• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Why evolution isn't scientific

Status
Not open for further replies.

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,112
7,459
31
Wales
✟426,109.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
but i already showed here other case that is very similar to this theoretical bear case. and as we have seen- no problem for evolution. so the bear case isnt different.

Except you didn't. 18 million years, geologically speaking, is nothing. In terms of a clock, it's not even a second. Your idea however can only work WITH evidence.
 
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
555
44
tel aviv
✟119,055.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
Except you didn't. 18 million years, geologically speaking, is nothing. In terms of a clock, it's not even a second. Your idea however can only work WITH evidence.
100 my is also nothing (geologically speaking). so i see no difference from 20 my vs 100.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
but there is no such a way to prove such a situation even if it was real. this is why evolution isnt testable.

It can't be proven. That's not the way science works. It's up to you to find evidence which will dis-prove the theory. That's how science works--it's based on inductive logic. Confirming evidence does not "prove" a theory it only confirms it, and the theory is then held provisionally until evidence comes along which contradicts it.

Do you have any real evidence that a species is been found to have existed before its supposed precursor? That is the evidence which will "test" the theory of evolution.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
but i just showed you that evolution can explain everything. this is the problem.

No you didn't. Evolution could NOT explain 200 million year old bears, since if there was a 200 million year old bear fossil, it would contradict everything else evolution (and a whole bunch of other sciences) tell us.

Handwavium may exist in your strawman of evolution, but it doesn't exist in reality.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2012
3,826
844
✟135,483.00
Faith
Atheist
but i just showed you that evolution can explain everything. this is the problem.
You are still wrong, xianghua.
People agree that finding a Precambrian rabbit would be something that evolution could not explain. This is the simple fact that a modern mammal cannot appear in the fossil record before mammals existed.
Evolution cannot explain a Precambrian rabbit bear.
Evolution cannot explain a Precambrian rabbit human being.
Evolution cannot explain ~5,415 species of modern mammals appearing in the Precambrian :doh:.
There are around 9 million species and any of them would be unexplained by evolution if we found evidence of them before the class existed.

Thus evolution cannot explain everything and there is no problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2012
3,826
844
✟135,483.00
Faith
Atheist
the tetrapod fossil appear before the missing links between tetrapods and fishes. so its out of place.
Still wrong, xianghua, as explained to you before.
There are no new tetrapod fossils. There are disputed trackways that some scientists attribute to tetrapods, a few to Tiktaalik and others think they are not trackways at all.

Tetrapods are a group of many species. Fishes are many species. There are multiple possible species that can be a transitional species between a species of fishes and a species of tetrapod. Tiktaalik is the first transitional fossil between fishes and tetrapods that we found. It may be that it is actually the first transitional fossil between fishes and tetrapods. If the trackways are accepted as evidence of earlier tetrapods then Tiktaalik becomes a later transitional fossil between fishes and tetrapods.

These are not "out of place" fossils.

ETA: In case you do not think that this has been explained to you before, read post 622.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟158,395.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
but i already showed here other case that is very similar to this theoretical bear case. and as we have seen- no problem for evolution. so the bear case isnt different.

You have never given any example that posed a problem for evolution, that is true.
 
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
555
44
tel aviv
✟119,055.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
It can't be proven. That's not the way science works. It's up to you to find evidence which will dis-prove the theory. That's how science works--it's based on inductive logic. Confirming evidence does not "prove" a theory it only confirms it, and the theory is then held provisionally until evidence comes along which contradicts it.

Do you have any real evidence that a species is been found to have existed before its supposed precursor? That is the evidence which will "test" the theory of evolution.
i already gave here several examples like in the whale case and this tetrapod one:

Tetrapod trackways from the early Middle Devonian period of Poland
 
Upvote 0

xianghua

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2017
5,215
555
44
tel aviv
✟119,055.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Single
If the trackways are accepted as evidence of earlier tetrapods then Tiktaalik becomes a later transitional fossil between fishes and tetrapods.
.

this is the problem. any fossil can be fit with evolution. later or eariler.
 
Upvote 0

VirOptimus

A nihilist who cares.
Aug 24, 2005
6,814
4,422
54
✟258,187.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
this is the problem. any fossil can be fit with evolution. later or eariler.

Is this some kind of performance art?

No, they cant, as has been repeatedly explained.

But there are no such fossils as the ToE is correct.
 
Upvote 0

Bungle_Bear

Whoot!
Mar 6, 2011
9,084
3,513
✟262,040.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
what is the problem? just push back bear evolution. problem solved.

You do realise that evolution doesn't actually work like that?

I mean, this has been REPEATEDLY explained to you. It's starting to seem that you are just deliberately ignoring it now.
 
Upvote 0

Roland Pires

New Member
Nov 9, 2018
3
0
67
Scarborough
✟23,503.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It can't be proven. That's not the way science works. It's up to you to find evidence which will dis-prove the theory. That's how science works--it's based on inductive logic. Confirming evidence does not "prove" a theory it only confirms it, and the theory is then held provisionally until evidence comes along which contradicts it.

Do you have any real evidence that a species is been found to have existed before its supposed precursor? That is the evidence which will "test" the theory of evolution.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.