Why science and religious fatih need not be in conflict: It's as easy as 1-2-3!

[Angrboda]

The revulsion people feel towards the holocaust is evidence that there are moral opinions, not that there are moral facts.  This is weak, Chad.  The feelings are evidence that people have feelings.  Nothing more.  Perhaps you'd like to explain how you torture moral facts out of this?

You seem to have a penchant for ignoring intentionality. Feelings are not just feelings - they are feelings about something. Feeling don't just arise for no reason in response to nothing.

Oh? You've never had a nightmare? Never felt anxiety over nothing? That you feel is no indication that the feeling is a response to something real.

The horror of tragedy, outrage at injustice, and the pangs of conscience are responses to something about or in the world.

All you're doing is restating your initial premise, that feelings are evidence of moral facts.

Sorry, but I'm going to go with the idea that the wrongness of the Holocaust is immediately obvious to anyone with a properly functioning conscience. If someone is going to say that it isn't they better have a damn good reason. Do you?

Sure, physicalism posits a mind which exists in a world of its own making. This 'intentionality' that you speak of can be of things that are entirely fictions of the mind. Even without physicalism, we know that not everything thought up by the mind exists as a real world thing. Care to disprove physicalism? Hell, just provide a naturalistic explanation for morals. You can't do that, can you, because your answer is all witchcraft and sorcery. Some 'obvious' truth that is.

All you've done is double-down on your original assertion and attempted to shift the burden of proof. What you haven't done is give a reason why moral opinions are evidence of moral facts. You're all bluster without a whiff of reason to your answer.