KaleoXxX
Well-Known Member
i covet my neighbors wife on a daily basis
estesj
Well-Known Member
Actually evolution and the big bang and all that other stuff are called theory not fact so just thought I would drop that fact. I refuse to argue because I am very stuck in my ways which will result in allot of typing and I'm not down for that.
estesj
Well-Known Member
That would be my second guess. There is a slim chance he likes the salems but any of the 3 are satisfying after his fried chicken dinner.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Evolution is a fact. Just look how many different breeds of dogs there are. That's evolution.
Oh just micro-evolution?
Define it. Micro-evolution is the exact same thing as Macro-evolution, only with more time.
[youtube]ho7GaI2rCwI&playnext_from=TL&videos=ADyEzCeo9io[/youtube]
"Micro-evolution is any change no matter how large, that doesn't result in a new species, Macro-evolution is any change no matter how small that does result in a new species."
Sorry man, I get your pov, it just irks me when I hear "evolution is only a theory", because it's not. It is a fact, we can see it happening all around us.
estesj
Well-Known Member
With all due respect I disagree and am now officially unsubscribed.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
CrackerJax
New Member
estesj is correct however....evolution is NOT a fact.
It is a scientific theory.
It is a scientific theory.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
You have gotta be fuckin' kidding me.
Ask ANY SCIENTIST, evolution is a fact. The layman doesn't understand what the fuck "theory" means in science, and apparently you don't either.
CrackerJax
New Member
No....you don't. No scientist will ever tell you evolution is a fact...and I'm an atheist.
it is a scientific theory.
it is a scientific theory.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Evolution is a fact dude. I can't even believe I'm discussing this with you.
The theory is natural selection. Understanding the distinction separates the ignorant from the educated.
Let's see what Sagan has to say about it;
[youtube]6bCz2eFTBig[/youtube]
Or how bout Professor Abigail Lustig of UT;
[youtube]08zw7jkLZf4[/youtube]
"It was clear to all reputable biologists as early as 1873 that evolution was a fact, whatever the mechanism."
1873! God damn! You're 137 years behind bro!
But this one probably does the best job at pwning your ignorance, take a look;
[youtube]LIm2H0ksawg[/youtube]
"Evolution is a FACT when describing WHAT happened and a THEORY when describing HOW things happened."
CrackerJax
New Member
First off....no scientist can tell you factually WHAT happened. They can surmise...but not say...this is an absolute.
That being said.... evolution is a scientific theory...which is not the same as a laypersons interpretation of a theory. It is the highest category science has...above the term law even.
This is actually pulled from an atheist writer and capsulizes it nicely.... for creationists... huh. So...no bias here...and I agree with him.
Evolution is a Scientific Theory - Evolution Meets Criteria for Scientific Theory Evolution Meets the Criteria for Scientific Theories
By Austin Cline, About.com Guide
See More About:
Creationists complain that evolution isn't valid or genuine science, but exactly the opposite is the case: evolution meets the criteria generally accepted by scientists as defining science and the vast majority of scientists accept evolution as science. Evolution is the central organizing framework for the biological sciences and is just as scientifically valid as analogous theories in other scientific fields: plate tectonics, atomic theory, quantum mechanics, etc. Creationist complaints rely upon misrepresentations of both evolution and science, so understanding what makes something scientific is helpful here.
Criteria for a Scientific Theory
To fully understand how and why evolution is scientific, it's important to first know what the generally accepted criteria for scientific theories are. Scientific theories must be:
Evolution is Consistent
Although there are gaps in our knowledge, disagreements as to how evolution occurred, and gaps in the evidence, the idea of common descent is still overwhelmingly supported by both historical and contemporary evidence as well as our understanding of how changes occur in living organisms. All evidence we have supports evolutionary theory and common descent; absolutely no evidence points to anything else. Evolution is also externally consistent: it does not contradict solid findings in any other physical science. If evolution did contradict physics or chemistry, that would be a significant problem.
Evolution is Parsimonious
Evolution is naturalistic and does not add unnecessary concepts, entities, or processes to our understanding of the universe. Evolution, which is just genetic change over time, does not rely upon any entities or concepts which do not otherwise exist in any scientific model. Common descent does not require us to imagine anything new or unusual in the universe. This means is the theory of evolution is the simplest and most reliable explanation of the diversity of life on our planet. Everything offered as alternatives requires us to imagine new entities not used or needed in any other scientific model, like gods.
Evolution is Useful
Evolution is the unifying principle of the life sciences, which includes medicine. This means that much of what is done in the biological and medical sciences could not occur without the background premise of evolution. I've yet to see any Evolution Deniers willing to give up modern medicine. Evolutionary theory also suggests lots of problems for scientists to work on because it makes predictions which, in turn, provide experiments to perform in order to better understand what's going on in the natural world. Evolution thus provides an overall paradigm for solving current problems within the life sciences.
Evolutionary Theory Can Be Tested
Because evolution as common descent is largely a historical science, testing it is complicated — but it's not impossible. As with other historical investigations, we can make predictions and retrodictions (utilize present information to infer or explain past events or states) based on the theory. We can thus state that we would expect to find certain things (like types of fossils) when looking at the historical record; if they are found, it supports the theory. We cannot perform the direct tests like those often found physics and chemistry, but the theory of evolution is as testable as other historical theories.
Evolutionary Theory Can Be Falsified
Falsification of evolution as common descent would be complicated because of the vast amount of supporting evidence. Evolution rests upon a general and widespread pattern of evidence from many different fields, so a similar pattern of contradictory evidence is needed to falsify it. Isolated anomalies might force modifications, but no more. If we found a general pattern of fossils in rocks dated to different ages than expected, that would be a problem for evolution. If our understanding of physics and chemistry changed significantly, causing us to find that the earth is quite young, that would falsify evolution.
Evolutionary Theory is Correctable & Dynamic
Evolution is based solely on the evidence, thus if the evidence changes so will the theory; in fact, subtle changes to aspects of evolutionary theory can be observed by anyone who regularly reads biology journals and pays attention to the scientific debates. Evolutionary theory today is not quite the same as the evolutionary theory which Charles Darwin originally devised and wrote about, though he was correct enough that much of what he discovered continues to b valid. Since there are gaps in our understanding and evidence, we can expect to see more changes in the future as our understanding expands.
Evolutionary Theory is Progressive
The idea that a scientific theory should be progressive means that a new scientific theory should build on earlier scientific theories. In other words, a new theory must explain what previous theories explained at least as well as they did while providing a new understanding for additional material — something which evolution does. Another way to see how scientific theories need to be progressive is that they can be shown to be superior to competing theories. It should be possible to compare several explanations for a phenomenon and find that one does a much better job than the others. This is true of evolution.
Evolution and the Scientific Method
The general theory of evolution easily meets the criteria for scientific theories. How about the scientific method: was the idea of common descent arrived at scientifically? Yes — the idea was arrived at by examining nature. Looking at existing species, examining their characteristics and commonalities, and considering how they arose led to the idea of common descent. We can see the scientific method at work at every stage of the study of evolution and the biological sciences; in contrast, we find not the scientific method but theology and religious orthodoxy behind evolution’s creationist competitors.
That being said.... evolution is a scientific theory...which is not the same as a laypersons interpretation of a theory. It is the highest category science has...above the term law even.
This is actually pulled from an atheist writer and capsulizes it nicely.... for creationists... huh. So...no bias here...and I agree with him.
Evolution is a Scientific Theory - Evolution Meets Criteria for Scientific Theory Evolution Meets the Criteria for Scientific Theories
By Austin Cline, About.com Guide
See More About:
Creationists complain that evolution isn't valid or genuine science, but exactly the opposite is the case: evolution meets the criteria generally accepted by scientists as defining science and the vast majority of scientists accept evolution as science. Evolution is the central organizing framework for the biological sciences and is just as scientifically valid as analogous theories in other scientific fields: plate tectonics, atomic theory, quantum mechanics, etc. Creationist complaints rely upon misrepresentations of both evolution and science, so understanding what makes something scientific is helpful here.
Criteria for a Scientific Theory
To fully understand how and why evolution is scientific, it's important to first know what the generally accepted criteria for scientific theories are. Scientific theories must be:
- Consistent (internally & externally)
- Parsimonious (sparing in proposed entities or explanations)
- Useful (describes & explains observed phenomena)
- Empirically Testable & Falsifiable
- Based upon Controlled, Repeated Experiments
- Correctable & Dynamic (changes are made as new data is discovered)
- Progressive (achieves all that previous theories have & more)
- Tentative (admits that it might not be correct rather than asserting certainty)
Evolution is Consistent
Although there are gaps in our knowledge, disagreements as to how evolution occurred, and gaps in the evidence, the idea of common descent is still overwhelmingly supported by both historical and contemporary evidence as well as our understanding of how changes occur in living organisms. All evidence we have supports evolutionary theory and common descent; absolutely no evidence points to anything else. Evolution is also externally consistent: it does not contradict solid findings in any other physical science. If evolution did contradict physics or chemistry, that would be a significant problem.
Evolution is Parsimonious
Evolution is naturalistic and does not add unnecessary concepts, entities, or processes to our understanding of the universe. Evolution, which is just genetic change over time, does not rely upon any entities or concepts which do not otherwise exist in any scientific model. Common descent does not require us to imagine anything new or unusual in the universe. This means is the theory of evolution is the simplest and most reliable explanation of the diversity of life on our planet. Everything offered as alternatives requires us to imagine new entities not used or needed in any other scientific model, like gods.
Evolution is Useful
Evolution is the unifying principle of the life sciences, which includes medicine. This means that much of what is done in the biological and medical sciences could not occur without the background premise of evolution. I've yet to see any Evolution Deniers willing to give up modern medicine. Evolutionary theory also suggests lots of problems for scientists to work on because it makes predictions which, in turn, provide experiments to perform in order to better understand what's going on in the natural world. Evolution thus provides an overall paradigm for solving current problems within the life sciences.
Evolutionary Theory Can Be Tested
Because evolution as common descent is largely a historical science, testing it is complicated — but it's not impossible. As with other historical investigations, we can make predictions and retrodictions (utilize present information to infer or explain past events or states) based on the theory. We can thus state that we would expect to find certain things (like types of fossils) when looking at the historical record; if they are found, it supports the theory. We cannot perform the direct tests like those often found physics and chemistry, but the theory of evolution is as testable as other historical theories.
Evolutionary Theory Can Be Falsified
Falsification of evolution as common descent would be complicated because of the vast amount of supporting evidence. Evolution rests upon a general and widespread pattern of evidence from many different fields, so a similar pattern of contradictory evidence is needed to falsify it. Isolated anomalies might force modifications, but no more. If we found a general pattern of fossils in rocks dated to different ages than expected, that would be a problem for evolution. If our understanding of physics and chemistry changed significantly, causing us to find that the earth is quite young, that would falsify evolution.
Evolutionary Theory is Correctable & Dynamic
Evolution is based solely on the evidence, thus if the evidence changes so will the theory; in fact, subtle changes to aspects of evolutionary theory can be observed by anyone who regularly reads biology journals and pays attention to the scientific debates. Evolutionary theory today is not quite the same as the evolutionary theory which Charles Darwin originally devised and wrote about, though he was correct enough that much of what he discovered continues to b valid. Since there are gaps in our understanding and evidence, we can expect to see more changes in the future as our understanding expands.
Evolutionary Theory is Progressive
The idea that a scientific theory should be progressive means that a new scientific theory should build on earlier scientific theories. In other words, a new theory must explain what previous theories explained at least as well as they did while providing a new understanding for additional material — something which evolution does. Another way to see how scientific theories need to be progressive is that they can be shown to be superior to competing theories. It should be possible to compare several explanations for a phenomenon and find that one does a much better job than the others. This is true of evolution.
Evolution and the Scientific Method
The general theory of evolution easily meets the criteria for scientific theories. How about the scientific method: was the idea of common descent arrived at scientifically? Yes — the idea was arrived at by examining nature. Looking at existing species, examining their characteristics and commonalities, and considering how they arose led to the idea of common descent. We can see the scientific method at work at every stage of the study of evolution and the biological sciences; in contrast, we find not the scientific method but theology and religious orthodoxy behind evolution’s creationist competitors.
sarah22
Well-Known Member
great post. now my only question...is why do you have to explain that with a condescending tone and rudeness? are you aware that its perfectly acceptable to educate people nicely? that you dont need to talk to people that way? come on man...
i think that people with an attitude like yours are one of the problems we face in this world. this whole mentality of if people dont agree with you and your ideas you start throwing insults and talking down to people. you know who else acts like that? religious folks. you're trying to cram your stuff down people's throats the very same way they do. and to you, its perfectly acceptable because you wholeheartedly believe it, based on what you've learned from science. but you know what? they whole heartedly believe their ideas too, because of things based on their faith. and who in the bloody hell are you to tell them they're wrong? seriously? are you the one person on this whole planet thats somehow been gifted with every single little last piece of knowledge available to man? no? i certainly didnt think so. so while its great that you have a lot of valuable information to contribute to the debate, its really immature to talk to people the way you do. im going to assume that you're capable of controlling yourself, because i know you're intelligent so you probably have the mental capacity to do so. i think you might want to work on it dude...for real.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Evolution is to biology what gravity is to physics.
Are you going to deny the theory of gravity is a fact too?
Are you going to deny the theory of gravity is a fact too?
CrackerJax
New Member
It is a fact that the theory of evolution exists.
Anything beyond that is parsing.
Anything beyond that is parsing.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I honestly couldn't agree with you more. I just want to put this in perspective for you. I've been talking with Cracker back and fourth for a couple days in the https://www.rollitup.org/toke-n-talk/318923-what-fuck-hes-only-helping-35.html thread, if you scroll a few pages back I even point out the exact same thing you're pointing out about my conduct here with him. I posed a question and he refuses to answer it because he'll contradict himself or be forced to answer it dishonestly. When I pointed out to ej that evolution was a fact, and Cracker came in and said it wasn't, I felt like he said that just because it's gotten a little heated in that previous thread and he just wanted to argue with me because it's me, and because of my posts. I've talked to the guy plenty of times, I know he knows the difference between the "theory" of evolution and the fact of evolution. I know he pulled that shit just to fuck around and be argumentative. It was pretty obvious.
But you're completely right. Like I told him, I should conduct myself better than that.
I agree. I haven't hit it yet today either, I get like that sometimes. Your suggestion is noted, I'll work on it.and who in the bloody hell are you to tell them they're wrong? seriously? are you the one person on this whole planet thats somehow been gifted with every single little last piece of knowledge available to man? no? i certainly didnt think so. so while its great that you have a lot of valuable information to contribute to the debate, its really immature to talk to people the way you do. im going to assume that you're capable of controlling yourself, because i know you're intelligent so you probably have the mental capacity to do so. i think you might want to work on it dude...for real.
How are you doing today Sarah?
It's my second day off and, lucky me! I'm spending em sick... lol
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
If you really believe that, you're an atheist for the wrong reasons.
CrackerJax
New Member
I'm an atheist because I don't believe in absolutes.
So given your black and white interpretation ... perhaps you are one for the wrong reason.
So given your black and white interpretation ... perhaps you are one for the wrong reason.