, that the Orkin man is a mass murderer?

Do you think that what Hitler and the Nazis did was acceptable/no problem as what they did is no different than what the Orkin man does?

These are simple yes/no questions. If you answer "no", please explain why you answered no.

[Autumnlicious]

Strawman bashing from you sucks donkey balls, rjh4.

Since when did common insects with primitive neurological systems compare to human beings?

You scum.

[leo-rcc]

If you disagree, I invite you to answer the following two questions, which CP has not chosen to do.

Do you think that the killing of ants and slugs, and the like, are equivalent to the killing of humans such that you think, for example, that the Orkin man is a mass murderer?

I had to look up Orkin man as I've never heard of it. Just because humans kill other animals, that does not in any way shape or form mean that humans are not animals. So the question remains, what criteria do you use to place humans outside of the realm of animals?

You want to bring a morality issue into a biological question.

Do you think that what Hitler and the Nazis did was acceptable/no problem as what they did is no different than what the Orkin man does?

Humans are speciests just as much as other animals are. Argumentum at Hitlerum is not valid here either.

[rjh4 is back]

Since when did common insects with primitive neurological systems compare to human beings?

I didn't say they did. In fact, I don't think they are properly comparable. My questions were prompted by CP's statement:

"But in the end like it or not we are just like the lowliest ant or slug of the earth, we live and we die just like everything else on this earth."

After reading over it again, maybe he was just comparing us with them relative to the fact that we both live and die. But if that is the case, he could have clarified this in response to my questions.

But then again, CP also implied that apes were greater than man:

"So I ask you rjh4 who is the greater animal, man or ape?"

And as for me I do not think even killing of apes is comparable with killing humans either. Killing humans is much worse in my worldview.

My point was that if one holds that mankind and animals are the same in kind and are on the same level as to worth, then to be consistent, it seems to me that killing one would be no different than killing the other. But I do not think that those who hold this position are consistent. Now if you do not hold that mankind and animals are the same in kind and are on the same level as to worth, just say so and explain why. Maybe you would agree with me that man is greater than apes.

If you disagree, I invite you to answer the following two questions, which CP has not chosen to do.

Do you think that the killing of ants and slugs, and the like, are equivalent to the killing of humans such that you think, for example, that the Orkin man is a mass murderer?

I had to look up Orkin man as I've never heard of it. Just because humans kill other animals, that does not in any way shape or form mean that humans are not animals. So the question remains, what criteria do you use to place humans outside of the realm of animals?

You want to bring a morality issue into a biological question.

Keep in mind that this whole line of discussion was not centered around whether or not man was an animal. I just threw in my comment about man not being an animal as part of my reasons why I think man is greater than apes. And I totally agree with you that just because humans kill other animals does not mean that humans are not animals. I also was not trying to bring a morality issue into a biological question. I was not trying to imply that at all as noted above.

In answer to your question, though, the whole idea of man being an animal is based on evolutionary (common descent) thinking which I reject. Since I hold to a Christian/Biblical worldview and the Bible indicates that mankind was created to be greater than the animals, then I hold that we are. It is as simple as that.

Humans are speciests just as much as other animals are. Argumentum at Hitlerum is not valid here either.

See above.

[leo-rcc]

In answer to your question, though, the whole idea of man being an animal is based on evolutionary (common descent) thinking which I reject. Since I hold to a Christian/Biblical worldview and the Bible indicates that mankind was created to be greater than the animals, then I hold that we are. It is as simple as that.

What is the bibles definition of greater then?