OK, then.
Printable View
OK, then.
If you don't question the theories that are already in place then the world is still flat....you get me know on why I question things?
Yes, Lyle, you're a scientific grandmaster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Fine, be sarcastic, I am just saying if no one questioned these scientific facts then the world wouldn't be any different than it was in the dark ages where religion ruled over everyone and controlled what they thought....only there would be no Pope only some sort of teacher with tenure
There doesn't need to have been any mechanism in place before any specific mechanism for anything evolved. Even single-celled organisms spent billions of years evolving.
There are plenty of transitional species, an entire flock of bird/dinosaur examples. If you spend a little time studying the basic outlines of evolutionary theory -- you could spend an entire academic career studying evolution and still not cover everything -- you'll see this.
You're starting to get a basic grasp of the outlines of evolutionary theory but you're still making ridiculous arguments -- scientists never taught that the earth was flat for instance, in fact there was a rather long argument between scientists and the church over basic things like the shape of the earth and whether the earth orbited the sun or vice versa. And I'm not confusing anything, you just don't understand evolutionary theory.
You're taking at face value a bunch of discredited arguments from creationists, a bunch of religious extrmists who insist in the face of all evidence that evolution is nonsense. These people are only found in America and only because they believe as a matter of faith that god formed the earth 3000 years ago so they need to discredit any science that proves their beliefs to be rubbish. The entire rest of the world has accepted evolutionary theory, like they have gravitational theory, electro-magnetic theory, etc.
If mechanisms weren't in place, then they had to be evolving at the same time and still be finished before the next one could evolve. It still requires an amazing amount of coincidence and very good planning.
With transitional species there should be millions of examples of the failed adaptations of naturally selected for extinction species. There are scant examples of birds looking like dinosaurs, but they are birds. They have wings and presumably can fly. We are missing the failed adaptations in every species of which there should be millions.
Scientists did think the earth was flat and just like the entire rest of the world that accepts evolution at face value they found out later they were wrong.
The problem with evolution being science is it hasn't been tested, observed, measured, it's stringing together theories and observing things now and estimating or guessing what happened long before. Gravitational theory and electromagnetic theory are extremely different. The theory on those is how they work, not what happens. Evolutionary theory has already decided how it works and is now trying to force fit what happened.
Interesting that you mentioned quantum physics in another post. Quantum physics has proven mathematically that there are at least 10 dimensions. We are only capable of interacting in 3 but are aware of the 4th. Did time evolve also? How about other dimensions. Not just the matter, energy, and space, but time, and whatever else exists. Evolution is a theory, but it's a very loose and unproven and untestable theory. It still remains more of a philosophy than science.
Did anyone else catch this part of the site Lyle posted. It sums up my argument that evolution isn't scientific but is philosophy.
Karl Popper suggested that a theory should be considered scientific if and only if it can in principle be falsified by experiment; any idea not susceptible to falsification does not belong to science.
AL 18:37Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacstraightleft
"......and all those with their own mind and head not up their ass , dont listen to John or any other of the magical religious control-ism bullshit ".
And there ends my thought for the day.
Al had a thought for the day???
ALERT THE MEDIA! ;D
Al there's nothing wrong with being spiritual or believing in the Bible or Jesus or whatever religion you want to mention but once organized religion takes over you're in trouble. All Organized religion is The New Roman Empire, The Persian Empire (Shia Muslims), The Arab Empire (Sunni Muslims) and so on and so forth....it's the same thing just in a different more accepted package.
I advocate thinking for yourself and using any scripture to learn about a different more peaceful way of thinking and being.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Freedom of thought is one thing in life , but fairy tales from all around the world . Well each to their own i guess.
But you ever wonder if you have a jewish friend and you are say muslim or christian , one of you if not all of you are wrong in what you believe ?
OR FOR CONVIENIENCE IS THERE LOTS OF " GOD'S " MAYBE THEY SUBCONTRACTED THE CREATION OF THE WORLD ?
Your opinion is fine Lyle but for me it doesnt come close to adding up , or making any sence what so ever.
Evolution is how life is created - sun - water natural elements not some guy sat on a cloud.
I have no problem with the theory of evolution but the question is 'if' there indeed were evolution, what force lead those very simple elements to transform into very complex beings called humans. I think I can sit in front of a big pond with all necessary elements inside and watch it for billion years and still nothing would have happened unless there is some force that will lead them to evolve. This is common sense, there must be some force involved and it must be some guided force, or else it would clearly have been a haphazard sort of evolution, a messy one instead of perfectly symmetrical ones. This is what I call a life force. Now where this life force is coming from is what we are debating here, right? I think there must be this sort of a central nerve center where these forces come from and where they are guided from. So what or Who can it be. Some deny its existence, some call it a universal mind, while the rest says it's God. The problem with us humans is that we tend to mold God's image with how our very limited mind can imagine. If there was God, He will naturally be someone so complex that he would be way beyond our imagination and comprehension. I guess that's why our mind still can't grasp Him, or else there will be none of this debate, right? Think about it, folks. The problem with some of our science guys is that they tend to think only from a fixed point of view; you got to 'think out of the box' sometimes, so to speak, to see the whole truth. Keep your minds open folks, keep 'em open.
Al,Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord AlQuote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Freedom of thought is one thing in life , but fairy tales from all around the world . Well each to their own i guess.
But you ever wonder if you have a jewish friend and you are say muslim or christian , one of you if not all of you are wrong in what you believe ?
OR FOR CONVIENIENCE IS THERE LOTS OF " GOD'S " MAYBE THEY SUBCONTRACTED THE CREATION OF THE WORLD ?
Your opinion is fine Lyle but for me it doesnt come close to adding up , or making any sence what so ever.
Evolution is how life is created - sun - water natural elements not some guy sat on a cloud.
This is exactly why evolution isn't and can't be considered science. First off proving or disproving whether there is a God doesn't prove evolution. See evolution always has an agenda and is trying to prove it by forcing the facts into a preconceived notion. Proving that evolution doesn't exist doesn't prove there is a God either. It simply eliminates a possibility.
Your argument is the exact reason I keep posting in this thread. You claim that evolution makes sense, but I am quite sure you don't know very much about it or you wouldn't make that argument. It is a very poorly constructed theory and uses assumptions to support it rather than observations or tests. It is a philosophy plain and simple. No evidence for evolution exists, the only reason it is widely proposed and accepted is because the alternative is God and that is completely unacceptable for science. Here's a couple quotes from evolutionists....
“We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations.”
-Biochemist, Franklin M. Harold
"After having chided the theologian for his reliance on myth and miracle, science found itself in the unenviable position of having to create a mythology of its own: namely, the assumption that what, after long effort could not be proved to take place today, had, in truth, taken place in the primeval past." Loren Eiseley, Ph.D. Anthropology, The Immense Journey, Random House, NY, 1957, p. 199
The thing about evolution is that it makes sense if you listen to the general idea and don't look closely at the details. If you examine them closely you will see it doesn't make much sense. The evolution of a single process would be miraculous let alone thousands of them working in synchronization. Think of the systems required to support life just internally, not even counting the environment. The main idea goes back to a single celled life form.
I dare you to do a little research on a single celled life form and still explain to me how simple it is to have developed on its own. A single cell still has more moving parts and is more complicated than the computer you are reading this on. Check it out on your own.
What started everything out? You don't think it's freaking amazing that we had single cell orgamisms that were living beings? How many of the other planets in our Solar System have that?????Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al
Al if you bothered to check out what Joseph Campbell had to say maybe your eyes would be opened...he knew about ALL religions and compared and contrasted them and found out they usually all say the same thing which is un-freaking-believeable considering the travelling being so difficult and everything.
Over the centuries religion has done everything it could to supress science and scientific discoveries that conflicted with their dogma. Check what happened to Gallileo Gallilei for instance. Science is constantly questioning itself every single day. Nothing in the scientific world has ever been rigourously proved or ever will be, but a great number of scientific theories have overwhelming evidence of proof, like evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Biomechanical and biochemical actions on the ancient earth to create original life had billions of years to happen. No planning necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by luvfightgame
There are plenty of examples of transitional species. Here are just a few. You could go and do a bit of research yourself and find plenty more :
talk.origins newsgroup
It depends what you mean by "scientists". There were also plenty of "scientists" that thought they could change lead into gold. But if we're talking about actual academic disciplines that developed their own methods of peer-reviewing of their discoveries based on observation, calculation etc. rather than a bunch of quacks making claims without evidence then no, no scientists have ever claimed the world was flat.
Evolution has been observed and measured endlessly. From Darwin discovering different shell shapes on Galapagos turtles (go read the hows and whys of just this single thing) there's more observation and testing of evolution than you could read in ten lifetimes. I've already posted examples of all this for you yet you continue to make the same arguments.
Once we've dealt with evolution we can start on quantum mechanics.
NCSE ResourceQuote:
Originally Posted by luvfightgame