Dick's Choice
-
This post is inspired by Richie "cupcake" Hughes' post over on TSZ
This post is inspired by Richie "cupcake" Hughes' post over on TSZ
Dick Hughes, is a good, atheist man with his own brand of morality who finds himself in a terrible position: He is in a hospital which has caught fire and he only has time to visit one of two rooms and escape before the whole building comes down, killing all within.
In room A is a beautiful, newborn baby girl. There is time to save only her.
In room B there are 10,000 IVF embryos, each waiting to develop into a wonderful child. There is time to save only them.
In room B there are 10,000 IVF embryos, each waiting to develop into a wonderful child. There is time to save only them.
Should Dick:
1) Save the Baby
2) Save the IVF embryos
3) Save neither as natural selection knows best
1) Save the Baby
2) Save the IVF embryos
3) Save neither as natural selection knows best
And if (3) Should he even save himself from the fire?
Richie Hughes opines:
LoL! I never said NS is a moral system. If evolutionism is right then there isn't any such thing. Morality would be whatever anyone wanted it to be. And agent actions would only be part of NS if evolutionism is true. Richie needs to shut up for more than two decades as he is totally clueless.
And yes, Allan Miller, it has been proven that I understand natural selection better than at least some evos, li,e Richie.
Richie Hughes opines:
Does he *really* believe that NS is a moral system or that we think it is? Everyone knows gravity or electromagnetism have better morals.Not understanding that agent actions are a part of NS probably means you should go away and read about evolution and not opine on it for a decade or two…
LoL! I never said NS is a moral system. If evolutionism is right then there isn't any such thing. Morality would be whatever anyone wanted it to be. And agent actions would only be part of NS if evolutionism is true. Richie needs to shut up for more than two decades as he is totally clueless.
And yes, Allan Miller, it has been proven that I understand natural selection better than at least some evos, li,e Richie.
posted by Joe G @ 7:48 AM
27 Comments:
At 4:40 AM,
Unknown said…
So, what would you do?
I'd save the baby girl.
At 10:02 AM,
Unknown said…
What's the matter? Can't you tell us your choice?
At 10:10 AM,
Joe G said…
My choice for what- evoTARD of the year?
My choice is to cross that bridge if and when I have to. I was just highlighting Richie's ignorant spewage.
At 11:07 AM,
Unknown said…
My choice is to cross that bridge if and when I have to
Why are you dodging the question? Would it matter whose daughter it was?
At 12:34 PM,
Joe G said…
It's a bullshit scenario. I say if an average person can save one or the other then I can save both.
And guess what? You cannot prove me wrong.
At 1:33 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
No you can't because you're an old fat cripple who lives in imagination land.
Everyone dies because of chubs. Loser.
At 1:37 PM,
Joe G said…
LoL! YOU live in imaginationland, cupcake. If I am old and fat then just about everybody is old and fat, even the best athletes.
Everyone dies cuz of Richie cupcake, who can't even save itself.
At 2:15 PM,
Joe G said…
Richie is the fucker who started the hospital fire...
BWAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
At 2:51 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
Nice meltdown, chubs. :)
At 2:54 PM,
Joe G said…
Your fire melted quite a bit, smoky cupcake.
At 5:48 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
" If I am old and fat then just about everybody is old and fat, even the best athletes."
Joe thinks he is equal to the best athletes.
Another nugget of Tard for the ages.
At 3:59 AM,
Unknown said…
Actually, I usually find such questions pretty goofy myself; I'm always trying to find some other way through the scenario.
I only asked Joe his view initially because I thought he considered the moral choices off for some reason NOT because I wanted to see if he was going to question the reality of the situation.
You two can now resume your insult-fest since you seem to enjoy it so much.
At 1:30 PM,
Joe G said…
Wow, cupcake, that doesn't follow from what I said. However my 10% > your 100%
At 7:07 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
Oh Chubs, you're so stupid.
You are making the ridiculous claim that if you are "old and fat" (you are) then atheletes are too because of their similarity to you.
Logic fail, my chubby tard muffin.
And when an Lion elects to chase a gazelle and the gazelle to run from the lion, they are both actively participating in natural selection. I know you don't understand evolution, you sad twat.
I enjoyed the other thread where you shit yourself rather then give any entailments of ID. Front loaded? Environmentally driven? DONT SAY ANYTHING YOU CAN TEST, JOE!!!!11
At 6:23 AM,
Joe G said…
Richie calling me stupid is like George W. Bush calling Albert Einstein stupid.
And if Richie thinks I am old and fat then it is a given that all athletes are fat. As for old- LoL! I am still more athletic than Richie will ever be.
And when an Lion elects to chase a gazelle and the gazelle to run from the lion, they are both actively participating in natural selection.
In what way? Natural selection is differential reproduction due to heritable accidental genetic changes. And you don't have any idea if that is true for lions and gazelles.
And I provided testable entailments for ID. Don't blame me for your cowardly ignorance, cupcake.
OTOH your position still has nothing.
At 8:54 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
Goodness you are a stupid Chubby Muffin. Must be when you fell as a baby...
The lion being well fed is better equipped to survive and have offspring. If the Gazelle survives, not being dead is a big advantage in having offspring.
You are so fucking ignorant.
And You shit the bed (again) when you had to pick an ID mechanism, because all ID is a tragic griping against Evolution, and it has no entailments.
At 9:07 PM,
Joe G said…
What the fuck?
The lion being well fed is better equipped to survive and have offspring. If the Gazelle survives, not being dead is a big advantage in having offspring.
AGAIN: Natural selection is differential reproduction due to heritable accidental genetic changes
Just cuz the lions eat the gazelle doesn't mean natural selection didit you dumbass. Natural selection has specific entailments. You would know what those are if you weren't such a willfully ignorant fuckwit.
Lions- more specifically the lionesses- hunt in packs, stalking and ambushing their prey. Just so you know.
And I don't have to pick a mechanism, design is a mechanism, ID is not anti-evolution and ID makes a positive case that is supported by the data, evidence, observations and experience.
Why do you say ID doesn't have any entailments AFTER we say what ID's testable entailments are? Are you really that fucking desperate?
Nice to see that yours is just a rant against ID- nice own goal, again, cupcake.
At 9:10 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
Poor old chubs.. BEDSHITTER.
Natural selection selects the fast from the slow. Genes that convey advantages (faster, better hunting instincts, etc) get passed forward.
YOU FAIL 101 biology. stick to getting physics wrong you tragic tubby fuck.
At 9:23 PM,
Joe G said…
Poor Richie cupcake, SHITEATER
Natural selection doesn't select, you fucking evoTARD.
Clueless evoTARDs think nature selects because the word "selection" is part of natural selection.
From "What Evolution Is" page 117:
What Darwin called natural selection is actually a process of elimination.
Page 118:
Do selection and elimination differ in their evolutionary consequences? This question never seems to have been raised in the evolutionary literature. A process of selection would have a concrete objective, the determination of the “best” or “fittest” phenotype. Only a relatively few individuals in a given generation would qualify and survive the selection procedure. That small sample would be only to be able to preserve only a small amount of the whole variance of the parent population. Such survival selection would be highly restrained.
By contrast, mere elimination of the less fit might permit the survival of a rather large number of individuals because they have no obvious deficiencies in fitness. Such a large sample would provide, for instance, the needed material for the exercise of sexual selection. This also explains why survival is so uneven from season to season. The percentage of the less fit would depend on the severity of each year’s environmental conditions.
Whatever is good enough- fast or slow- gets through.
“Natural selection is the simple result of variation, differential reproduction, and heredity—it is mindless and mechanistic.”- UCBerkley on Evolution
“Natural selection is therefore a result of three processes, as first described by Darwin:
Variation
Inheritance
Fecundity
which together result in non-random, unequal survival and reproduction of individuals, which results in changes in the phenotypes present in populations of organisms over time.”- Allen McNeill
“Natural selection is the result of differences in survival and reproduction among individuals of a population that vary in one or more heritable traits.” Page 11 “Biology: Concepts and Applications” Starr fifth edition
Once again I prove I understand natural selection better than Richie, cupcake SHITEATER
BWAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA
At 9:31 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
So much fail Joe, so old slow chubby bedshitter!
Nothing you've posted actually makes a case for you. DUUUUUUUURRRP.
And you managed to confused the actions of the agents (lion, Gazelle) with natural selection itself. Natural selection is mindless - it isn't thinking "geez I fancy more lions" - but the animals are certainly making choices based on their genetic capabilities.
SO MUCH CHUBBY FAIL - keep going - this quote:
“Natural selection is the result of differences in survival and reproduction among individuals of a population that vary in one or more heritable traits.” Page 11 “Biology: Concepts and Applications” Starr fifth edition" makes exactly my case.
DUUURRRRPPPP
At 6:50 AM,
Joe G said…
What an ignorant SHITEATER you are cupcake. Everything I posted made a case for me and proved that you are an ignorant ass.
And again with your ignorant false accusations! I didn't confuse anything and you can't make a case that I did. You have no idea why the animals make the choices they do.
How does that quote make your case, Richie? It says exactly what I said and you said I failed. Obviously you enjoy being a dishonest and ignorant fuckwit.
At 11:10 AM,
Rich Hughes said…
Joe (in is post): "... natural selection knows best"
Joe, later comment: "“Natural selection is the simple result of variation, differential reproduction, and heredity—it is mindless and mechanistic.”- UCBerkley on Evolution"
knows best...mindless and mechanistic.
Idiot.
At 11:16 AM,
Joe G said…
LoL! Richie the cupcake doesn't get it!
I know what NS is, Richie. I also know how evos treat it. My OP refers to how evos treat it.
SHITEATER
At 11:37 AM,
Rich Hughes said…
So you show how evolutionist are wrong with a quote from UCBerkley of evolution.
Only in fat-tard world could that make sense.
No-one holds the views in your post. You tried a parody but fucked up because you're fat Joe Gallien and that's what he does.
You just don't understand the very basics. You never have. But you do love to plug baraminology, you big puffy fool.
At 2:36 PM,
Joe G said…
I showed how you are wrong by quoting UCB. Showing you are wrong is easy as you don't know anything.
At 2:58 PM,
Rich Hughes said…
You showed a view you posted that I don't hold is wrong.
Fat dipshit.
Only an idiot like you can post something wrong, be corrected then claim that that's what those that correct you believe!
At 5:01 PM,
Joe G said…
You showed a view you posted that I don't hold is wrong.
You and your butt buddy Alan Fox are always blathering on how nature selects, as if its telic. Alan thinks NS and AS are the same and AS is far from mindless.
Post a Comment
<< Home