Nobody professes themselves to be wise. It's all about the evidence

@@colinmatts what evidence?

@@colinmatts I've asked for evidence several times, and I've been called all sorts of insults. It's truly hilarious coming from the people who claim to have a monopoly on morals, are showing "true love," etc. 🤣😂

@@twchannel7503 You are confusing the origin of life with the diversity of life.

@@colinmatts Apart from God you have no grounding for truth, morals, or the laws of logic. Trying to explain origin, meaning, morality, and destiny apart from God reduces a person to absurdity or foolishness. Romans 118For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world,g in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Me too :)

Same! I’ve learned so much

Amen and amen

@@judahthejesusfreak241 I subbed to your channel bro 👊🏼

@@ClintonHester88 Aw thanks dude 🔥

Lol, I think you mean Cliff, but I understand as his logic is so child like. ;)

@@SR-ry6hs For example? Or maybe an LOL is all you've really got for us?

@@jessebryant9233 he is still searching

@@SELAHPAUSE I hope so! 🙏

The kid is a critical thinker and very intelligent. We need more critical thinkers.

Evolution is change.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 cliffe answered it spot on. It just went over your head, like the young man. Objective morality comes from a higher source(God) than humans. So whether 19 out of 20 believe that murder is good, it’s always objectively wrong. Society nor the majority determine objective morality. It’s written in stone and cannot be removed. It’s not that hard to get unless you really just don’t want to see it.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 So I'm a mess because I messed up one sentence in my entire argument to you? ... which by the way has blown your argument out of the water because you chosen to ignore SEVERAL of my arguments and all of your responses have been " you provide no evidence" yet this whole time you have only told me why I am wrong and not why your right. Your literally so arrogant that I don't even want ot bother with you anymore. Your clearly going to forever have a biased and burning passion to be against Christianity so there is no point in debating with you.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 wow! The puddle argument here in the wild. Priceless. So if the puddle was a different shape, rape would be awesome? You really need to think and stop with the naturalist dogma.

@@JamesRichardWiley Ok AND

Same!!! It strengthens our faith and believes in Jesus Christ twice fold!!

he has like hundreds of old videos on the channel to watch :)

You legend Larry

Same here.. I'm just trying to watch all the uploaded video because it's not like the other videos that cannot be reliable after some time. It's reliable in the past, present and future

_And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the _*_whole_*_ creation._ *- Mark 16:15* 😉

Unbeknownst to you sir Trees in the Bible is referred to as people

@@SELAHPAUSE Amen. Mark 8 A Blind Man Healed at Bethsaida 22And he cometh to Bethsaida; and they bring a blind man unto him, and besought him to touch him. 23And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town; and when he had spit on his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought. 24And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking. 25After that he put his hands again upon his eyes, and made him look up: and he was restored, and saw every man clearly. 26And he sent him away to his house, saying, Neither go into the town, nor tell it to any in the town.

Haha 😂

@@upsidedownkingdom5263 🤷🏻‍♂️

Can you give "summed up" examples of "the things he believes" that you found questionable?

Correct. You simply can't believe what rational people hold to be true. You have abdicated your rationality for mythology. So I hope you have fun splashing around in the deep end of your pool of delusion.

The brilliant James Tour explains the incredible complexity of a single cell... kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ebZ1e5mKtNGxYJ8.html

not to mention the freaking human life performing the experiment

@Our Savior It seems you haven't a clue as to the meaning of 'creation'.

Are you suggesting that the fact RNA or DNA were not produced within the environment of a laboratory, is somehow a demonstration that a god created life?

@@theoskeptomai2535 I think he's suggesting the irony that once scientists recreate life in the lab, they would have created life - in their efforts to prove that life came about by chance

Exactly, I’m surprised he didn’t catch his own contradiction

Indeed, seems like university teaches them to practice cognitive dissonance instead of pursuing real truth. It's all politics in the end.

There is no objective morality. Our species decides what is moral in group decisions.

@@JamesRichardWiley Should we believe that because you are the greatest or the people who taught you that to you are the greatest? You didn’t provide hard evidence so that is the only thing you could be appealing to for your claim.

@@gitzah Seems like they teach them valueless propositions and blind faith dogma, in public universities that should be a violation of the separation of church and state, there shouldn’t be an exception to it because they claim they are so advanced as to be beyond religion, their principles are certainly religious in nature and practice.

How did you come to conclude that this Jesus ever existed?

​@@theoskeptomai2535 A pesky little thing called history.

@@curiousgeorge555 How does history demonstrate the existence of this Jesus?

@@theoskeptomai2535 He died on a cross and was resurrected from death. The Bible proves this through many eyewitnesses. Scholars and many Christians alike have faith and believe in the considerable evidence of the Bible's history; Please do your research with proper care. 💯

@@davidlegkodukh6969 Will you agree that a _firsthand eyewitness account_ is one in which the author of such claim is 1) known; 2) that the author states unequivocally that he or she personally witnessed the events in question (in this case the supposed resurrection of this Jesus), 3) attests that their account is a valid, accurate, and authentic account of such events? Yes or no.

Because of the finite time we actually KNOW we have, and the experiences that affect our lives, and those around us. Is life only meaningful if it goes on forever? What a sad way to live.

@@SR-ry6hs “because of the finite time we actually know we have”. If that’s why human lives have value(which was the question) then I feel so very sorry for you.

Right and wrong is written on our hearts. Unfortunately entire civilizations choose to ignore it and make their own rights and wrongs.

Yeah Cliff is standing on mars hill

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e82gp6t7m8jdYqM.html

I agree Cliffe can't prove his case for Jesus and Jesus won't offer to help.

@@JamesRichardWiley fools sounds foolish alike.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 i see you're lacking friends, go find someone else to play with.

@Kamesha Winn It makes sense, right?

This is a good point @billy. I think the disconnect is that "evolutionary" reasons for things are simply reasons why said thing is beneficial and is in no way connected to history, yet it is posited as a historical fact , ironically, in a scientific context

Very well stated. Everything that evolves MUST first exist.

@@ChrisTheKing172 I agree that people likely needed other people right from the start in order to survive. But I think the definition for objective has been skewed by the student in the video and may be influencing your phrase about objective morality (correct me if I'm wrong though). The student seemed to be treating the word "objective" as though it means that which has the consensus. But that is not the definition of objective. EDIT: Actually I think I might be wrong about your phrase- rather, are you saying, humans invented a set of morals that they then taught amongst themselves as objective morality? I'm confusing myself now haha

@@ChrisTheKing172 Ah yes, thanks for that clarification. It would make sense that ancient people would develop general rules of morality for their group's survival. Of course, it often didn't apply to other competing or enemy groups. Now that the internet is somewhat making us more interdependent in a global sense, we are moving closer to being one group or tribe, so we have more compassion on those outside our group perhaps. But general rules for a group are subjective. Whereas objective morality is based on the idea there are truths regarding right or wrong that are independent of our opinions whether they are unanimous or not. Regarding absolute morals: Where Jesus told the Pharisees off for insisting he not heal on the Sabbath, Jesus was using absolute moral principle/s to apply the moral laws governing his group (Israel) according to context, whereas the Pharisees were applying moral law as though it were absolute. I believe God's absolute objective principles of right and wrong should govern any moral law. However, I understand the need to disregard context in cases where a person or group is incapable of understanding context. Such a parent's rule for their small child not to go near the road (regardless of cars being on the road at the time).

Here are the first three demands from your barbaric, bloodthirsty, self centered god invented and worshiped by warring Hebrew tribes living in the Sinai Desert. 1. I am the Lord your God you shall not have other competing gods before me. 2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. 3. Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day. Summary: All the other rival gods are false and you shall not worship them says the Hebrew priests to the people.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 Lol no one is arguing that people won't have differing opinions or subjective ones. He's arguing that no matter what a "majority/society" says, there are a few objective morals in this world. Now, you can go ahead and argue in circles and say "well, his objective claim is subjective to him" then the opposing can say "well, you're claim that my claim is subjective is also an objective claim"

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 I mean, all those you stated are still encompassed within the 10 commandments. Not so sure what you’re trying to get at here “You guys” lol it’s a ridicule on both sides hence why I said it’s circular.. meaning both parties are in the wrong when you argue that way and never get anywhere lol.. but if you only want to see one side being wrong, then sure.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 I mean, a lot fall into what adultery is. Now, for homosexuality, sure, that’s another discussion yes there are people who still kill and rape. Okay, since it’s not 100% that people don’t rape, are you saying that there are times rape is morally correct

@@JamesRichardWiley There’s no point in trying to reason with you but to anyone who reads your comment. Every command from God is not a just a random command given for control. There is a reason behind the rule and given the context it would be easy to understand. 1 Command, having no other gods before him. Why? Because the Yahweh of the OT, had guided them out of Egypt to be set apart from the false worship and pagan practices of that culture which were destroying human flourishing thriving. Those other gods would lead to continue living corruptly 2. Lord’s name in vain, as a child is very disrespectful to tarnish your parents name. God is the same way, no one likes to be disrespected, why would God not deserve or demand respect. 3. Sabbath and a day of rest also to serve as a day to remember what God did for them. True Summary: God created the world, and humans in their rebellious free will chose to commit evil crimes against one another and go against God’s intention. In his patience, he lead an oppressed group of people in slavery out of their oppression to shape into his intended good creation. Rules were made to help them grow and show the audience reading how God’s commands are for your own good. He was shaping a nation that was helpless. Deeper meaning, the rules were meant to be broken. To show how good people aren’t. Only then would they realize and humble themselves before God. And the nation of Israel did that, they rebelled against God broke his rules, what ended up happening. They became oppressed, full of pride eventually under the rule of the Roman Empire. God being a humbled himself to the form of human in Jesus revealing how the hearts of men are wicked and the intention behind the rules. Not only that, he gives a way out by dying on the cross, and rising from the dead overcoming this world of evil to come back and eventually judge and bind evil forever.

Believing extraordinary events occurred outside Nature is easy. Proving to others they occurred - not so much.

@@JamesRichardWiley Proof only exists in mathematics.

What are you learning, that snakes talk, or corpses come alive or a 500 foot wooden boat is seaworthy? In what reality?

@@JamesRichardWiley He is learning that rocks magically don't come to life. Killing is actually wrong and atheists are willfully ignorant.

@@JamesRichardWiley Who created the earth?

Would you also consider a fool to be one who adopts the existence of a god whose reality is unsubstantiated by any demonstrable evidence, and then abdicates his or her whole life in a pursuit to worshipping such a mythological deity?

​@@theoskeptomai2535 Your question is the same that Pilate asked, “What is truth?

@@wendellwinafred You avoided the question. Here it is again: Would you also consider a fool to be one who adopts the existence of a god whose reality is unsubstantiated by any demonstrable evidence, and then abdicates his or her whole life in a pursuit to worshipping such a mythological deity? Yes or no.

@@theoskeptomai2535 How long will you people turn my glory into shame? How long will you love delusions and seek false gods

@@wendellwinafred You avoided the question. Here it is again: Would you also consider a fool to be one who adopts the existence of a god whose reality is unsubstantiated by any demonstrable evidence, and then abdicates his or her whole life in a pursuit to worshipping such a mythological deity? Yes or no.

If there is one thing we can all take away from this, it is Cliffe's patience.

Can God erase sin whenever He feels like it? Can God squish Satan whenever He feels like it? Why not?

@@JamesRichardWiley 1. Biblically, it’s a little more complex. GOD has HIS elect and HE will unveil their spiritual eyes and soul and bring them into belief in JESUS. HE does that according to HIS divine timeline in said individuals life. 2. Satan is a defeated enemy so in that sense he has been squashed. Does he still deceive and influence? Yes. Under GOD’S sovereign will. Satan will be cast into eternal hell along with his cohorts but until then he will continue to operate in GOD’S sovereign plan.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 if that was for me can you clarify.

@@JamesRichardWiley He did erase sin bro, when Jesus died on the cross for us IT WAS FINISHED.

That is how it is blind faith, you’ve never seen evolution create things without reason just to exist but that makes you feel important, doesn’t mean it’s the truth.

@@davidbermudez7704 Did nothing tell you that?

i think i got brain damage by listening to that guys logic... God bless him.

We believe in evolution because of the mountains of evidence from the fossil record and DNA that supports the model

@@colinmatts why have humans evolved different then all other creatures ... example , all animals still live the same as they did in the beginning , birds still make nests and live in trees....humans build houses , fly in planes , drive in cars , build cities etc etc ... why are humans different ?

The first guy was coherent and respectful. Cliffe was neither in his argument. Cliffe demands the proof of a creative mechanism in evolution but requires no proof for his own position.

@@jamesbullo Cliffe uses "evidence" as the standard, not proof. He's stated many times you can't prove, only bring up evidence for your argument(s).

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 does someone really have to "prove" to you that it's wrong to kidnap, torture, rape, kill, cook and eat an innocent 5 year old? This moral obligation is axiomatic. It's also an obvious enough that even the most hardened skeptic can recognize it for what it is. Only the most foolhardy cynic will refuse to admit the obvious. This is classic cognitive dissonance. You know it's truly wrong no matter who thinks otherwise but you also know that a value that's outside the human consciousness is not the RESULT of human consciousness so rather than even consider the possibility of divine providence, you deny the truth.

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 I get what you’re saying, but the argument at this point isn’t to prove objective morality, but to provide evidence that it exists. Nothing is proven, everything that anyone believes is a result of examining evidence and drawing a conclusion

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 I’m not sure that’s what Cliffe is doing. I think he is citing the Nazi trials to dismantle the socialization argument, albeit not very neatly. The kid responds by positing the utilitarian argument which, incidentally, is actually an objective moral argument

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 the question is if there is evidence that any objective morality exists. See, if there is no such thing as objective morality then there was nothing actually wrong with the holocaust. It just so happens that most other countries disagreed with Germany. But let’s say that they hadn’t. Let’s say that the majority of nations agreed with the Nazis and helped them complete their objectives. We’ll if morality is only ever subjective, then so what? It’s just a matter of preference. So then words like right and wrong have no meaning. They are just made up to suit preference. Are you willing to hold the position that Nazi Germany stood on equal moral footing for their actions as the non-violent Civil Rights movement? That it’s all simply relative?

@@sterlingfallsproductions3930 I think you miss my point entirely. I’ve actually been saying that there is a stark difference between universal and objective morality. Universal morality doesn’t exist and is therefore irrelevant. Objective morality does not require universal morality to exist in order to be true. I went “straight to the holocaust” because it was relevant to the vid and it establishes a premise that when social systems fail, there is a larger/overarching morality that we turn to. I’m not making a Christian argument, I’m stating the case for objective morality. Let’s deal with exhibit A before we move on to B through Z

The Cosmos is eternal energy that is expanding and contracting within itself to form and dissolve all things. How do I know this? I just made it up. Prove me wrong.

@@JamesRichardWiley "Prove me wrong" is not how logic works. A claim carries its own burden of proof. So, go ahead and proof yourself right instead.

@James Richard Wiley Cliffe might say : please give evidences supported this , and we can discuss about those evidences

@@mikeyuskiw3477 Never say that to an atheist! Oh, no, they "lack belief"! But what are the implications of their "lack of belief" in the supernatural? Well, that leaves them with what exactly? Okay, and how do they prove that? They won't even try!

Which means that when you use the term 'evolution' you are not talking about it in the Darwinian sense/common ancestry.

I agree, I think these videos would reach 10x the amount of people if only they could be branded and cut a little better

@@krabbble very true.

He is teaching some defective doctrine though. “Part of creator of the cosmos became incarnated as the Son” God does not exist of parts.

@@nonpossenonpeccare9104 I've watched a lot of his videos where he explains it better. What he's doing isn't easy, he has to be appreciated rather than being judged

@@nonpossenonpeccare9104 I don’t think he’s speaking that literally, it’s just a way of explain God being triune in nature

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e82gp6t7m8jdYqM.html

Lots of words but no Jesus.

That’s apart of his personality I love it.

@@swiftblackninja yea but no matter how true your words are, bad delivery can make it harder for anyone to receive

I think he's becoming more aggressive lately. We need to keep praying for this man.

Agreed. Comes off as too fanatical. Comes off as close mindedness

@@lightworker4512 well when you have been hearing the same arguments from students for 40+ years i think anyone would start to lose their patience

Cliffe has a book to back up his argument. But no Jesus or God. Case dismissed.

Seeing that you understand the meaning of "objective," as do I (as I agree with your definition), do you assert there to be objective moral values as many Christians do?

@@theoskeptomai2535 yes. And you assert subjective moral values only exist. Could you please elaborate on how you subjectively value a human life as this is the basis for our moral attitude to others?

@@peterberr3888 I answered this very question thoroughly when you asked the very same question in another comment thread, did I not?

@Theo Skeptomai it did not appear in my comments; i get a feeling a lot of stuff goes missing in these youtube comments. Pls copy + paste here.

@@theoskeptomai2535 Yes, I do believe that objective morality exists, as do most people on earth, not just Christians.

Plus it does not explain, and never will, just where all this "stuff" like matter, space, the elements, the atom, energy, etc came from. Nothing would ever be able to create anything. I'm amazed how people can discount God, think that the existence of God is crazy, but yet think that somehow everything just magically appeared.

@@spacecoastz4026 Yeah exactly, it boggles my mind.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/e82gp6t7m8jdYqM.html

Yes. And slightly less narcissism wouldn't hurt either.

I wouldn't say it was pride or narcissism that was stopping his understanding of this particular argument (although, he is human so likely does have pride etc), in this case it seems more like he thinks objective morality means the morality which has consensus. I might be wrong, but from the context of his arguments, it seems he is defining objective in that way. To me, it seemed neither understood what the other was getting at because they were looking at objective morality from the perspective of their own trains of thought, and not imagining themselves in eachother's shoes in order to explain in a way the other could understand based on their train of thought at the time. I think when the student gets time alone to think about it, he will recognise what cliff was really getting at.

Morality is not objective. Does the universe care what you do or think?

Boooooooo

So he’s not allowed to talk to people that don’t have experience? He should just keep his experience and studies to himself? That’s a lazy argument on your end

Care to link the video? id like to see it

Assertions such as "design implies intelligence", or "design implies a designer", or "absolute truth doesn't change", or "repeatable occurrence implies evidence"....all those assertions that somehow would fail if only he debated someone who has more experience? I don't think so.

Right. So you would prefer better obfuscation. Got it. These students do just fine regardless of how little you think if them.

@@andrewgravagna talk to whomever you wish. Do you want to have a discussion or trounce some first year biology students. Then Cliff is your man. If you want to test your arguments then this is not the forum. Just spreading bad logic is not helping people, unless this is spot the logical fallacies game.

man get this guy out of here so dumb it scary

Doesn't get what exactly? Which guy?

"Humans are created in the image of GOD"...how do you KNOW this?

Has this god written these basic rules in my heart?

@@theoskeptomai2535 give it a rest! No one is interested in submitting to your absurd interrogations.

@@saintpaulofyoutube4416 No. I will not give it a rest. I am hear to discuss the claims Jonah Ghost has made. I may learn something by having a discussion with him. 1) How is my question a "absurd interrogation"? 2) What question could I ask that would NOT be considered by you to be "absurd interrogation"?

@@theoskeptomai2535 1) the repetitive nature of your interrogations make your questions absurd. 2) the only question YOU could ask that isn't absurd is a question YOU didn't think of. You're ridiculous. When are you going to realize it?

@@saintpaulofyoutube4416 1) When have I ever asked my question above before? Be specific.

It's a heart issue, rationalized with guise of science

...and a lifetime of indoctrination and the failure to think critically.

@@jessebryant9233 Careful Jesse, you're actually describing Christians.

@@theoskeptomai2535 Look up Jim Wallance and get back to us later. Adults are speaking.

@@rinzler9171 Why would I need to look up Jim Wallace?

@Our Savior oh, so you follow the rules of the old testament? Dang, how are you not in jail? Doesn't change morals, that's rich.

If morality is subjective, there is no morality.

Does this supposed standard of morality address every moral dilemma?

@@dogelife7901Are the ANY other assessments you deem to not be subjective?

MORALITY - Child Abuse: 1) In 1880, the ages of consent were set at 10 or 12 in most states, with the exception of Delaware, where it was 7. It was morally-acceptable; until, it became morally-unacceptable. 2) Children as young as four years old worked long hours in factories. This was morally-acceptable until laws were passed that made child labor morally-unacceptable. 3) Children have been beaten and abandoned for thousands of years, based primarily on the belief that children are the property of their parents. In most ancient societies it was morally-acceptable for the father to kill his children for disobedience and the sexual abuse of children was also morally-acceptable and women often participated in the abuse. Petronius, recorded the rape of a seven-year-old girl witnessed by a line of clapping women. Eventually these atrocities became morally-unacceptable. Murder: 1) In the Phillipines, the president was elected on a platform for killing hundreds of thousands of drug dealers, and users, and gave carte-blanche, to the population, to murder anyone they suspect is involved in drugs. This resulted in thousands of innocent people being murdered; but, it was deemed morally-acceptable. 2) In the Bible, your god, made murder one of the Ten Commandments, and then, proceeded to break the very law he set-down and you Christians give him a pass; cause, you claim that he can do whatever he wants, after all: he's god. Rape: 1) In the United States, prior to the mid 1970s, marital rape was morally-acceptable, and exempted from ordinary rape laws. The exemption is also found in the 1962 Model Penal Code, which stated that "A male who has sexual intercourse with a female not his wife is guilty of rape . . ." It wasn't until the middle 1970's that it became morally-unacceptable. 2) For a long time, the rape of a woman was considered a property crime against the victim's husband or father. The word itself derives from the Latin word rapere, or seize. It wasn't until the 11th and 12th centuries that rape began to be considered more as a violent, sexual crime against the victim. 3) In the Old and New Testament, your god, is running around impregnating whomever he chooses with his magical sperm; whereby, he leaves the child without a parental, material father. 4) We also have your Moses telling the Israelites, after a battle, to take the virgins as spoils of war and do with them as you will. Fornication - 1) It was Paul who chastised the church in Corinth for practicing fornication and having sex with the Father's wife; something, that the infidels would not dare do. I Cor.5:1 - "It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife." 2) And we all know that if you want to have sex before marriage: find a Christian girl. Stealing - The American Indians never had a word for stealing, and even today, there are tribal societies; whereby, the entire community shares in the prosperity, and wealth, of another individual within the community. They are not selfish and if one member prospers; then, the entire community benefits. To them: there is no such thing as stealing. 1) Your televangelists steal money everyday from the sick and elderly and you people try to sugar-coat it by saying that they are using the money for God's work, or that, the sick and elderly are freely giving it away; so, it's not really stealing. 2) It was you Christians who stole this land from the Native Americans and you just call it conquest, and if that wasn't bad enough, you guys forced them onto reservations cause of your gluttony and you couldn't just share the land with them. You called them savages cause they didn't believe in your God and by the end you murdered 3.4 million Native Americans. Morality, like everything else: expands and contracts, rises and falls. Where is your god.?

Well said.

Nobody knows for certain how life originated. That means it's a mystery that needs to be researched. Superimposing the super natural on the issue does nothing to illuminate it

@@colinmatts the origin of life is a historical question. You first sentence is an unsubstantiated claim.

If you mean, the "vegetables" Cliffe is promoting,...then I don't see it as you do. To me, he is promoting "junk food". It's all in how you perceive the topic, though.

@@DRayL_ Got any meat and potatoes for us, "Deavon"?

@@jessebryant9233 I'm still looking for them. 🙂

@@DRayL_ Take all the time you need... [elevator music]

You don't think moral assessments change by situation or over time?