.......Twilight_guy said:
Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution explains how that fact works.
Poll: Evolution Yay or Nah?
- Thread starter lawrie001
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution explains how that fact works.
If it's science, then it could potentially be proven wrong. That is a requirement for something to be scientific. It must be falsifiable.CScuff said:
Evolution is a theory. In science unless you can see it happening and document it as an actual phenomena (humans are never going to see into the past and be able to ascertain evolution 100%) then its a theory. It's a really good theory that I believe works but its no more fact then the theory of gravity or electromagnetism. We have really, really good explanations for observed phenomena, not facts. Things fall is a fact, gravity is a theory.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
and why would you think said interpretations are incorrect? There are gaps, but we know where the fossils we do have fit in, even a 6 year old would likely agree on the fossil placements in the record by inspection alone. And we have many forms of dating to check the time periods, and for recent fossils and preserved DNA we can trace the DNA through the generations. The results from all these things form the same image of the fossil record, and of the Theory of evolution as a whole.TK421 said:
And we don't just have fossil records, if you read those links on ring species and followed up on that, we have evidence right now that does not rely on fossils. Also, if there were that a great a disagreement on the fossil records, the world would know about it. But scientists in all the relevant fields agree on what the results mean, and even agree the basic time-frame.
My point was that organisms changing over time is a fact. We have seen it in a lab.Twilight_guy said:
Yeah essentially all of science is theory, its our best guess for what happens around us. Kinda reminds me of what I put for my philosophy of science module, I basically put that whilst religion and science are in a lot ways similar (both draw upon the world around us, people use it to explain what around us and people will do everything and anything to defend it) but the fundamental difference is that whilst religion stays stuck with the same theory no matter the amount of opposing evidence, science adapts and changes within limits (we don't throw a theory away because of one anomaly) a great quote of this was from Richard Dawkins who told of a professor he knew that for 30 years had stood by and taught a theory which he had the up most trust in being fact, then one day one of his students shows him a newer more compelling theory which using new evidence proves the theory he had been teaching for 30 years was wrong, and all the professor said was "Thank you for enlightening me young man". I know its not really linked to the above argument but principally we take theory as fact until a time where it is proven false, otherwise you could never use that theory in the real world. But also never get the theory and the phenomena confused, life will always change over time regardless if evolution is proven false in the future but at this moment we should treat it as fact, atleast thats my opinion on it.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Ya that reply was pretty pointless and didn't have anything to with my post and nowhere in the bible does it say that god created heaven directly above earth. especially in genesis. it also kind of seems that you have no idea what you are talking about. and I believe the bible is more than just a story with good morals if I did, why would of I based my life around it? Also god's world was perfect until halfway through genesis 3 and then sin ruins it all. and if god thought the world was perfect why did he send his son to die for it imperfection? I think you just have a very misinformed view of the bible.boyvirgo666 said:
I fully believe in evolution. But I know evolution is an all powerful force, but is ultimately blind. And often makes mistakes that lead to failure. But life still goes on one way or another. And just that it's imperfect makes it all the more believable.
Evolution for the win. Creationalism is more poorly written, and worse thought out than the spider-man musical. Lrn 2 understand how evolution works. Inb4 hate.
Evolution for the win. Creationalism is more poorly written, and worse thought out than the spider-man musical. Lrn 2 understand how evolution works. Inb4 hate.
I believe in creation and evolution. Creation explains things beginning and coming into existence, evolution explains everything else. I don't think the Bible is meant to be taken literally all of the time, so God being the all-time master of Rube-Goldberg machines makes sense.
If I was an omnipotent and omniscient being who has existed forever, I might entertain myself with a massive Rube-Goldberg machine.
If I was an omnipotent and omniscient being who has existed forever, I might entertain myself with a massive Rube-Goldberg machine.
Yep. The term "evolution" generally implies a bit more then that is all. Be careful with how you word things, misunderstands from using the incorrect word have caused humanity lots of pain.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
I always thought it was yay or nay
Seems I've been missing trains a lot lately too
OT: MEH, we're here now, we'll end someday, what does it matter
Seems I've been missing trains a lot lately too
OT: MEH, we're here now, we'll end someday, what does it matter
Genesis 1:6-8Active Schizophrenic said:
nd it was to comment on other silly things the bible says.
And God said,boyvirgo666 said:
Wait genesis 1 6-8 says: And God said, ?Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.? 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault ?sky.? And there was evening, and there was morning?the second day." you tell me how that means he literally formed heaven above earth? it doesn't even say the word "heaven" or "kingdom of god" or anything of the sort at all! It only says sky! isn't that silly how the bible says the sky is above the ocean!? What a ridiculous notion!
Well, kind of. I'm a Christian (come at me bro) but I don't think that humans were the first things god created. I think god kind of just created the earth, screwed around with it for however long (his "six days and sunday") because dinosaurs are awesome, and THEN created us.
The definition you provide, while correct, does not preclude that a theory cannot in eventuality be proven as fact.Cerrida said:
However, a Scientific Theory is one that, while still conjectural, has survived scruitiny and conjecture through experimental rigor.
It's not just 'conjecture', it's conjecture that's backed up by continued research and experimentation. Yes, a single experiment can prove it wrong. However, unlike 'theories' like Young Earth Creationism, no single experiment has been able to, and god knows both those who are for AND against evolution have tried.
Non-scientific journal is non-scientific.
And is not the only technique used to date old materials, which ARE reliable. Scientists usually use multiple techniques, which have a tendancy to corroborate. That's because science like to be thurough, and always doubts itself.
Even the ones which are directly taken from actual embryos and have citations noted in their bibliographies and can be independantly verified!?!
Except, "macro-evolution" has been observed to occur, multiple times, in nature, and in the laboratory.
Observed phenomenon is observed.
The bible states that God is incapable of lying.Active Schizophrenic said:
Titus 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
Hebrews 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:
The bible states that man is capable of lying.
Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?
-------------------
So thusly, we have the bible stating unequivocably that God will not, and is not capable of falsehood, but that man in contrast is capable of falsehood.
The observations of the universe show that, given what we can observe, it is billions of years old. However, the bible indicates that the universe is considerably less than that, only a few thousand years old... the birth of Adam plus a week or so.
If the bible's accounting is correct, then God put the evidence of the heavens in the sky in such a way that we'd come to a false conclusion. In other words, he put false information in the night sky. As god cannot lie, we know this to be impossible. So therefore, if God exists, the universe must be billions of years old.
On the other hand, we know the bible is written by men. According to that same bible, men can lie, and therefore the bible may contain mistruths, as it is written, and retranslated by men, who may be telling mistruths about their divine inspiration--something the bible explicitly warns about.
2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
So the question then becomes the idea of which must you believe?
Do you believe the bible, the work of men, or the universe, God's creation itself?