Evolutionary Science is a fairytale

[FishFace]

If there was no evidence for something that actually happened, historical science would reject it. A rational person would prefer the truth, but to them, the truth is irrelevant. They call it 'absolute' truth, as if the truth can never be known; it's something that can only be approached, like they're zeroing in on the position of an electron. If the truth was known without evidence, what would they do? They would say it isn't true.

How can you know something without evidence? It's just a lucky guess.

I figure the probability of historical science rejecting the truth is 100%. It is the same as the probability of accepting the hypothesis X the probability of finding the 'evidence' X the probability of 'interpreting' the 'evidence' X the probabilty of accepting the truth.

I think you need some more words in that sentence.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

This is the day that the Lord has made!

You have to believe in creation. you see God's hand in every living creature because of it's natural beauty which takes after HIM of course.

Evolution is hard to prove only if you dont ask the hard questions. Then it begins to unravel and you begin to find out all the missing information backers cant get you.

Obviously-you don't get a walrus from a giraffe!

Gorilla to man? We are each a distinct species the way God meant. Mutating to a certain extent maybe but not into advanced species over time. That cannot be proven and since it cant be proven it has no place in our public schools.

Besides that I read that natural selection only means you have enough to get you by in life. That means find a mate, catch a fish, jump a stream, light a fire, etc. man was created to do so much more and the fact that we've advanced so far beyond hunting and gathering proves it. We arent advanced microbes!!

As the previous poster suggested this is nowhere near an exact science like physics and chemistry backed by equations that have been proven by experiment.

What experiment has proven we evolved? We need hard evidence with numbers like they do in REAL SCIENCE.

Evolution is a mockery to true science because of the missing connections. So we have to throw out this outdated science and should never be taught in our public schools. Never, never. Darwin was a speculator more than a real scientist.

Besides that if Adam and Eve didn't happen how do you account for sin entering the world????

This isn't one of my big concerns anyway. The real thing is using our time for God's sake and the sake of his Son Jesus. Since we are HIS creation he not only owns every living thing on the planet and throughout the Universe but he also owns our time!

Did you know that we could not buy an extra breath of life for all the money in the world? That's how valuable is your life which God gave to each of us-and we can live it for HIM, our rightful creator and Lord. So we shouldn't be using our time for anything except to bring God glory which i have to admit i don't do enough of.

But its hard not to be grateful knowing the Lord lets us take our next breath even though we all take it for granted.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

This is the day that the Lord has made!

Actually, it isn't: the shepherds had their sheep out when Jesus was born, which they wouldn't have done at the Winter Solstice.

You have to believe in creation.

Nope. I don't even have to believe that anything other than my mind exists. Prove to me your existance

you see God's hand in every living creature because of it's natural beauty which takes after HIM of course.

Nonsense. I see unparalleled beauty in nature, but not because of any divine intervention. Instead, I attribute it to a glorious tapestry of common ancestry (cuz, y'know, the evidence).

Evolution is hard to prove

The biological phenomenon of evolution is a known fact: it necessarily emerges from population genetic dynamics, not to mention the fact that we have seen it happen (watch a child being born; that is evolution).

The theory of evolution and the consequences thereof (namely, common descent), are just that: theories. They are not proven, and science does not attempt to prove them. We do, however, have an incredible amount of evidence to support said theories. Indeed, there is no known evidence that contradicts them.

only if you dont ask the hard questions.

The hard questions? In my experiance, these 'hard questions' turn out to be misunderstandings parroted from preacher to layman. The hard questions are regularily asked by biologists and evolutionary scientists the world over. And you know what? We get answers, sometimes surprising ones.

Then it begins to unravel and you begin to find out all the missing information backers cant get you.

Pray tell, what information is this?

Obviously-you don't get a walrus from a giraffe!

Gorilla to man?

Evolution does not imply that gorillas can evolve into humans, nor walruses into giraffes (indeed, if one gave birth to the other through natural means, then common descent would be soundly refuted).

We are each a distinct species the way God meant. Mutating to a certain extent maybe but not into advanced species over time.

That cannot be proven and since it cant be proven it has no place in our public schools.

By that logic, the educational syllabus would be simply logic classes (and, by extension, mathematics).

Can you prove the past existance of any historical event? No. Thus, history is to be removed from the syllabus.
Can you prove any theory of physics? No. Thus, physics is to be removed from the syllabus.
And so on. Only logic involves proof.

Besides that I read that natural selection only means you have enough to get you by in life.

Nope. Natural selection drives randomly appearing certain traits into high frequencies (and others to low frequencies), dependant on the selection pressures. For example, if a new disease X is introduced into a stable population, those who just so happen to have more anti-X immune systems are far more likely to survive this epidemic than their unfortunate kin. In this was, the frequency of this chance immune system rapidly increases, and thus the population evolves.

That means find a mate, catch a fish, jump a stream, light a fire, etc. man was created to do so much more and the fact that we've advanced so far beyond hunting and gathering proves it. We arent advanced microbes!!

Debatable. We are a collection of several trillion bacteria and viruses, each highly specialised to proliferating the common genome as much as possible.

As the previous poster suggested this is nowhere near an exact science like physics and chemistry backed by equations that have been proven by experiment.

Nevertheless, the terms are well-defined, the hypotheses explict, and the predictions testable. That is science. Your faith, no matter how strongly felt, does not stand up to such rigour.

What experiment has proven we evolved?

What experiment has proven that atoms exist, as per atomic theory? What experiment has proven that germs cause disease, as per germ theory? You complete lack of understanding of scientific is appalling, even by Creationist's standards.

We need hard evidence with numbers like they do in REAL SCIENCE.

AHAHAHA

Evolution is a mockery to true science because of the missing connections.

What missing connections? I challenge you to give at least one.

Besides that if Adam and Eve didn't happen how do you account for sin entering the world????

Who says sin entered the world? I sure don't.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

What kind of scientist are you? maybe life science.

What kind of scientist doesn't know that existence of atoms are a proven fact?? Even have photographic evidence.

The truth is you have to rely on ignorant people wholl just take your word for everything,

Youre just some biologist thats it. You don't know any physics and probably just took chemistry for life science majors-mostly organic and bio.

Still you try to go on and make a psuedo science out of Darwin and evolution. Those ideas are outdated anyways so why you go around forcing this on our children?

Then you go on to say having a child is evolution. In what way???That would be news to the general public!

You said can ANY historical event be proven? This is how you make your case?? To answer your question, sure it can. Just show me a photograph of a past event and I'll go along with it and unless you EVoS come up with the hard evidence, no one going to go along with you. You got no numbers, no formula to plug #s into and test like real science does. Man, you people havent got none of that and that's your big problem.

You ought to try more science and less decieving if youre going to call it science. There are theories out there anyone can come up with. Yours isn't nowhere strong enough to be taken as real science. You dont find no 'Missing links' in Physics or Chemistry. All their theories have been proven. Every single physical law which by the way, the Lord made also so you and I dont fall apart while typing, has been proven and put into practice in everyday applications like engineering. Numbers, numbers and more numbers.

What kind of science you got that proves we came from monkeys or worms or amoeba?

Whats more, the first thing that came out of you tells me you don't know how to read a Bible or familiar with
who Christ is. Everyone, even a biologist like you should be familiar with the verse that "before the world existed I am". That may go over the head of someone in your field of work but its meaning is clear to most of us.

This is the day that the lord hath made-whether you believe it or not.

Happy Birthday Jesus!!

 

[Dal M.]

Youre just some biologist thats it... Yours isn't nowhere strong enough to be taken as real science. You dont find no 'Missing links' in Physics or Chemistry. All their theories have been proven.

Merry Poe-mas.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

What kind of scientist are you? maybe life science.

What kind of scientist doesn't know that existence of atoms are a proven fact?? Even have photographic evidence.

No we have images obtained by atomic force microscopy that we interpret as atoms.

The truth is you have to rely on ignorant people wholl just take your word for everything,

Sounds like a perfect description of creation "science"

Youre just some biologist thats it. You don't know any physics and probably just took chemistry for life science majors-mostly organic and bio.

I don't know about Wiccan's education but I have a Ph.D. in biophysics and I agree with most everything he said.

Still you try to go on and make a psuedo science out of Darwin and evolution. Those ideas are outdated anyways so why you go around forcing this on our children?

Then you go on to say having a child is evolution. In what way???That would be news to the general public!

Evolution is a change in allele frequency over time. Populations evolve through reproduction so having a child is part of evolution.

You said can ANY historical event be proven? This is how you make your case?? To answer your question, sure it can. Just show me a photograph of a past event and I'll go along with it

It is very easy to fake photos you know.

and unless you EVoS come up with the hard evidence, no one going to go along with you. You got no numbers, no formula to plug #s into and test like real science does. Man, you people havent got none of that and that's your big problem.

You really don't know anything about the evidence for evolution do you?

You ought to try more science and less decieving if youre going to call it science. There are theories out there anyone can come up with. Yours isn't nowhere strong enough to be taken as real science. You dont find no 'Missing links' in Physics or Chemistry. All their theories have been proven. Every single physical law which by the way, the Lord made also so you and I dont fall apart while typing, has been proven and put into practice in everyday applications like engineering. Numbers, numbers and more numbers.

OK so show us proof of a theory that explains gravitational attraction between masses. The utitlity of a scientific theory is not that it can be absolutely proven but that it is consistent with all known observations. The theory of general relativity for example, can't be proven but so far it is consistent with all observational tests and it has explanatory power. There are no observations that falsifiy it. Evolution is consistent with a wide variety of observations and it has explanatory power. Can you give us an actual observation that falsify evolution?

What kind of science you got that proves we came from monkeys or worms or amoeba?

It can't be proven any more that the law of gravity can be proven but we do have a lot evidence for evolution.

I think you may have a quite a lot to learn about how science actually works.

Anyway Merry Christmas

 

[gamespotter10]

Nothing is more humorous than when an evolutionist pokes fun at creationists or IDists for not putting forth a scientific theory to explain life.

First of all, life is not scientific -- life is spirtual. Contrary to what evolutionists say, what makes us human is not the shape of our jaw bone or the size of our heads. Life is something that controls and manipulates the matter it occupies. Thus, those who claim to be able to describe life scientifically are kidding themselves because life is more than material -- it's metaphysical, which by defintion is in conflict with science. Science is the study of the material world.

So when evolutionists scoff at Creationists for not putting forth a scientific theory for life, I believe they are asking us to play a game, which includes defining life according to a flawed premise.

But what's truly laughable about all this is that the "science" evolutionists put forth is not science at all. Like I said, "science" is (or should be) the study of the material world. But what the world's evolutionists have forced down our kids' throats is not science. Instead it's long list of "what ifs," "probablys," "maybes," and "more-than-likelys." What they're attempting to sell the unsuspecting public is not to be found in nature -- it's found in their books.

And their so-called evidence is NEVER visible. Never. For example, every creature on earth is said to have evolved from a common ancestor. Thus there must, be thousands and thousands of common ancestors that link each creature to the next. For example, lions and tigers must have a common ancestor....man and ape must have a common ancestor...squirrels and skunks must have a common ancestor...bats and whales must have a common ancestor. Of course none of these common ancestors have been found -- or will ever be found -- but we're just supposed to take their word for it because they know more than us. But the reality is, this is not science -- this is nothing but brain-rotting blind faith in an intellectually bankrupt theory.

But the fairytale doesn't stop there. Evolutionists have made a living the past 75 years on the Big Joke that is the unseen beneficial random mutation. I honestly believe this is the most ridiculous aspect of the whole theory. The notion that a once-in-a-multi-million chance mutation can be beneficial and spread throughout a population via sexual reproduction is truly outrageous -- especially when you consider that populations are often separated by hundreds or thousands of miles and mutations are 99% destructive and/or deadly. Not only that, but a grand total of only 4,000 hominid bones have been dug up...(this includes humans, australopithecus, Neanderthals, Homo erectus, etc) Thus, there simply is not enough of a population for the likely occurrence of beneficial random mutations. Of course cumulative selection of thousands of such mutations has never -- and will never -- be witnessed.

And the fairytale continues. THE most crucial aspect to the whole evolutionary farce is natural selection. This, as well, has never been documented, studied or witnessed. As far as I know there have never been controlled experiments on animals in an attempt to prove this concept. Once again, we are supposed to fall in love with the theory -- not any actual evidence.

So there's the backbone to evolutionary theory -- and there is no real science to it -- it's all nothing but a wild fairytale....a fairytale dreamed up by a select few who have no intention of actually studying the material world -- as real science requires. Instead, their only intention is to give atheists around the world a vessel to latch on to so they can justify their own existence without having to acknowledge the truth of the Almighty Creator.
__________________
"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." Professor Louis Bounoure, National Center of Scientific Research.

natural selection and speciation is an observed documented FACT.

If however you wish to apply this level of skepticism to the Theory of Evolution, then please, become an atheist because you know as well as I know that there is absolutely not a shread of evidence for a personal god.

 

[gamespotter10]

What kind of scientist are you? maybe life science.

What kind of scientist doesn't know that existence of atoms are a proven fact?? Even have photographic evidence.

No one has ever directly observed a nucleus

The truth is you have to rely on ignorant people wholl just take your word for everything,

Really? I only became an evolutionist after I researched the evidence for myself, not because I heard that most scientists support evolution.

Youre just some biologist thats it. You don't know any physics and probably just took chemistry for life science majors-mostly organic and bio.

why is this at all important? BTW, that was nothing more than an ad hominem attack

Still you try to go on and make a psuedo science out of Darwin and evolution. Those ideas are outdated anyways so why you go around forcing this on our children?

I've noticed something very peculiar with your posts losangeleschristian, you quite often make very bold statements like the ToE is outdated, or its pseudoscience, but you have never once given any evidence to support your claim. I call poe on this guy

Then you go on to say having a child is evolution. In what way???That would be news to the general public!

You said can ANY historical event be proven? This is how you make your case?? To answer your question, sure it can. Just show me a photograph of a past event and I'll go along with it and unless you EVoS come up with the hard evidence, no one going to go along with you. You got no numbers, no formula to plug #s into and test like real science does. Man, you people havent got none of that and that's your big problem.

then please, without using common ancestry, explain the following phenomena
1: Orthologous endogenous retroviruses in all of the great apes
2: non-functional ascorbic acid gene in all apes and all humans that have the same 8 base-pair deletion
3: Ubiquitous genes which match phylogenic predictions (Chimps being our most recent common ancestor should have Cytochrome C being very similar, what we find is that its exactly identical to humans
4: Numerous transitional fossils including fish to land tetrapods, reptiles to birds, reptiles to mammals, mammals to whales, and apes to humans, and MANY others.

You ought to try more science and less decieving if youre going to call it science. There are theories out there anyone can come up with. Yours isn't nowhere strong enough to be taken as real science. You dont find no 'Missing links' in Physics or Chemistry. All their theories have been proven. Every single physical law which by the way, the Lord made also so you and I dont fall apart while typing, has been proven and put into practice in everyday applications like engineering. Numbers, numbers and more numbers.

evolutionary science has been used many times in forestry and medicine, including the manufacture of the polio vaccine, which was made using evolution

What kind of science you got that proves we came from monkeys or worms or amoeba?

we have lots of genetic evidence which supports universal common ancestry, and the evolutionary history of life is derived from the fossils which we can dig up

Whats more, the first thing that came out of you tells me you don't know how to read a Bible or familiar with
who Christ is. Everyone, even a biologist like you should be familiar with the verse that "before the world existed I am". That may go over the head of someone in your field of work but its meaning is clear to most of us.

Science and religion DONT mix.

This is the day that the lord hath made-whether you believe it or not.

Happy Birthday Jesus!!

 

[Wiccan_Child]

What kind of scientist are you? maybe life science.

I'm a theoretical physicist.

What kind of scientist doesn't know that existence of atoms are a proven fact??

All of them. We have very, very good evidence for their existance, but it is ultimately an unproven theory. But by all means, prove me wrong: demonstrate their existance.

Even have photographic evidence.

This just further highlights your ignorace: atomic theory tells us they cannot be photographed. We can create (what we believe to be) images of them:

But these are ultimately not photographic images of the atoms themselves (this image, for instance, was done via a scanning tunneling microscope).

The truth is you have to rely on ignorant people wholl just take your word for everything,

Yes, gosh-darn those university lecturers and them there world-reknowned textbooks.

Youre just some biologist thats it. You don't know any physics and probably just took chemistry for life science majors-mostly organic and bio.

Hmm, no. I'm a theoretical physicst. I do love how you think a biologist with 'majors' in organic chemistry and biology, could have no first-hand knowledge of evolutionary theory. I mean, it's not like evolution pertains to the biological sciences...
Oh, wait, it does. What's your point again?

Still you try to go on and make a psuedo science out of Darwin and evolution. Those ideas are outdated anyways so why you go around forcing this on our children?

Because you're wrong: it isn't outdated, it is science, and thousands of scientists attest to this fact.

Then you go on to say having a child is evolution. In what way???

See below.

That would be news to the general public!

Indeed it would, but only because the general public is unfortunately ignorant of the techinicalities surrounding evolutionary theory. For instance, evolution itself is defined as a change in the frequency of inheritable traits in a given population of self-replicators over time.

Having a child fits this definition: before the child's existance, the frequency was x, and after it increased by 1. I.e., the population has evolved.

You said can ANY historical event be proven? This is how you make your case??

I was highlighting the absurdity of your statement (""). That something is unproven tells us nothing about its likelyhood. For instance, I cannot say with 100% certainity that you are not some sophisticated machine, but I can say that this possibility is remote (to say the least). Likewise, though I cannot say with 100% certainty that the Holocaust happened, I am nonetheless very confident that it did happen.

So my point is that you are either proposing the absurd by your statement, or are simply mistaken. I'm betting it's the latter.

To answer your question, sure it can. Just show me a photograph of a past event and I'll go along with it

Prove to me that this photograph:

Necessarily demonstrates the existance of Buffalo Bill.

The point is that you merely assume that this photograph is representative of past events. You cannot demonstrate that this wasn't done by magic gnomes with an inclination to deception (for instance).

and unless you EVoS come up with the hard evidence, no one going to go along with you.

Two words: radiocarbon dating.

You got no numbers, no formula to plug #s into and test like real science does. Man, you people havent got none of that and that's your big problem.

So because biology doesn't have the mathematical rigour of, well, mathematics, it is necessarily false?
Wow, I guess all those vaccinations and observed instances of speciation just didn't happen.
You know you're a fundy when you reject empiricism...

You ought to try more science and less decieving if youre going to call it science.

By all means, show me where I've decieved anyone.

There are theories out there anyone can come up with. Yours isn't nowhere strong enough to be taken as real science.

Yet again, you show your utter ignorance when it comes to science. A theory is simply a proposed explanation that has evidence. It is a valid hypothesis that magic gnomes are pulling masses together, as is the notion that Einstein's field equations hold true.
Neither are proven, but guess which one is more well evidenced.

You dont find no 'Missing links' in Physics or Chemistry.

Oh really? So tell me what dark matter is.

All their theories have been proven.

Absolute nonsense.

Every single physical law which by the way, the Lord made also so you and I dont fall apart while typing, has been proven and put into practice in everyday applications like engineering. Numbers, numbers and more numbers.

And evolutionary theory has applications in computing, dynamic systems, artificial life, artificial intelligence, medicine, anthropology, palaeoarchaeology, etc.

What kind of science you got that proves we came from monkeys or worms or amoeba?

This question makes no sense:
1) Science isn't a thing to be presented, it is a method to be considered.
2) Noone claims to have proof of our common ancestry with all other lifeforms.

What we do have, however, is literally overwhelming amounts of evidence.

Whats more, the first thing that came out of you tells me you don't know how to read a Bible

Bible's aren't hard to read, with or without the Holy Spirit's guidance.

or familiar with who Christ is.

Dude on the cross, died for our sins, forgiveness, turn the other cheek, born of a virgin, God manifest, one third of a triune deity, etc. I'm familiar with the Jesus myths.

Everyone, even a biologist like you should be familiar with the verse that "before the world existed I am".

What? Why on Earth should everyone be familiar with that (not everone speaks English, for starters...)?

That may go over the head of someone in your field of work but its meaning is clear to most of us.

Since you have bizarrely presumed that I am a biologist, I'll sit here in polite bemusement whilst you collect your thoughts. Do try to pay attention next time.

This is the day that the lord hath made-whether you believe it or not

Prove it. Moreover, explain why shepherd were tending their flocks smack bang on the Winter Solstice.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

We can either make this real easy or real hard. Prove right here and now that we evolved from primordial slime otherwise stop mincing words. If you cant then say so and stop putting evolution theory on the same level with chemistry and physics. U know the same work didnt go into proving theory of evolution.

 

[trivista]

We can either make this real easy or real hard. Prove right here and now that we evolved from primordial slime otherwise stop mincing words. If you cant then say so and stop putting evolution theory on the same level with chemistry and physics. U know the same work didnt go into proving theory of evolution.

If you can't be bothered to expend the energy required to type the word you their is little likely hood that you would spend the hundreds of hours required to begin to understand modern evolutionary theory.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

you people, wiccans, atheists, all the same to me dont have evideence and try telling the public like you just did that you have as strong evidence as a scanning tunneling image of atoms. they even tell you right in the book. But you're so insecure about matching up your evidence that you try telling me 'that isn't technically a photo at all we just believe them to be atoms'.

So whatever they may be, even without the images, they still have evidence you only dream of having.

I told you your science isn't real science if you got to mince words like that. shame on you trying to pull an exact science like Physics down with the science of evolution. What have you got but a few bones? You even got a missing link going for you. thats why your theory falls apart. i dont see no 'missing link' in Physics or Chemistry. There are no terms like "perhaps", "probably" there. Thats only found in junk science like evolution.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

If you can't be bothered to expend the energy required to type the word you their is little likely hood that you would spend the hundreds of hours required to begin to understand modern evolutionary theory.

What does that have to do with it? i type fast.

I asked you to prove something. What happened? I thought with all your fancy talk you could put something together but instead you felt your guts turn to jelly and give me your give up call. Maybe some of your wiccan friends can think of a fabrication to help you out against a layman like me. I heard that guy from rational response (Sapient) can help you out. I hear he's pretty good at this.

 

[trivista]

What does that have to do with it? i type fast.

I asked you to prove something. What happened? I thought with all your fancy talk you could put something together but instead you felt your guts turn to jelly and give me your give up call. Maybe some of your wiccan friends can think of a fabrication to help you out against a layman like me. I heard that guy from rational response (Sapient) can help you out. I hear he's pretty good at this.

What fancy talk? This is my 3rd or 4st post in the past 6 months.

See you aren't even keeping track of who you are responding to.

 

[MoonLancer]

you people, wiccans, atheists, all the same to me dont have evideence and try telling the public like you just did that you have as strong evidence as a scanning tunneling image of atoms. they even tell you right in the book. But you're so insecure about matching up your evidence that you try telling me 'that isn't technically a photo at all we just believe them to be atoms'.

So whatever they may be, even without the images, they still have evidence you only dream of having.

I told you your science isn't real science if you got to mince words like that. shame on you trying to pull an exact science like Physics down with the science of evolution. What have you got but a few bones? You even got a missing link going for you. thats why your theory falls apart. i dont see no 'missing link' in Physics or Chemistry. There are no terms like "perhaps", "probably" there. Thats only found in junk science like evolution.

whatever helps you sleep at night.... The conclusions of evolution are derived from the same methods of every other science. too bad you don't know what those are...

your just cheesed because mainstream reality (science) doesn't agree with your world view. well thats too bad isn't it? get over it. The only thing thats falling apart is creationists and their fringe movement on mainstream reality.

Think about this. in Dover, Creationists couldn't even persuade a judge who was given the thumbs of by Rick Santorum and chosen by Gorge Bush. This guy was extremely conservative. and he saw right through the creationists bull sh*t. can you Imagen if this was a moderate or liberal judge? as long as their are people who look at the facts and evidence, creation will always loose because its jam packed with BS.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

Okay but you're all in on this discussion taking the same side. The first one came on strong with his double talk. It seemed to me he would be teaching that garbage in our schools so i mentioned he must be a biologist. Then he tries impressing me and says no I'm not. 'I have a PHD in theoretical physics'.. for whatever that's worth.

Then I asked him to cut out the double talk and prove his theory if he values it so much and believes it should be taught in our schools. I even took a shot at it and called it junk science just to goad him and he still hasnt come forward to prove me wrong.

You'd think a man with all those years of training as a PHD in theoretical Physics, he could do something with it and tell us just how slime somehow grew into a man throughout these billions of years and give hard evidence for it.

man, they don't have anything. They still trying to connect the pieces with their primitive science.

Since when are the words "probably" and "perhaps" found in Physics and Math????

I still dont know. Maybe he really is just a biologist and was trying to intimidate me with his "PHD in theoretical physics".

That was just an embarrassment what they were doing with their "prove this is a photo" bit. And then putting a Science like Physics and Chemistry on the same level as Evolution.

Their theories are weak and because so much evidence is missing, it shouldn't be taught.

Keep the deception out of our public schools!

 

[Losangeleschristian]

whatever helps you sleep at night.... The conclusions of evolution are derived from the same methods of every other science. too bad you don't know what those are...

Now there you go with the double talk instead of addressing what we want to know. You tried every way to decieve me and found i couldnt be decieved.

I assure you I'm not the one losing sleep over this. You being the scientist you say you are, are faced with the burden of proof and so far have done a poor job in proving anything. No evidence. Nothing. All you done is mention that you attempted the same methods used in other sciences. And you still came up short! Because you got your missing link so all youve been doing all this time is blowing smoke.

You call yourself a scientist?? A scientist can put his theory to the test and if it holds, passes the test. Have you? No.

Then you try pulling down physical science down on the same level as theory of evolution.

"hey man, prove is this really a photo".

Go back to the drawing board.

 

[jwu]

Since when are the words "probably" and "perhaps" found in Physics and Math????

Quantum physics deals a lot with probabilities. And theories about the origin of the universe are weighted against each other based on the available evidence to find out which one is more probable.

In math...how about Goldbach's conjecture? So far no counter-example could be found, so it's "probably" true.

Note that math is distinct from natural science though, as it includes the concept of formal proof. You won't find any such thing in natural sciences, be it biology, physics, chemistry, geology and so on.

You call yourself a scientist?? A scientist can put his theory to the test and if it holds, passes the test. Have you? No.

In what way do predictions of the distribution of endogenous retroviral insertions not count as as test to the theory of evolution? Please be specific.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

Quantum physics deals a lot with probabilities. And theories about the origin of the universe are weighted against each other based on the available evidence to find out which one is more probable.

In math...how about Goldbach's conjecture? So far no counter-example could be found, so it's "probably" true.

Note that math is distinct from natural science though, as it includes the concept of formal proof. You won't find any such thing in natural sciences, be it biology, physics, chemistry, geology and so on.

In what way do predictions of the distribution of endogenous retroviral insertions not count as as test to the theory of evolution? Please be specific.

These are all good points you bring up. Now you're talking about astronomy which is different. But you still got the problem trying to figure out events of the past. Trying to fit the pieces together of how everything started. But even according to scientists you're still off by about a billion years?

So how you going to tell someone in a book with certainty what happened in the first fraction of a second about this force and that?

You have several theories but don't know which if any are the right ones. At least we have photos of what past versions looked like and since it's directly observable it's okay but past that its speculation.

I have no problem with photographic evidence. I dont have a problem with that at all. So its alright to show them and described what happened at the time and what it means now-that the universe is growing etc. But speculation is guesswork and i don't like the thought of throwing assumptions around.

With some chemistry there is some assumption also but they just comparing numbers and saying this can be approximated for the sake of simplicity.

But...any time you try to figure out the past or future you're going to miss more often than not. Until you find enough pieces and finally you can say with a certain % or confidence this or that happened. In all likellihood, this is probably what happened.

But evolution got too many holes in it tho because you take your dates back millions and hundreds of millions and even billions of years!! Then you assume going from one form over time to another. Was anyone around to see it? There's no way to observe it like you can in astronomy. You see? Too many missing connections-thats what im getting at. It's mostly guesswork and if its mostly guess work you got to overhaul it and look for something else. In the meantime get rid of it. We don't need it in our schools. It's contaminating the minds of our youth and thats not what God intended for them to learn.

 

[I_Love_Cheese]

These are all good points you bring up. Now you're talking about astronomy which is different. But you still got the problem trying to figure out events of the past. Trying to fit the pieces together of how everything started. But even according to scientists you're still off by about a billion years?

So how you going to tell someone in a book with certainty what happened in the first fraction of a second about this force and that?

You have several theories but don't know which if any are the right ones. At least we have photos of what past versions looked like and since it's directly observable it's okay but past that its speculation.

I have no problem with photographic evidence. I dont have a problem with that at all. So its alright to show them and described what happened at the time and what it means now-that the universe is growing etc. But speculation is guesswork and i don't like the thought of throwing assumptions around.

With some chemistry there is some assumption also but they just comparing numbers and saying this can be approximated for the sake of simplicity.

But...any time you try to figure out the past or future you're going to miss more often than not. Until you find enough pieces and finally you can say with a certain % or confidence this or that happened. In all likellihood, this is probably what happened.

But evolution got too many holes in it tho because you take your dates back millions and hundreds of millions and even billions of years!! Then you assume going from one form over time to another. Was anyone around to see it? There's no way to observe it like you can in astronomy. You see? Too many missing connections-thats what im getting at. It's mostly guesswork and if its mostly guess work you got to overhaul it and look for something else. In the meantime get rid of it. We don't need it in our schools. It's contaminating the minds of our youth and thats not what God intended for them to learn.

Question, If you accept Astronomy as a science with numbers and such, how old is the earth and the universe? Also have we observed the entire process, or only parts of it?