' If we had not so evolved, we would still operate on the same instinctive basis as frogs, or bats, or lorakeets.'

yea Pericles, real evidence based science. No wonder so much of science is treated with contempt. You certainly have a lot of blind faith.

Why are all you people being sucked in by the ravings of RUNNER?
His tiny mind is never going to come to grips with the real world.
I am also an atheist, but I believe in the power of prayer, not because the power comes from God, but because of the tremendous power of the human brain to react favourably to all forms of external stimuli.

David

"We have evolved to have ethics, to exhibit humane behaviour, to invent religions and create art, to fret about our humanity to the point of suicide and so on."

Pericles, here you have describe a process but can you provide a coherent explanation that is consistent with the facts?

Ethics and humane behaviour, to be products of evolution, would mean a world in which they are profitable, useful endeavours, for "highly evolved animals" in their pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain.

However the fact is crime, notably organised crime and state-sponsored crime against communities and nations, has proven most profitable. Crime pays...unless of course there is a God. Virtue and sacrifice can only be rational if there is a God.

Indeed don't Atheists point to the injustice of this world as evidence that there is no God. So how can you now argue that ethics and humane behaviour are an outcome of human evolution.

Secondly, how can fretting about our humanity be the outcome of an evolutionary process ---a process where only the fittest survive---when it leads (in increasing numbers) to suicide!? Those who fret about their humanity should be falling by the wayside, while the less fretful, less reflective, the less concerned with the welfare of others should be the winners of the evolutionary race. And, again isn't this what Atheist put as evidence against a God who is both Merciful and Omnipotent.

In short, your contention is incoherent and comes into direct conflict with the Atheist argument against the existence of God.

Have another try. I'm enjoying this.

Thank you VK3AUU, well said and so true. The indoctrinated like runner will not answer even the simplest questions, throw out irrelevant quotes in dated English, threaten in the name of their vengeful god, and resort to insults when confronted. They give mental illness a bad name.

Grateful,

Clearly you do not understand evolution. Not surprising given that you reject it.

<<Ethics and humane behaviour, to be products of evolution, would mean a world in which they are profitable, useful endeavours, for "highly evolved animals" in their pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain.>>

No, just survival. The “pursuit of pleasure and avoidance of pain” are simply useful means by which that goal may be achieved.

We're not “highly evolved” either. Evolution is not a ladder to be climbed and nor does it have a “path”. We are not the pinnacle of evolution; nor are we a step closer to it. Evolution can only work with what it’s given. We consider ourselves highly evolved because we have characteristics that we value. Whales might consider themselves highly evolved because they are the biggest creatures. A Lion can take down an unarmed human with ease. Who’s to say they’re not more highly evolved?

<<However the fact is crime, notably organised crime and state-sponsored crime against communities and nations, has proven most profitable. Crime pays...unless of course there is a God.>>

Or a community that’s survival relies upon keeping deviant behaviours to a minimum. You even said “against communities”. You clearly don’t understand the evolution of humans if you don’t understand the role our social structures have played in it. Your opinion on what is consistent with “the facts” is irrelevant if you don’t understand what the facts actually are.

<<Virtue and sacrifice can only be rational if there is a God.>>

Self-preservation and utilitarianism are rational reasons for virtue and sacrifice.

Because some other being wants you to do something, or be some way, is not a rational reason to do it. Unless, of course, they’ve got some hideous, cruel and inescapable punishment in store for you if you don’t … oh, that’s right.

<<Indeed don't Atheists point to the injustice of this world as evidence that there is no God.>>

Injustice is not evidence of no god, it’s just evidence that an omnibenevolent god doesn’t exist. Which is a real problem for the Abrahamic god, wouldn't you think?

A neat piece of doublethink, grateful.

>>Pericles, here you have describe a process but can you provide a coherent explanation that is consistent with the facts?<<

My explanation is in total accord with the facts, grateful. As you very kindly point out:

>>Ethics and humane behaviour, to be products of evolution, would mean a world in which they are profitable, useful endeavours<<

I'm sure that even you can understand that communities of human beings that lack a common basis of ethics would not survive very long. Ethics and humane behaviour form an essential foundation of communities, and have evolved well past the idea that animal instincts alone can support societal living.

And this is a total furphy:

>>Virtue and sacrifice can only be rational if there is a God.<<

I would be interested to hear your justification for that assertion. What evidence can you offer that shows virtue to be a uniquely God-driven state, as opposed to a rationally-evolved product of the human will to survive?

And this is purely preposterous:

>>Secondly, how can fretting about our humanity be the outcome of an evolutionary process ---a process where only the fittest survive---when it leads (in increasing numbers) to suicide!?<<

"Fretting about our humanity" is simply an observation that we are capable of self-awareness in a manner far beyond that of the animal kingdom as a whole. While one of these evolved gifts is the ability to envisage our own death, it is not in itself a sufficient condition to cause suicide.

>>Those who fret about their humanity should be falling by the wayside, while the less fretful, less reflective, the less concerned with the welfare of others should be the winners of the evolutionary race.<<

Do you actually have any evidence for this, grateful? On what basis do you propose that the self-aware are more prone to remove themselves from the gene pool? Or are you just throwing God-shaped rocks?