Why evolution isn't scientific

Status
Not open for further replies.

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
554
43
tel aviv
✟111,545.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
a scientific theory is a theory that we can test. mean it can be falsified. the problem with evolution is that it cant be test. for instance: some evolutionists (like dawkins and others) claiming that if we will find even a single out of place fossil- evolution will be false. but we actually found many such fossils like this one:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180801182438.htm

but as you can guess- they just push back the evolution of the creature and dont claim that evolution is false. the problem is that in this way any fossil will not falsify evolution. other evolutionists claimed that if we will find more shared ervs with far species than close species evolution will be false. but in this case they can just claim for convergent evolution or convergent loss or even ils. so even such a case will not be a problem for evolution, and therefore its not a scientific theory by definition. as a general note: english isnt my native so i may not understand some words here and there in general. thanks.
 

AirPo

with a Touch of Grey
Oct 31, 2003
26,359
7,214
60
✟169,357.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
a scientific theory is a theory that we can test. mean it can be falsified. the problem with evolution is that it cant be test. for instance: some evolutionists (like dawkins and others) claiming that if we will find even a single out of place fossil- evolution will be false. but we actually found many such fossils like this one:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180801182438.htm

but as you can guess- they just push back the evolution of the creature and dont claim that evolution is false. the problem is that in this way any fossil will not falsify evolution. other evolutionists claimed that if we will find more shared ervs with far species than close species evolution will be false. but in this case they can just claim for convergent evolution or convergent loss or even ils. so even such a case will not be a problem for evolution, and therefore its not a scientific theory by definition. as a general note: english isnt my native so i may not understand some words here and there in general. thanks.
That's not out of place.
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,372
Frozen North
✟329,323.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
but as you can guess- they just push back the evolution of the creature and dont claim that evolution is false.

You appear to continually confuse refinement of the timelines of when things appear in the fossil record versus what would constitute an actual falsification of the theory.

I believe Sarah explained all of this in detail to you and yet it appears you still don't understand it. That's unfortunate.

but in this case they can just claim for convergent evolution or convergent loss or even ils. so even such a case will not be a problem for evolution, and therefore its not a scientific theory by definition.

You've never demonstrated that you understand what convergent evolution even means. Consequently your criticism doesn't mean anything.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Yet another thread in which nonscientists tell scientists how to do their jobs.
I've read the OP twice and can't seem to find that.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,666
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,434.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You appear to continually confuse refinement of the timelines of when things appear in the fossil record versus what would constitute an actual falsification of the theory.

I believe Sarah explained all of this in detail to you and yet it appears you still don't understand it. That's unfortunate.
What woud Sarah say if they found a rabbit in the pre-Cambrian?
 
Upvote 0

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,372
Frozen North
✟329,323.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
What woud Sarah say if they found a rabbit in the pre-Cambrian?

Has that ever happened? No? Then irrelevant.

What the OP posted isn't the same thing at all. This is the problem with trying to argue against something from a position of ignorance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zoii
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Are there any scenarios in which evolution could not recover from a detrimental objection? We are approaching it's third incarnation now, by adding teleological forces to neo darwinism. It seems insuperable under naturalistic presuppositions and the ability to add new features through penmanship. So how do people envision a naturalistic scenario where it is shown to be fully false?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0

AirPo

with a Touch of Grey
Oct 31, 2003
26,359
7,214
60
✟169,357.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Are there any scenarios in which evolution could not recover from a detrimental objection? We are approaching it's third incarnation now, by adding teleological forces to neo darwinism. It seems insuperable under naturalistic presuppositions and the ability to add new features through penmanship. So how do people envision a naturalistic scenario where it is shown to be fully false?
The aliens that have been pulling the strings all along finally reveal themselves.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Steven Wood

Not my will but Thy will be done
Jul 17, 2015
392
153
46
Arkansas, United States
✟18,151.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Yet another thread in which nonscientists tell scientists how to do their jobs.
So are you saying that just because they are scientist they are incapable of lying for the reasons of gaining fame and grants? My belief has always been that nonsense is nonsense no matter who is spewing it and common sense is not all that common. I have no problem understanding things especially if its a dumbed down, abridged version. Sounds to me like the OP know a little something about it though. I tell you this though, I have a hypothetical question that I'd like you to answer.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: bhillyard
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
554
43
tel aviv
✟111,545.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
Yet another thread in which nonscientists tell scientists how to do their jobs.
yet another comment wich dealing with the writer instead of dealing with the facts. if you can show why im wrong- be my guest.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Steven Wood
Upvote 0

Steven Wood

Not my will but Thy will be done
Jul 17, 2015
392
153
46
Arkansas, United States
✟18,151.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You appear to continually confuse refinement of the timelines of when things appear in the fossil record versus what would constitute an actual falsification of the theory.

I believe Sarah explained all of this in detail to you and yet it appears you still don't understand it. That's unfortunate.



You've never demonstrated that you understand what convergent evolution even means. Consequently your criticism doesn't mean anything.
Here's a question for you? Since you insult the intelligence of the OP and count her opinion as worthless lets see how well versed you are in both sides of the arguement or just spew what you think makes you sound smart, Do you understand the entire Bible enough to discredit it and label it as false compared to "logical" science? Before you answer I'll give you a hint about what your response should be. If you say you do then you will know that there are a few passages that pose the question who knows the mind of God and who was there and the beginning or creation. Now if you say yes you'll know that that passage proves you'd be lying. If you say no the you are not educated enough for your criticism to mean anything let alone have the right to demean another. If you think I am purposely being insulting you should learn that your words have consequences and may hurt others as well.
 
Upvote 0

Sanoy

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2017
3,169
1,421
America
✟118,024.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
We're doing what now?
The idea that the universe is such that life, as we observe it, isn't just random, but likely. So rather than rely on pure randomness the state of matter is a significant driving force acting congruently with evolution.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Steven Wood
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Steven Wood

Not my will but Thy will be done
Jul 17, 2015
392
153
46
Arkansas, United States
✟18,151.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Has that ever happened? No? Then irrelevant.

What the OP posted isn't the same thing at all. This is the problem with trying to argue against something from a position of ignorance.
please see my response to your first response
 
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
554
43
tel aviv
✟111,545.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
You appear to continually confuse refinement of the timelines of when things appear in the fossil record versus what would constitute an actual falsification of the theory.

I believe Sarah explained all of this in detail to you and yet it appears you still don't understand it. That's unfortunate.



You've never demonstrated that you understand what convergent evolution even means. Consequently your criticism doesn't mean anything.
so where is the limit that we can push back creatures evolution? give me a specific number. if you cant- then you prove my point that evolution can explain anything.
 
Upvote 0

sfs

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2003
10,678
7,745
64
Massachusetts
✟339,454.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So are you saying that just because they are scientist they are incapable of lying for the reasons of gaining fame and grants?
Well, no, but if you're seriously suggesting that virtually all of the world's scientists are lying about evolution, then yes, I'm saying that's completely nuts. (Why would they be doing this, anyway? The same scientists are the ones deciding who gets grants -- why would they devote their lives studying something they know is a fraud?)
My belief has always been that nonsense is nonsense no matter who is spewing it and common sense is not all that common.
My belief -- formed based on decades of watching people attack evolution -- is that most of those doing the attacking have no idea what they're talking about.
I tell you this though, I have a hypothetical question that I'd like you to answer.
I can answer hypothetical questions, but not hypothetical questions that you haven't asked (which would make it a hypothetical hypothetical question, I guess).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Steven Wood

Not my will but Thy will be done
Jul 17, 2015
392
153
46
Arkansas, United States
✟18,151.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
yest another comment wich dealing with the writer instead of dealing with the facts. if you can show why im wrong- be my guest.
many are called but few are chosen and the foolish will never gain wisdom. To take a page from their beliefs. trying to explain the truth to the blind and ignorant is like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a monkey.its a waste of time because God will never open the eyes of the wicked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.