Great Atheist Bomb Drops!

[WhatsGoingOnBigGuy]

Moral thruths come from evolution. That's why they are universal in a way. Yes, they do exist and there is a well-understood reason why. The existence of a deity is irrelevant for that though, One can be a decent man either way.

There is no such thing as morality or moral truth without God. In a godless nihilist reality everything considered to be popularly "moral" would simply be a rule of arbitrary human construction, not a metaphysical constant. Without God even murder is not inherently wrong and the decision as to whether or not it would be prohibited in society would essentially come down to popular opinion. We have temporal laws against these things because our ancestors who drafted them were informed by God's law and implemented them to reflect it.

A "decent man" to a nihilist is a completely arbitrary descriptor that can mean something different in a million different settings.

[Insuperable]

You call that a bomb? I had most of these thoughts when I was a borderline atheist, at 17 years old. Buaaha.

[Aldaris]

No one has ever observed macro-evolution.

What counts as micro/macro-evolution is as shady as it gets in the first place, but two points there. You can't expect to observe something like a fish turning into an amphibian in your or anyone else's lifetime, because that process takes more time than that. But a crucial thing is that just because we can't directly observe something doesn't mean we don't have enough evidence to prove it beyond the reasonable doubt.

It's totally asinine to believe that slime came alive over time to produce all the life we see today.

Man, it's a bit more complex than that. :-) No actual biologist would ever phrase it like this. It's just a childish simplification which is easy to attack. Otherwise known as a strawman.

Things do bring forth after their kind, as the Bible says. But that's not exactly the same idea as "species." There's variation within kinds, but no one has ever seen a dog produce a non-dog, etc.

If we ever saw something like that, that would actually poke a huge hole in the evolution theory, not the other way around - once a 'thing' is within a clade, it's there forever. We're eukaryotes, mammals, great apes, etc. Same goes for everything else. Now define what's a 'kind'.

[Valkyrion]

Atheism is basic imbecility.

Atheism is awkward term, because it contains root of Greek word "Theos" for god in itself what unintentionally can look as implying that atheists are ones that fight against some divine entities and religion, while atheism is practically simply rejection of believing in statements that have no valid empirical proofs.

Moral truths cannot be discovered by science, they come from tradition (science operates in a different domain). Moral truths are consecrated so that they are preserved.

Moral truths come from sense of empathy and basic common sense. I don't know what I should say if one claims to need priests or scientific graphs to be able to know what's good and what's not.

Morals are necessary in every day life. This is why, when atheism abolishes religion, the only thing that happens is that the moral void is replaced with dumber and more fanatical cults like wokism, morbid obsession with ecology and animal rights etc.

That's directly connected with what I typed above. Caring for other beings and future of next generations if we talk about ecological issues is not only matter of politics, but about empathy we suppose to have as highly conscious beings we believe we are.

[Aldaris]

There is no such thing as morality or moral truth without God. In a godless nihilist reality everything considered to be popularly "moral" would simply be a rule of arbitrary human construction, not a metaphysical constant. Without God even murder is not inherently wrong and the decision as to whether or not it would be prohibited in society would essentially come down to popular opinion. We have temporal laws against these things because our ancestors who drafted them were informed by God's law and implemented them to reflect it.

A "decent man" to a nihilist is a completely arbitrary descriptor that can mean something different in a million different settings.

Gonna keep it brief. If someone hurts me or my loved ones, I'm going to be angry and react in accord. It has nothing to do whether their actions were 'wrong' in some sense that it was written in the fabric of spacetime. :-) Yeah, there is nothing like some ultimate morality, but there's no difference with the consequences. Do you think me, you, or anyone else would care about some metaphysical mumbo-jumbo if that happened? Philosophy is nice, but don't overdose with that and get real.

[Loki]

Zero evidence you say? Go claim your Nobel Price then.

There is no way the scientific establishment would applaud you with such a reward for destroying their fallacies!

[Loki]

This video is very revealing. YouTube actually deleted the original, because it was too embarrassing for the atheistic professor ... I see the most embarrassing parts have been edited out at the end. But it is nevertheless still revealing of how pathetic atheism is, and how much it has deceived people who THINK they are smart!

In the original view, the atheist professor on the thumbnail image lost his temper in a childish way when it was evident that he was contradicting himself, and that he was talking implausible nonsense. He realised his own stupidity in that moment, it was painful to watch actually.

There is so basis in fact for Darwinian evolution. It's purely based on blind faith.

[Universe]

edit : double post

[Universe]

According to the theory of evolution, advantegous traits get passed down to the next generation.
Okay. So how did the first flying animals came to existance? Evolution supposedly builds up animals little by little, that means among the ancestors of flying animals there were many many generations that had weak and useless limbs (that later supposedly turned into wings). Why did the genes responsible for those useless semi-wings spread if the "wings" didn't provide advantage? (there were many generations that couldn't fly)
There are flightless birds like Emus and ostriches, but their wings are degenerated. According to mainstream science they have ancestors that could fly. So saying "but emus can't fly either" doesn't answer my question. Why was having a useless limb that was a half-wing half-arm an evolutionary advantage?

Note: I'm not an evolution denier, just playing the devil's advocate here. (I'm not a huge "fanboy" of either side, but I believe evolution more than creationism).

Also: how could african monkeys accidentally sail to South America? (That's what evolutionists claim - this is how they explain the existance of monkeys in South America).

[Insuperable]

According to the theory of evolution, advantegous traits get passed down to the next generation.
Okay. So how did the first flying animals came to existance? Evolution supposedly builds up animals little by little, that means among the ancestors of flying animals there were many many generations that had weak and useless limbs (that later supposedly turned into wings). Why did the genes responsible for those useless wings spread if the wings didn't provide advantage? (there were many generations that couldn't fly)

Note: I'm not an evolution denier, just playing the devil's advocate here. (I'm not a huge "fanboy" of either side, but I believe evolution more than creationism).

Advantageous traits passing down has the most to do with a natural selection.

According to theory all living beings came from single cell organisms. Having a single cell, hence no brain, it had no consciousness. It couldn't hunt for food to feed, it couldn't know it's hungry. It fed and evolved simply due to chemical and physical stimulus from the environment and 'luck' obviously.

Theistic evolution proponents will say that evolution was a guided process and atheistic evolution proponents will say it was just so, it's nature, it's science.

And of course, then there is a question how single cell organisms, DNA, RNA or whatever formed out of cosmic soup leading to similar discussions.