The Demise of Evolution

[pitabread]

No, i just dont trust things that are uncertain and subject to change.

That's the psychology of Closure at work. Creationists generally have higher need for Closure and therefore less tolerance of uncertainty.

 

[Speedwell]

No, i just dont trust things that are uncertain and subject to change.

Then you can have no use for science of any kind, not just the theory of evolution. All scientific theories are held provisionally, pending new discoveries.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a while. However, GPS is proven to work, no one has proven millions of years of evolution however, because its uncertain and subject to change.

Now you just contradicted yourself since GPS depends on the theory of gravity. And yes, by the way that you abuse the word proven evolution over millions of years has been shown to be a fact far beyond a reasonable doubt. That you do not understand how this has been done is your fault alone.

Once again, the theory is subject to change, just as the theory of gravity is subject to change. The facts remain.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, i just dont trust things that are uncertain and subject to change.

That is a flaw on your part.

 

[Need answers]

It explains all of the facts we have at present very well. But we can never be certain whether new facts will come to light which will require that the currently accepted theory be modified or abandoned altogether.

Abandoned altogether? It doesnt sound very factual at all.

 

[Need answers]

Now you just contradicted yourself since GPS depends on the theory of gravity. And yes, by the way that you abuse the word proven evolution over millions of years has been shown to be a fact far beyond a reasonable doubt. That you do not understand how this has been done is your fault alone.

Once again, the theory is subject to change, just as the theory of gravity is subject to change. The facts remain.

Gravity can be observed, evolution cannot.

 

[Need answers]

That is a flaw on your part.

No, its wise.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Gravity can be observed, evolution cannot.

Oh my! So wrong. We can observe it at several different levels. You do not understand what observation is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, its wise.

You should no better than that. And if you don't it is a pity.

 

[Speedwell]

Gravity can be observed, evolution cannot.

Just to be clear, you are speaking of the fact of evolution, not the theory. Is that correct?

That it has not been observed that life on Earth has changed and diversified since it began.
That it has not been observed that species which once existed are no longer alive.
That it has not been observed that there are species alive now which have not always existed.

 

[pitabread]

Gravity can be observed, evolution cannot.

Evolution is observed. We observe changes in populations of organisms over time.
That's what biological evolution is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just to be clear, you are speaking of the fact of evolution, not the theory. Is that correct?

That it has not been observed that life on Earth has changed and diversified since it began.
That it has not been observed that species which once existed are no longer alive.
That it has not been observed that there are species alive now which have not always existed.

He is using Ken Ham's distorted definition of "observe".

 

[Jimmy D]

That is not a flaw. It does not matter how many times it is said.

If its uncertain and subject to change its not a fact. A fact is proven true, you yourself say parts of evolution can be wrong.

Come on, you obviously read at least some of my post, it’s not that difficult to grasp...

“ In science, theories never become facts. Rather, theories explain facts.”

 

[Subduction Zone]

Come on, you obviously read at least some of my post, it’s not that difficult to grasp...

“ In science, theories never become facts. Rather, theories explain facts.”

Selective reading appears to be a creationist defense mechanism.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

The way of writing religious manuscript less wordy and different from novel. If that is hard to comprehend, then think of the difference between words in a engineering text and a marketing ad.

Go read Job 41. Is that "less wordy.... than a novel"?

 

[Kylie]

Bamboo would be a closer word to describe the barrel of the tank or armour vehicle. Is the barrel so huge and thick like a tree trunk? Most tree trunks have branches too except BAMBOO or coconut tree.

Yes, and bamboo was just so widespread across the middle east, wasn't it?

Can't suggest writers in the middle would have compared it with bamboo if bamboo never actually grew there. You know Bamboo is from nowhere near the middle east, right?

See your own limitations with words. The bible say it better than you, so don't say how it should say stuff to suit you. It is readers who have to comprehend it, not criticise that it lacks details.

I'd hardly say the Bible's version is a clearer description of a tank than mine.

The way of writing religious manuscript less wordy and different from novel. If that is hard to comprehend, then think of the difference between words in a engineering text and a marketing ad.

Not really relevant. I'm not aware that there were any word count restrictions for the people who wrote the Bible.

As for God harden Pharaoh's heart, let me copy abd paste from another earlier post of mine six months ago.

And you produced nothing...

 

[Need answers]

Evolution is observed. We observe changes in populations of organisms over time.
That's what biological evolution is.

So did you actually observe the origin of mankind evolve over time? Nope.

 

[Speedwell]

So did you actually observe the origin of mankind evolve over time? Nope.

So what? The scientific method does not require that we observe the entire process in order to conclude that it very likely happened.

 

[Need answers]

So what? The scientific method does not require that we observe the entire process in order to conclude that it very likely happened.

Very likely a scientific fantasy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So did you actually observe the origin of mankind evolve over time? Nope.

This is a poorly worded post on your part, but we can observe evolution through the fossil record.

I don't think that you understand what observation is.