Pelafina

You know you can't believe in the theory of evolution, because it is not scientifically proven. It is the best guess we have so far which explains what we see. But if you believe in it, then you are operating on faith, because it's a theory, not fact.

Here is a TED talk about how he built a toaster from scratch.

How come Stef doesn't want to charge money for each copy of the book?

Anyone with any infectious disease should research medical ozone therapy.

Favorite quote in the movie: "I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum."

It's not true that energy and mass are equivalent.

The people who claim “calories in/calories out” are making the unproven claim that if you don’t burn all the calories that you take in, then the excess energy will be stored as fat. This is an assumption.

If this is true, which southern states are good picks to make real estate investments in?

My advice is to listen to Cobra. He knows what he's talking about. I've been doing the ketogenic diet for 6 months now and have had amazing results with weigh loss and energy levels. Body pains and inflammation is completely gone too.

False dichotomy. Why is it that if creationism is BS, therefore evolution is correct? I think they're both BS. Evolution is a pseudoscience.

Is there a logical test to determine whether an action is virtuous or not? Or are virtuous acts dependent on individual preference?

Is there a logical test to determine whether an action is virtuous or not? Or are virtuous acts dependent on individual preference?

There are so many holes in the evolution theory, but for some reason the believers get upset when you bring up the inconsistencies and missing evidence. They are putting forth their claim regarding evolution, therefore, they have the burden of proof. Why don't the evolutionists just claim that they don't know how humans came to be and end it there.

What's a good definition of virtue?

Article and video by Bob Murphy - "But Wouldn't the Warlords Take Over?" http://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ak3TwNXA0w

You can use this same argument to show that morality is subjective, and I would agree with that argument.

Some people like the system of taxation. They're happy to pay taxes and they're happy that the taxman forces non-willing participants to become taxpayers. The willing participants are not being aggressed against, because they consent to the system. The others who make payments unwillingly are victims of theft.

And some people pay their taxes because they consent to that system. Many people feel patriotic when they pay their taxes. You view taxation as theft. Some people consent to it, therefore there is no violation of the NAP with those people.

If not stealing were universally preferable to stealing, and if nobody likes to be stolen from, then why is taxation legal? Obviously people are satisfied with the morality/immorality of taxation. So it is universally preferable to have a taxation system. Maybe people's preferences will change in the future and taxation will be eliminated, or maybe not.

Why are actions which are preferred most of the time considered to be good actions?

I have read UPB. The book doesn't provide a framework that tells whether actions are good or evil. It describes what behaviors tend to be preferred by most people, most of the time.

You haven't pointed out what I said in the previous post you find to be in error. Let me restate my point and my question: How do you come to a conclusion as to what is morally correct? People have different opinions as to what standards of behavior are acceptable. Comparing the correctness or incorrectness of a math equation is not analogous to comparing the correctness or incorrectness of a moral belief.

How do you come to a conclusion as to what is morally correct? People have different opinions as to what standards of behavior are acceptable. Comparing the correctness or incorrectness of a math equation is not analogous to comparing the correctness or incorrectness of a moral belief.

Morals don't exist because they don't have mass or energy.

Morality definition: Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. A particular system of values and principles of conduct, especially one held by a specified person or society. How can a certain action be "right" in the same way that 1+1=2 is correct? Someone may think that putting your kid in time-out is right, and someone else may think it's wrong.