Are you the intellectual barometer now if you don't understand then no one else does either?
Upvote
0
Do we humans disprove evolution?
- Thread starter Pulchra
- Start date
This link which was provided as a piece of quote mining highlights the pitfalls of using a pop-sci article to support an argument.
It expresses the views of a single individual Sean Carroll who has an unorthodox approach on the subject.
The link wants you to believe that physicists in general are in some ongoing battle to determine whether quantum mechanics or general relativity will prevail in a unified theory.
While Sean Carroll might think quantum mechanics will win in the end, the prevailing view is quantum mechanics and general relativity is on the same footing in a theory of everything.
This not only a view expressed by mainstream scientists but also those working in fringe sciences such as string theory and quantum loop gravity.
Note in the diagram space curvature = general relativity.
The relationship between cosmology (based on general relativity) and particle physics (based on quantum mechanics) are found in the following links.
An example of the failure of Plasma Cosmology
An example of the failure of Plasma Cosmology
An example of the failure of Plasma Cosmology
It expresses the views of a single individual Sean Carroll who has an unorthodox approach on the subject.
The link wants you to believe that physicists in general are in some ongoing battle to determine whether quantum mechanics or general relativity will prevail in a unified theory.
While Sean Carroll might think quantum mechanics will win in the end, the prevailing view is quantum mechanics and general relativity is on the same footing in a theory of everything.
This not only a view expressed by mainstream scientists but also those working in fringe sciences such as string theory and quantum loop gravity.
Note in the diagram space curvature = general relativity.
The relationship between cosmology (based on general relativity) and particle physics (based on quantum mechanics) are found in the following links.
An example of the failure of Plasma Cosmology
An example of the failure of Plasma Cosmology
An example of the failure of Plasma Cosmology
Upvote
0
- Aug 14, 2019
- 9,081
- 8,285
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Divorced
Evolutionists have this marvellous ability to find an explanation for everything. "It just so happened" I still don't buy it. It's not science, it's speculation based on the improbable and unprovable.
Upvote
0
- Apr 17, 2006
- 6,219
- 3,838
- 45
- Country
- Australia
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- AU-Greens
I bet you can't produce any data to support your assertion of "improbable".
It turns out that no matter how much conviction you have, "I still don't buy it" isn't evidence.
Upvote
0
klutedavid
Well-Known Member
But despite the intensive efforts of researchers in the field, many unsolved problems about the Casimir effect remain. In particular the seemingly innocent question of the Casimir force within a single hollow sphere is still a matter of lively debate. People are not even sure if the force is attractive or repulsive. Hendrik Casimir himself thought about this problem as early as 1953 while looking for a stable model for the electron. Half a century on, the mysteries of the Casimir force are likely to keep us entertained for many years to come. (physicsworld.com)
Me not know enough to comment.
Upvote
0
Estrid
Well-Known Member
- Feb 10, 2021
- 9,744
- 3,243
- 39
- Country
- Hong Kong
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
This not a fair, true, or in any way founded on anything but
attitude and lack of knowledge- tho withal not a bad description of
creationism.
IF evolution were so wrong it would have long since been disproved.
It's just a scientific theory. Like any theory, open to disproof.
Every single bit of data from every related field of research is
consistent with ToE. Not one fact anywhere against it.
Speaking of Improbable, could that fact merely be a
fluke, an odd coincidence of no significance? Give it
a few moments of fair consideration.
I wonder what makes it seem reasonable to say it's all phony,
that your chosen interpretation of the Bible stands tall, uber alles.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,851,136
- 51,515
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
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
The explanations are found empirically. In this case, they tested the hypothesis that the Venus flytrap had evolved from an apparently related group of plants, and they found abundant evidence that this was the case. In principle, it might not have been the case - they might have found no connection at all - and that would have been both puzzling and very interesting.
Upvote
0
- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,851,136
- 51,515
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
I'm convinced that's a privilege reserved for Jesus, when He comes back.
They may not cling to it anymore; but I believe they will switch their tactics to God being a deceiver.Bungle_Bear said:
For example, what if Jesus comes back and takes you back in time to observe the Creation Week firsthand?
What then?
Upvote
0
klutedavid
Well-Known Member
Science is always updating theories. They are currently trying to ascertain the Hubble constant. They have two different values for the Hubble constant resulting from two different methodologies.
Can you tell us what the value of the Hubble constant is?
Does science understand why there are two different values for the Hubble constant?
The two values might not seem very different. But each is extraordinarily precise, and they contain no overlap between their error bars. If the Cepheid estimate is wrong, it means all of astronomers' distance measurements have been incorrect since the days of Hubble. If the second estimate is wrong, then new and exotic physics would have to be introduced into physicists' models of the universe. So far, neither team of scientists who determined the numbers has been willing to admit any major measurement mistakes. (livescience)
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
Are you seriously suggesting your level of competence of a subject can be compared to an experts if both sides struggle such as making sense of the discrepancies of the Hubble constant value?
This seems to be the motivation behind your post.
There are no apples to apples comparison here; experts are not blindly ignorant.
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
Similar threads
