Morals Come From Evolution

You said: "I believe this is untrue is because natural selection hasn't influenced species that evolved considerably" This sentence is a contradiction. You said that you believe that natural selection (evolution) hasn't influenced that evolved considerably (from evolution). Oh dear. You said: " You said that in order to disprove you, I had to cite examples in a different species. " I'm pretty sure that I didn't say this. I said you had to disprove Natural Selection and Mutation. Furthermore, I specifically pointed out that each species will have it's own morals due to differences of the effects of natural selection. You said: "The "Black Widow". Infamous for the sexual cannibalism shown by the females after mating, This "moral" does enhance chances of survival of offspring. " I said cannibalism weeded humans out from evolution because of a disease it gave them. This doesn't happen with black widows, So evolution doesn't weed them out for it. You can say it's immoral if you want. But that's spider morality so it doesn't matter plus the male does it willingly so it's not violating his autonomy. You said: "But shouldn't all, At least species that have evolved considerably, " They have. They just looks primitive to you because you're a human and you think that intelligence and being big, Etc makes you superior. A bear would probably think you were inferior because it's faster and stronger than you, And the bear would be wrong and so are you. Furthermore. You're assuming that Evolution is necessarily pushing us towards a goal of improvement, It's not. It's random Gene Mutations and dynamic Natural Selection. It doesn't push us towards anything. If we get a survival trait, It's by accident and if it helps us, It's because it fought survival pressures. The same goes for bad and neutral mutations. You said; " I propose, And I truly believe that morals arise from our versions of world view" So you think morals are subjective? That's nice, But the evidence is against you on that one because morality is objective when it's studied, So good luck proving that one. You said: "It is the very same beliefs that prevents Hindus from digging into beef products, While others may not find anything wrong in eating these" Nope, It was natural selection. The beliefs of their culture were a survival pressure and to not follow the no cow policy was counterproductive to one's survival, So the ones who didn't eat the cows bred more because nobody wanted to mate with the cow eaters. Still evolution. You said: "My opponent has told you all that Hitler was killed because our morality, Obtained from evolution, Was superior to his narrow morality. If that were the case, Why do murders still occur? " Yes. Keep bringing this up and making my point stronger. Murders still occur because gene mutations are random. Murderers being around just proves my point because in natural selection, If a species was thriving and had a disposition to produce a murder gene, Evolution would never be able to stop all them, Only the majority. Even someone with the worst genes can breed a little bit, Assuming they didn't die in their childhood. You said: " natural selection have automatically weeded them out? " It did, That's why there are significantly less murders than non murderers. You said: " After all, Hitler was a murderer too. . . . " Yeah, And we see what natural selection did to him. Thanks for the evidence. You said: "I would like to analyze this check-and-balance system" It's not a check and balance system. Natural Selection is a broad term for any factor in nature that could effect your ability to reproduce, That's it. It doesn't "check" the extremity of our actions. The action either gets you killed or it doesn't based on the current survival pressures. You said: "Why then do we find ourselves so different" Because of random mutation. Jeez, Could you at least try to think of the answer yourself before you ask silly questions? You said: "But I am not wrong in saying that it is impossible to find a person with 3 hands" You do realize that people are born with extra limbs right? They're not around because of NATURAL SELECTION. You said: "Let us take the excessive body hair, A characteristic in primitive humans. Gradually, A few genetic variations arose, And gradually this phenomenon shrunk in the population. Now, It is odd to find such people" I guess you haven't seen many people with their shirts off. The answer, Of course, Is natural selection. The world was cold and fur was good. Survival pressures changed when the world got hot. Hair wasn't good anymore. You ever wear a fur coat on a summer afternoon? I'm guessing no. You said: "Evolution has acted uniformly (in this case" Well of course it did in THIS CASE. The ice age going away was a pandemic event. If it had happened on a remote island, There'd still be hairy people in the ace age areas. But all of those areas are different now. Furthermore, There are many cases of species spreading certain genes uniformly when the trait is dominant and necessary. One example is a species of butterfly that gained a certain type of poison immunity from ONE BUG and spread it to the whole species. This was because the mutation was so important for their survival that the others went extinct. On the hitler in Russia thing, Hitler's inferior morals caused him to invade Russia and natural selection punished him. Still fits my model. Well at least this time, You tried to rebut me. You did it using the same points I already rebutted as your justification, So they're just as fallacious. But you tried. Bless your heart. Since this is my last statement. I'd like to thank my opponent for debating. Hopefully you take this as a lesson that you shouldn't repeat the same claims that have already been countered. Your floor.