Where do atheists get their morality from?

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, considering the 150,000 year gap between anatomically modern humans and behaviorally modern humans it would be difficult to establish that some form of religious or sacred morality was manufactured before any sort of practical or secular morality was engaged in by homo sapiens. Consider, btw, that the term "behaviorally modern" does not imply elaborate religious observances. That comes even later. All of this is ignoring the social aspect of our ancestors which stretches back 2.5my (and to be honest, a great deal further). Good luck painting any sort of superstition as the origin of morality. Religious anything (including it's belligerent ramblings on the subject of morality) is a footnote, a minor mention at the end of the chapter on human beings. Look how quickly it rose and then faded with relation to the vast span of time we've been here.

[Angrboda]

It started with the Neanderthals as I probably already stated especially since the other two were not around at the time the Neanderthals were developing their worship.

{...snip...}

I'll repeat my earlier statement about Ancient Greece. They had their gods... a whole pantheon of them; and they certainly decorated the graves of their loved ones (and I'm understating the word "decorated" very much). But you know what they didn't do? They didn't have a religious law from their gods... no religious morality.

Their connection with their gods was... don't piss them off. They went to temples to ask for good things in their life, and made offerings (usually small carvings) that they thought that their gods would appreciate. Why? So that the blind-chances of happen-stance might turn out well for them.

The ancient history of China was much the same. For a few thousand years, until sometime in the first millennium BCE, Chinese spiritual practices focused on divination, practiced by shaman, in order to help the people arrive at a "fortunate" (lucky) result to their plans, hopes and dreams. There was nothing moral about it. It was reading of bones and tea leaves.

The Spring and Autumn period gave rise to a blossoming of religious philosophies, but these philosophies took no heed of the growing practice of god worship, and were largely secular in nature. To call these systems "religious morality" in the Western sense associated with the Semitic religions would result in the grossest of distortions.

[Red Celt]

The ancient history of China was much the same. For a few thousand years, until sometime in the first millennium BCE, Chinese spiritual practices focused on divination, practiced by shaman, in order to help the people arrive at a "fortunate" (lucky) result to their plans, hopes and dreams. There was nothing moral about it. It was reading of bones and tea leaves.

The Spring and Autumn period gave rise to a blossoming of religious philosophies, but these philosophies took no heed of the growing practice of god worship, and were largely secular in nature. To call these systems "religious morality" in the Western sense associated with the Semitic religions would result in the grossest of distortions.

Tsze-kung asked, saying, "Is there one word which may serve as a rule
of practice for all one's life?" The Master said, "Is not Reciprocity such a
word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others."

— Confucius, Analects XV.24

[Polaris]

That was evidence I just found by a five-minute search and was half the evidence I posted.

And now you have all the time you need. I'm patient. I'll wait.

You know that secular implies that there is a separation between itself and religion, right?

Define "separation" as you apply it here. According to both your source and the Oxford English Dictionary, the two are simply the absence of the other.

It started with the Neanderthals as I probably already stated especially since the other two were not around at the time the Neanderthals were developing their worship.

Evidence?

(While the Denisovan specimen found dated to 41 Kya, genomic sequencing dated the divergence of the Neanderthal and Denisovan lines at 600-650 Kya. Proto-Neanderthal arrived in Europe 350-600 Kya. And for those of you playing along at home, this means our lucky contestant now has to provide evidence for the social lives of, not one, but two species, from at least 600,000 years ago. Are you ready contestant?)

The Denisova DNA strand is only expressed in a small number of people (ethnic Oceanians) and was a rather late addition, around the time of the Cro-Magnon.

It's being expressed in a small number of people is irrelevant. And I won't pretend to be knowledgeable about the sequencing of the genomes and such, but it is not clear to me why the Denisovan DNA in the human genome couldn't have come by way of inter-breeding between Neanderthal and Denisovan at any time during the 600,000 year co-existence. But, as noted, I'm not an expert on that, so if you know different, please let me know. (With a citation from the scientific literature.)

However, do note, what is at issue here is not when Denisovan interbred with homo sapiens, but whether there was interbreeding — or even contact — between Neanderthal and Denisovan prior to the first evidence of religious or secular culture in either. Since Denisovan diverged from Neanderthal (which we know from genomic sequencing), the suggestion that they didn't have contact with each other between their divergence at ~640 Kya and the first cultural artifacts of either is gonna be rather difficult to prove. But I won't prejudge you; show me what you've got.



Breaking news... dit.. dit.. dit.. dit..

The earliest cultural assemblages for Neanderthal are the Mousterian cultural artifacts, dated at 300,000 years ago. Do you know what that means contestant? Yes, it means that Denisovan and Neanderthal may have co-existed for as long as 300,000 years prior to any cultural artifacts for either of them that we know of currently. "Ouch! That's gotta hurt!"

I posted the other evidence for the Neanderthals. I'm not posting it again.

The Denosivian and Neanderthals did not live in the same environment and unlike Cro-Magnon/Neanderthal expected interactions, there is absolutely no evidence the two ever interacted. The oldest fossil for the Denosivian sub-species dates to 80,000 years ago....there was divergence in the two groups (modern humans and Denosivians) roughly 170,000-250,000 (that 700,000 year date is antiquated and was based on conjecture) years ago but those were not the actual species at that time. Evidence

The genetic similarities between the Neanderthals and Denosivians was ruled out as inconclusive by experts based on the DNA extracted from the toe....coupled with the fact that none of the other features of the Denosivian specimen compared with the Neanderthals, the genetic interactions between the two groups have further been questioned (bluntly, denied) by anthropologists.

It being expressed in small amount of people isolated to a certain region means this sub-species was isolated to a certain region.