Creationism VS Public schools

[MasterOfKrikkit]

Anyone can post websites and then claim victory in a discussion, but the websites could be wrong.

I didn't post any websites; I gave two key pieces of evidence for (macro)evolution and common descent -- namely, ERVs and Human Chromosome #2. You can look those up on websites, if you like, or in textbooks or in scientific papers. Bottom line: either you have to refute those findings (good luck) or believe in a massive conspiracy with no evidence and no reason for it.

So unless you're going to live in a cave with a tinfoil hat, please explain to me how, in a creationist paradigm (while still, presumably, assuming that God is not deliberately deceptive) chimp and human ERVs show up in exactly the same positions in our genomes AND, while you're at it, why our chromosome #2 has two centromeres, a central telomere and a genetic sequence suspiciously similar to two chimp chromosomes fused together.

You have not proven evolution; nobody had "proven" evolution.

Please stop with the equivocation. There is no "proof" in science, but there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt. The ToE is one of the most well-supported theories out there. Indeed, the examples I gave above should pretty well seal the deal alone; but the rest of the mountain of evidence is pretty compelling too.

If it was proven, there would be no debate, and it would not be called the "theory of evolution" anymore.

And more equivocation. "Theory" in science is the highest designation possible -- it means "overarching idea that explains disparate phenomena and has been thoroughly examined and tested". The idea that stuff is made up of little lumps called atoms is a theory; the idea that apples fall to the ground and planets orbit the sun because of an attractive force called gravity is a theory; the idea that energy comes in discrete lumps called quanta is a theory. This has been explained many times before. Your wilfull ignorance is noted. So please stop ing when the "wolf pack" calls you on it.

As to the debate: there really is no debate in science. Evolution happens. The ToE is the best model that explains how. There are disagreements over technical details, but there is no "controversy" about the general structure of the ToE. The controversy is political and religious. It is a controversy created by those with a non-scientific agenda.

Now stop with the diversionary tactics and answer the question: how have we not provided evidence for evolution? What reasonable doubts, specifically, still exist regarding the evolution of the horse/tetrapods/hominids (as posted by ChordatesLegacy) or common descent (in the light of the evidence I gave above)?

 

[Vene]

Anyone can post websites and then claim victory in a discussion, but the websites could be wrong. You have not proven evolution; nobody had "proven" evolution. If it was proven, there would be no debate, and it would not be called the "theory of evolution" anymore.

The "debate" is between scientists and non-scientists. Among the people who actually study evolution and life, there is no debate. It was settled over a hundred years ago.


And theory is just as strong as law. Theory refers to an explanation backed up with evidence that explains a phenomenon. They are also highly unlikely to be refuted (be it evolution, germ theory, or the cell theory). Laws are mathematical statements that explain a phenomenon. They can also be refuted and are based on a large body of evidence (roughly the same as a theory). Some examples are the laws of thermodynamics and Newton's laws of motion.

In case you missed it, a theory is just as strong of an idea as a law, and no theory will ever become a law and no law was ever a theory.

 

[Danyc]

This is always needed.

 

[mpok1519]

yes; we still dont KNOW if gravity exists, which is why we should teach "alternative science"!

lol =P

 

[pgp_protector]

yes; we still dont KNOW if gravity exists, which is why we should teach "alternative science"!

lol =P

Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

 

[mpok1519]

intellegent falling; falling is so complicated, it needs a sentient someone to throw you down lol

 

[Aceofspades77]

Evolution is a losing cause in which those who belief in the idea have to succumb to the piles of twisted facts that try to keep it afloat. I feel that with time, especially in our "age of knowledge", the evolution lie will continue to lose ground and believability. It's too easy to find any number of loopholes in the "evolution machine" with simple research and common sense.

 

[Skaloop]

Evolution is a losing cause in which those who belief in the idea have to succumb to the piles of lies that try to keep it steady. I can find any number of loopholes in the "evolution machine" with simple research and common sense.

Name one. Name one loophole based on research. Don't bother with common sense, because usually common sense is neither. And it doesn't apply to science anyway.

 

[Aceofspades77]

Name one. Name one loophole based on research. Don't bother with common sense, because usually common sense is neither. And it doesn't apply to science anyway.

Pick a topic holmes and we'll role.

 

[Danyc]

Evolution is a losing cause in which those who belief in the idea have to succumb to the piles of twisted facts that try to keep it afloat. I feel that with time, especially in our "age of knowledge", the evolution lie will continue to lose ground and believability. It's too easy to find any number of loopholes in the "evolution machine" with simple research and common sense.

Name one of them.

Please, do not say:

1: Evolution is only a theory
2: It violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics


I just want to make that disclaimer because it is just so damn aggravating.

 

[Danyc]

Pick a topic holmes and we'll role.

You're the one who said you had all the answers. Please, enlighten the scientific community that has been wrong for 150 years, on a topic that can be proven wrong with simple research and common sense.

 

[Aceofspades77]

Name one of them.

Please, do not say:

1: Evolution is only a theory
2: It violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics


I just want to make that disclaimer because it is just so damn aggravating.

Why are going to quote me if your statement has nothing to with my post.

 

[Danyc]

Why are going to quote me if your statement has nothing to with my post.

Tell me this guy is joking.

Its a joke, right?



(Please be a joke)

 

[Skaloop]

Pick a topic holmes and we'll role.

Not really what I asked. I could name any number of myriad topics regarding the ToE, and you couldn't present a problem with any of them. So you tell me one thing that you can demonstrate through substantiated research that is fundamentally incorrect regarding evolution. If there are so many problems, it should be easy to provide just the one. And then we will demonstrate through evidence and facts and actual scientific research how you are thoroughly mistaken.

 

[Split Rock]

Evolution is a losing cause in which those who belief in the idea have to succumb to the piles of twisted facts that try to keep it afloat. I feel that with time, especially in our "age of knowledge", the evolution lie will continue to lose ground and believability. It's too easy to find any number of loopholes in the "evolution machine" with simple research and common sense.

Creationists have been predicting the immanent downfall of evolution for over one hundred years. Congrats on joining the club.

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

Evolution is a losing cause in which those who belief in the idea have to succumb to the piles of twisted facts that try to keep it afloat. I feel that with time, especially in our "age of knowledge", the evolution lie will continue to lose ground and believability. It's too easy to find any number of loopholes in the "evolution machine" with simple research and common sense.

Its so easy to tear down, yet it remains one of the strongest concepts in science. It's only easy to reject when you ignore fossil, genetic, molecular, ERV, and mitochondrial evidence. Similarity in gene sequence and chromosomal position is evidence of common ancestry.

 

[MasterOfKrikkit]

Pick a topic holmes and we'll role.

Human Chromosome #2. Please explain how this is not the result of genetic mutation from an ancestor common to humans and chimps.

 

[Morcova]

What happened to the "role"?

 

[Cabal]

What happened to the "role"?

I believe sherlock holmes has something to do with it. I'm not sure, I'm not really "down" with the kidshizzles these daynizzles.

 

[AV1611VET]

So you tell me one thing that you can demonstrate through substantiated research that is fundamentally incorrect regarding evolution.

This is a trick challenge, right?

You want someone to demonstrate through substantiated research what's wrong with evolution? When substantiated research came up with evolution in the first place?

Is this like asking someone to show, from documentation put out by the American Bowling Association, what's wrong with bowling?