|
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663 |
Its still not an established fact. Faith is required. It's not faith. It's science. Unless insistence of assumptions beyond scientific laws are applied. Then its faith.
“When debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
- Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 132,027 Likes: 63
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 132,027 Likes: 63 |
Its still not an established fact. Faith is required. It's not faith. It's science. Unless insistence of assumptions beyond scientific laws are applied. Then its faith. In accordance with scientific concepts (the way science is done), it's science. Faith doesn't enter into it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663 |
In accordance with scientific concepts (the way science is done), it's science. Faith doesn't enter into it. On that point, we agree.
“When debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
- Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2 |
Evolution is a fact. Species in fact adapt and evolve. Theory is used to understand the means and mechanisms and process of evolution: theory is the how of it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,948 Likes: 6
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,948 Likes: 6 |
[quote=IndyCA35]
But is it sufficient enough to establish interspecies evolution as a fact? Yes. I genuinely appreciate the direct answer, however…..and I may be wrong….but there’s a number of most learn-ed and bonafide scientists, that believe in evolution, that wouldn’t make such a bold statement due to its scientific inaccuracy. Theories change. Facts don’t. Evolution is still a theory. As is the germ theory of disease still a theory. In science, theory doesn't mean hunch. It means it explains much and has withstood the rigors of challenge over many years, and is therefore likely an accurate model. The longer is survives challenge, the more certain we can be of its correctness. You seem to forget your side looses scientists every year to the creationist side. It doesn't happen the other way around. They can no longer believe their own lie, so they go with the Truth.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,948 Likes: 6
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,948 Likes: 6 |
Its still not an established fact. Faith is required. It's not faith. It's science. You obviously don't understand faith.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,590 Likes: 16
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 18,590 Likes: 16 |
The point of the Genesis account of creation is not here’s how God did it. The point of the Genesis account of creation is that God did it.
Every day on this side of the ground is a win.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20 |
And if you think there is no evidence in the fossil record for evolution, then you are not very bright. But is it sufficient enough to establish interspecies evolution as a fact? Points off for spelling and grammar are welcomed. 😉 It is incontestably proven that a huge meteorite struck the Earth 66 million years ago and left the Chixlub Crater which is 110 miles in diameter and 12 miles in depth.. It is commonly known as the K-T extinction event. ![[Linked Image from science.org]](https://www.science.org/do/10.1126/science.aaf5684/full/gg_60212w_crater-1644966022570.jpg) ![[Linked Image from media.sciencephoto.com]](https://media.sciencephoto.com/image/c0440427/800wm/C0440427-Chicxulub_Crater,_Map.jpg) No dinosaurs have ever been found above the K-T boundary line, nor have large mammals been found below the line. Barring evolution, how does one explain the proliferation of mammalian species up to and including man over the last 66 million years? Or do you deny the very existence of a period when reptiles dominated the Earth, and their extinction 66 million years ago? It has been mentioned that "the theory of evolution" is a controversial subject. It is only controversial to one who enters the discussion with pre-concieved notions which make it impossible to recognize the validity of facts. Religion does that to many a person. When your religion makes it impossible to accept natural laws and observable facts........perhaps it is time to question your religion. Just ask Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno, and Hypatia of Alexandria. Copernicus only avoided the Inquisitors because he died before they could get hold of him.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20 |
As is the germ theory of disease still a theory. In science, theory doesn't mean hunch. It means it explains much and has withstood the rigors of challenge over many years, and is therefore likely an accurate model. The longer is survives challenge, the more certain we can be of its correctness. I don’t see how the “It’s not just a theory” claim applies. Nobody is challenging it as being less than a scientific theory. But the opposite is true, as well. It is no greater than a theory, either. Regardless of what can be said….regardless of debate skill, regardless of how long it survives (as a theory), scientifically, the Theory of Evolution is not a fact. I get it: People feel strongly about it. They’ve read about it. They’ve studied the available evidence. They have their references. In their hearts, they know it’s true. Its still not an established fact. Faith is required. Do you accept: "The Theory of Reletivity" as fact? "Germ Theory" as fact? "Cell Theory" as fact? "Atomic Theory" as fact? "The Theory of Plate Tectonics" as fact. The word "theory" is used in conjunction with Evolution just as it is in discussion of disease causing organisms and contagions.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,247 Likes: 15
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,247 Likes: 15 |
The explanation of how gravity operates is still a theory, even though the presence of gravity is very clearly observed. I have never gotten a clear explanation of the cause of gravity although as you say it ''is very clearly observed''. I asked a neighbor friend to explain what caused gravity and he said it was the spinning of the earth. I said that didn't seem right, that a spinning tire throws mud off. It doesn't hold it on. I have a son who is a bona fide genius in many things and he attempted to explain it but really it amounted to "we don't know for sure". Gravity is a force of nature and is a good example to give an atheist that doesn't believe in something he cannot see. You can bet your a$$ he believes in gravity. Oh, boy....that's quite a spin. Unlike God, whatever that is supposed to be, nobody needs to believe in gravity, and anyone can test its reality. Sure, you can test it, you can feel its effects, but can you explain its cause. What are these effect that can be attributed to "God?' Examples may help. How about gravity? Explain it.
Patriotism (and religion) is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
Jesus: "Take heed that no man deceive you."
Hebrew Roots Judaizer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 132,027 Likes: 63
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 132,027 Likes: 63 |
I explained gravity in one of the above posts.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,247 Likes: 15
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 13,247 Likes: 15 |
The explanation of how gravity operates is still a theory, even though the presence of gravity is very clearly observed. I have never gotten a clear explanation of the cause of gravity although as you say it ''is very clearly observed''. I asked a neighbor friend to explain what caused gravity and he said it was the spinning of the earth. I said that didn't seem right, that a spinning tire throws mud off. It doesn't hold it on. I have a son who is a bona fide genius in many things and he attempted to explain it but really it amounted to "we don't know for sure". Gravity is a force of nature and is a good example to give an atheist that doesn't believe in something he cannot see. You can bet your a$$ he believes in gravity. Gravity is not tied to the spinning of the earth. It's tied to mass density. Mass warps space, and greatly massive objects warp space a lot. The warpage of space around massive objects causes other massive objects to be drawn towards them, just like if you spread a thin rubber bladder over a frame creating a large flat surface and then place a heavy steel ball in the middle. then put another smaller steel ball on it, and it will be drawn to the more massive one (or, rather, they will be drawn together, but due to the dramatic difference in mass, the less massive object will appear to be moving towards the more massive object). You can even place the small ball into orbit around the much more massive ball by the way you start it on its course. The above is a three dimensional model of a four dimensional phenomenon. The operation of gravity involves a fourth dimension, and we cannot perceive a four dimensional model, so there's no way to show it to anyone in a way that makes the operation of gravity intuitively obvious. You give a good example of how to demonstrate gravity and its effects but it does not explain why mass creates gravity. I find it amazing that a spinning object doesn't throw everything on it off and disintegrate. I darn sure believe in this thing we call gravity but no one can explain it to me other than to say mass creates gravity.
Patriotism (and religion) is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
Jesus: "Take heed that no man deceive you."
Hebrew Roots Judaizer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,211 Likes: 9
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 31,211 Likes: 9 |
The explanation of how gravity operates is still a theory, even though the presence of gravity is very clearly observed. I have never gotten a clear explanation of the cause of gravity although as you say it ''is very clearly observed''. I asked a neighbor friend to explain what caused gravity and he said it was the spinning of the earth. I said that didn't seem right, that a spinning tire throws mud off. It doesn't hold it on. I have a son who is a bona fide genius in many things and he attempted to explain it but really it amounted to "we don't know for sure". Gravity is a force of nature and is a good example to give an atheist that doesn't believe in something he cannot see. You can bet your a$$ he believes in gravity. Gravity is not tied to the spinning of the earth. It's tied to mass density. Mass warps space, and greatly massive objects warp space a lot. The warpage of space around massive objects causes other massive objects to be drawn towards them, just like if you spread a thin rubber bladder over a frame creating a large flat surface and then place a heavy steel ball in the middle. then put another smaller steel ball on it, and it will be drawn to the more massive one (or, rather, they will be drawn together, but due to the dramatic difference in mass, the less massive object will appear to be moving towards the more massive object). You can even place the small ball into orbit around the much more massive ball by the way you start it on its course. The above is a three dimensional model of a four dimensional phenomenon. The operation of gravity involves a fourth dimension, and we cannot perceive a four dimensional model, so there's no way to show it to anyone in a way that makes the operation of gravity intuitively obvious. You give a good example of how to demonstrate gravity and its effects but it does not explain why mass creates gravity. I find it amazing that a spinning object doesn't throw everything on it off and disintegrate. I darn sure believe in this thing we call gravity but no one can explain it to me other than to say mass creates gravity. That's because mass doesn't create gravity.
You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.
You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 26,101 Likes: 20 |
The explanation of how gravity operates is still a theory, even though the presence of gravity is very clearly observed. I have never gotten a clear explanation of the cause of gravity although as you say it ''is very clearly observed''. I asked a neighbor friend to explain what caused gravity and he said it was the spinning of the earth. I said that didn't seem right, that a spinning tire throws mud off. It doesn't hold it on. I have a son who is a bona fide genius in many things and he attempted to explain it but really it amounted to "we don't know for sure". Gravity is a force of nature and is a good example to give an atheist that doesn't believe in something he cannot see. You can bet your a$$ he believes in gravity. Oh, boy....that's quite a spin. Unlike God, whatever that is supposed to be, nobody needs to believe in gravity, and anyone can test its reality. Sure, you can test it, you can feel its effects, but can you explain its cause. What are these effect that can be attributed to "God?' Examples may help. How about gravity? Explain it. At this point in time it is best to say that gravity is a property of mass. As waves are a property of light and EM radiation. I have read a few hypothesis (much different than a theory) concerning wave forms associated with gravity. But we just do not know much about it yet. Perhaps in 100 years people will have a better understanding of the nature of gravity.
People who choose to brew up their own storms bitch loudest about the rain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2 |
The explanation of how gravity operates is still a theory, even though the presence of gravity is very clearly observed. I have never gotten a clear explanation of the cause of gravity although as you say it ''is very clearly observed''. I asked a neighbor friend to explain what caused gravity and he said it was the spinning of the earth. I said that didn't seem right, that a spinning tire throws mud off. It doesn't hold it on. I have a son who is a bona fide genius in many things and he attempted to explain it but really it amounted to "we don't know for sure". Gravity is a force of nature and is a good example to give an atheist that doesn't believe in something he cannot see. You can bet your a$$ he believes in gravity. Oh, boy....that's quite a spin. Unlike God, whatever that is supposed to be, nobody needs to believe in gravity, and anyone can test its reality. Sure, you can test it, you can feel its effects, but can you explain its cause. What are these effect that can be attributed to "God?' Examples may help. How about gravity? Explain it. You don't have to know about everything or explain everything. You see and use all sorts of things without knowing exactly how they work. Technology, gadgets, we know that animals and plants exist without fully knowing their genetic makeup, etc. Just because we don't know all about gravity, be it quantum gravity, curved spacetime, mass/energy, etc, is no reason to assume 'God did it.' The same for the existence of the universe, the world, life, bio-genesis, etc. You don't learn by starting with assumptions, be it 'God,' whatever that is, or Alien simulating worlds, or whatever appeals to you.
Last edited by DBT; 12/08/23.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,808 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 5,808 Likes: 2 |
Fine. Then offer a better theory that fits with the facts. There is a Nobel Prize just waiting for you if you can. So….because the Theory of Evolution isn’t a fact, a better scientific theory has to be conjured up? Clearly, I’m not a person of higher education, but I know this isn’t the way real science works. If you believe in the Theory of Evolution, that is okay by me. I take no issue with believers of other faiths as long as there’s mutual respect. But make no mistake, when you step out onto the field of faith beyond fact, you’re no different than any theist. Science is demonstrable and testable, and willing to be challenged and corrected, faith is not. Your unwillingness to accept this is demonstrable and testable, and unable to be corrected - you need better education, but it's faith to think that this will ever happen.
Whatever you said...everyone knows you are a lying jerk. That's a bold assertion. Point out where you think I lied. Well?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663 |
Evolution is a fact. Species in fact adapt and evolve. Theory is used to understand the means and mechanisms and process of evolution: theory is the how of it. Not by the rules and definitions of real science. Again, theories can change. Facts do not.
“When debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
- Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663 |
It has been mentioned that "the theory of evolution" is a controversial subject. It is only controversial to one who enters the discussion with pre-concieved notions which make it impossible to recognize the validity of facts. An interesting opinion, but that suggests agnostics that challenge the Theory of Evolution have preconceived notions. I believe we can all agree that is more than unlikely. Religion does that to many a person. When your religion makes it impossible to accept natural laws and observable facts........perhaps it is time to question your religion. Does this apply when that religion is a perverted version of science in which accepted terms, definitions and explanations are contorted to explain a belief?
“When debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
- Socrates
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,663 |
Do you accept:
"The Theory of Reletivity" as fact?
"Germ Theory" as fact?
"Cell Theory" as fact?
"Atomic Theory" as fact?
"The Theory of Plate Tectonics" as fact.
The word "theory" is used in conjunction with Evolution just as it is in discussion of disease causing organisms and contagions. Watch out Idaho. People in your camp may come out of nowhere to discredit your entire POV because of misspelling. 🤣 As previously mentioned, theories have different qualifications….no? Relativity, germ, cell, atomic and tectonic theories are better qualified. Its as simple as that. Perhaps, new evidence will change the Theory of Evolution and strengthen it, which….incidentally…..means it is not a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 6,725 Likes: 2 |
Evolution is a fact. Species in fact adapt and evolve. Theory is used to understand the means and mechanisms and process of evolution: theory is the how of it. Not by the rules and definitions of real science. Again, theories can change. Facts do not. I suggest that you read what I said again. This time more carefully.
|
|
|
|
|
280 members (222Sako, 12344mag, 160user, 1badf350, 10Glocks, 257 roberts, 33 invisible),
1,976
guests, and
974
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,539
Posts18,531,126
Members74,039
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
