This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

rocket777's Profile

rocket777's Avatar Joined over 7 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by rocket777

More Discussions by rocket777

Latest Comments by rocket777

Go to: Richard Dawkins - Absolute Morality

rocket777's Avatar Jump to comment 20 by rocket777

Not all absolute morality is bad. All absolute means is that some idea has lasted a long time.

For example, the act of murder has rarely been considered moral, except by certain criminal gangs and governments. This is pretty close to an absolute morality.

Actually, I think what is needed are a few basic principles, such as the principle that would find aggressive force (or threats thereof) to be immoral.

With such a principle in hand, one can more easily judge the morality of some act. The non-aggressive force principle would find that both murder and theft were immoral - even if a majority approves - e.g. as might occur in a democracy that votes to transfer wealth by force.

Sat, 01 May 2010 18:48:00 UTC | #464666

Go to: Richard Dawkins - Sunday programme

rocket777's Avatar Jump to comment 3 by rocket777

I found it interesting how the interviewer in a sentence contrasted the debate on man made global warming (designed by man vs. designed by nature) with the debate on evolution and design. Richard, in a short phrase seemed to agree and the conclusion one would draw is that he believes in the man made version of climate change. I believe his words were that the "denial" is prompted by some economic concerns.

Well, I'm a believer in evolution because I have seen with my own eyes many of the pieces of evidence. This would include such evidence as the fossils found in the La Brea tar pits and I've read all of Richard's books plus many others such as the ones on DNA. I've seen chimps, dogs etc. However, when it comes to climate change - an activity that is supposed to be caused by man, in only the last century - I don't find anything near the sorts of evidence that are available for evolution. What I see is political power struggles in its spokespeople and equally powerful (written) evidence. For example, I've read many books that claim that there have been little ice ages and their opposites, yet I've also heard from governmental scientists who claim these were local events and that the hockey stick chart is accurate.

What is missing is the obvious kinds of evidence that would compare to seeing dinosaur bones. This would be the equivalent of seeing the beaches nearby having changed over the last 60 years of my observations. It would be like having winters in New York with average temperatures like those in California instead of record snowfalls.

I'm not saying that the science is settled and that man has had no effect whatsoever; rather, I'm saying that to flippantly compare the evidence for evolution with the evidence for man made global warming is to belittle evolution. Perhaps what we are witnessing here is how memes can spread so easily.

Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:42:00 UTC | #449375

Go to: The Supreme Court and Fred Phelps

rocket777's Avatar Jump to comment 51 by rocket777

The problem with "free speech" is a lack of proper attention to property rights. There IS no legitimate right to free speech unless you are on your own property or have permission of the owner. This would include not only physical trespass but include such things as bullhorns that send sound into another property.

The difficulty arises when dealing with public property. If there wasn't so much "public" property then the question of whether or not the protesters have a right to protest at the funeral would boil down to if the protesters were trespassing or not.

To those who would contend that streets have to be public to be useful, there could be private ownership with easements that provided rules to determine what level of speech and traffic could occur on the privately owned property. Instead of one single rule for everyone everywhere, there could be rules appropriate to the property and according to the wishes of their owners.

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:02:00 UTC | #448253

Go to: There is grandeur in this view of life

rocket777's Avatar Jump to comment 91 by rocket777

It hardly seems probable that the code (i.e. the machine language) came about all at once. But there might simply be one surviving version.

The mitochondria, with their own genome, quite likely a symbiosis from more primitive bacteria, do, in fact, have a seemingly earlier version of the code in a few of the triplets. Either that, or they have evolved since they took up residence in the cell. In either case, it demonstrates that alternate codes can still exist, and perhaps there are more we simply haven't discovered.

Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:28:00 UTC | #417537

Go to: Evolution All Around

rocket777's Avatar Jump to comment 64 by rocket777

So where's the story on the dancing lemur. Bit of a bait and switch if you ask me.

Seriously, is there a utube of this somewhere?

Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:14:00 UTC | #404425

More Comments by rocket777