Does life have value?

Originally posted by apathist
If that helps you, keep it. Atheists don't need magical sky-daddies in order to accept life, death and reality. They are made of stronger and more rational stuff.

I asked the great goddess if jesus lives. She told me nature lives.

You mock Jesus and his teaching but stand by Darwin on the hypothesis that we don't kill off the gene pool that weakens humanity because we are "noble"?

How is being "noble" scientific, or are you saying that the teaching about loving your neighbor that Jesus taught us was based on science.

Which is it?

Originally posted by apathist
Mankind may have been created wholesale by God? Possible, sure. Maybe Heaven's Gate people were right, too. Also maybe the Vikings were right that the key to the afterlife is to die in battle.

I sense you have nothing specific to say to back up your points, so you are taking the
insult route. Not something normal from you, and sad.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I sense you have nothing specific to say to back up your points, so you are taking the
insult route. Not something normal from you, and sad.

Has he called you a troll yet?

It's amazing just how vacuous his reasoning is.

Originally posted by whodey
You mock Jesus and his teaching but stand by Darwin on the hypothesis that we don't kill off the gene pool that weakens humanity because we are "noble"?

How is being "noble" scientific, or are you saying that the teaching about loving your neighbor that Jesus taught us was based on science.

Which is it?

Was that aimed at someone else? I have never mocked jesus and I've never said anything about 'noble'.

Reveal Hidden Content

Originally posted by KellyJay
I sense you have nothing specific to say to back up your points, so you are taking the
insult route. Not something normal from you, and sad.

Which of my points do you claim I'm trying to avoid providing 'back up' for?

If comparing the Genesis account of the origin of mankind to other illogical and unsubstantiated beliefs is insulting for you, that's your problem. One way for you to handle it is to evade the issues by using misdirection, but I see you know that.

Originally posted by whodey
I'm not sure how that answers my question, but OK.

My pappy used to have a wise saying as well. He say, "If you can't stand the heat, don't come into the kitchen".

So instead of starting a thread on the implication that those of faith don't care about life, how bout looking in the mirror instead.

Wise man also say, 'shove it Bob.'

Originally posted by apathist
How do you rate the value of theories? Are they all on equal footing? The asteroid theory is pretty solid but there are competitor theories; that the demise of the dinosaurs allowed mammals to flourish is without reasonable doubt.

Dinosaurs could have died off for a number of reasons, things are dying off today and
there are no asteroids involved. If the area something lives in becomes too dangerous, if
it no longer supports something required, a sickness, and so on, so many things could kill
off a life form. If you believe in a common ancestor for all life, than the countess things
that could go wrong with any species must have never occurred for the longest time to
life, you think that is possible? If dinosaurs were as dangerous as we make out be, got
killed off for some reason, why do you think on a near sterile planet early life could keep
on going, striving, thriving, and becoming more diverse?

Originally posted by whodey
Has he called you a troll yet?

It's amazing just how vacuous his reasoning is.

I've not called anyone a troll in this thread, and what vacuous reasoning? I think your side is doing so poorly that you resort to derailing the thread. Good job.

Originally posted by apathist
Which of my points do you claim I'm trying to avoid providing 'back up' for?

If comparing the Genesis account of the origin of mankind to other illogical and unsubstantiated beliefs is insulting for you, that's your problem. One way for you to handle it is to evade the issues by using misdirection, but I see you know that.

No, I think you are right here and I am wrong, sorry! You didn't do anything wrong, my bad.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You don't know that either.

Actually, I do. (Can even point you to where the meteorite hit).

And a quid pro quo sir, you 'don't' believe in evolution (just an extremely watered down version). It's like my dad saying he likes hard rock music, because he occasionally plays a little Elvis.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Dinosaurs could have died off for a number of reasons, things are dying off today and
there are no asteroids involved. If the area something lives in becomes too dangerous, if
it no longer supports something required, a sickness, and so on, so many things could kill
off a life form.

That's true. Still, the asteroid theory is the best explanation for the dinosaur die-off, by far.

Scientific American, 2010, please read:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/asteroid-killed-dinosaurs/

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Actually, I do. (Can even point you to where the meteorite hit).

And a quid pro quo sir, you 'don't' believe in evolution (just an extremely watered down version). It's like my dad saying he likes hard rock music, because he occasionally plays a little Elvis.

You maybe able to point to where a meteorite hit, you cannot tell what the all of the affects
were due to it. I have said repeated, I do believe in evolution, I just don't believe that all life
started from a single lifeform than changing into what we have now.

Originally posted by apathist
That's true. Still, the asteroid theory is the best explanation for the dinosaur die-off, by far.

Scientific American, 2010, please read:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/asteroid-killed-dinosaurs/

You don't know why they died off, and for all we know there would be some around today.

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you believe in a common ancestor for all life, than the countess things
that could go wrong with any species must have never occurred for the longest time to
life, you think that is possible?

I would say no, die-offs must be pretty routine.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/prehistoric-world/mass-extinction/

Currently the world's coral reefs are disappearing.

If dinosaurs were as dangerous as we make out be, got
killed off for some reason, why do you think on a near sterile planet early life could keep
on going, striving, thriving, and becoming more diverse?
Good question. I think it unlikely that the first time something akin to a single-cell organism capable of reproduction occurred, it spawned all life today. The 'first' time' it happened must have occurred many many times.

Also, I think the idea that life started in one place is simplistic - probably it was developing in many different environments around the globe. Sea-vents, even.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You don't know why they died off, and for all we know there would be some around today.

If knowledge must be absolute, then you're right. But then we don't know if we are really alive and on earth! We could be a virtual simulation in a machine (or the dream of a butterfly!) and the 'real reality' is entirely different then we think. The old brain-in-a-jar or the Matrix philosophy problem. Fun stuff!

Your second point is unlikely to be true, but then I just saw Kong Skull Island.