Debate #1: Is Evolution science or not?

[kahri]

science uses logic, reason, and evidence

This is not in contradiction to what I wrote.

 

[thirsty]

Nova, evolution follows and has followed every single principle of science, just like any other theory. It is purely based on scientific understanding. If something is found wrong with it, it will be gone or changed. As we speak, there is no evidence against the current theory.

Ofcourse evolutionist must keep changing their theory. They keep finding out that theory does add up.

 

[Battie]

Ofcourse evolutionist must keep changing their theory. They keep finding out that theory does add up.

Reformationists like Martin Luther realized that the early church had gotten things wrong. They changed the church. The church is still changing.

According to your argument, Christianity would be false because it had to change.

 

[P4g4nite]

Ofcourse (sic) evolutionist (sic) must keep changing their theory

As do mathematicians, geologists, astronomers, physicists ..your point is?

 

[Split Rock]

We have a debate: is Evolution science or religion? No interference allowed. Let the debate begin. My position is that it's a religion. My opponent says Evolution is a part of science. We shall see who's right and who's wrong.

What God or Gods are worshipped by this religion?

What ceremonies are used during observation of this religion?

Are there any standard prayers?

Show us the hierarchy supporting this religion.

How is it possible for Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Buddists, etc, etc, to accept evolution if it is a separate religion?

Isn't the real reason you are saying this nonsense because you desire parity that hasn't been earned?

Do you actually have an argument?

 

[cerad]

The good ol' link dropping technique.

Merry Christmas
http://www.someRandomDubiousWebsite.com

Link is broken.

 

[michabo]

Ofcourse evolutionist must keep changing their theory.

The ability and willingness to change one's views after contradictory observations is the heart of science and basic honesty.

 

[corvus_corax]

The good ol' link dropping technique.

Merry Christmas.
http://www.someRandomDubiousWebsite.com

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
And some people say that atheists have no sense of humor

That was beautiful!

 

[Cassandra]

Link is broken.

*coughs* There is no link

 

[NeoTrio]

The ability and willingness to change one's views after contradictory observations is the heart of science and basic honesty.

Of course, a Creationist wouldn't know anything about self-correction and intellectual honesty. They're all about saying "goddidits" enough times so people won't ask any questions.

 

[ClaireZ]

Evolution is Science. As far as I understand it, (and I am new to learning about it) the arguments are over how evolution occurs (ed) not if it occurs (ed).

 

[llDayo]

What God or Gods are worshipped by this religion?

The science god, Chickichickiboomboom.

What ceremonies are used during observation of this religion?

Lab experiments, the ritual of the digging of bones, Nobel prize nominations.

Are there any standard prayers?

Bless us oh great CCBB with extensive knowledge of nature and the logical understanding to equate 2+2=4.

Show us the hierarchy supporting this religion.

There is only one level: evidence.

How is it possible for Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Buddists, etc, etc, to accept evolution if it is a separate religion?

Polytheism.

Isn't the real reason you are saying this nonsense because you desire parity that hasn't been earned?

Homosaywhat?

Do you actually have an argument?

I do, but it's with my wife and has nothing to do with Evil lotion.

 

[Blackmarch]

We have a debate: is Evolution science or religion? No interference allowed. Let the debate begin. My position is that it's a religion. My opponent says Evolution is a part of science. We shall see who's right and who's wrong.

Yes because Evolution theory is based off an observable process.

 

[Novaknight1]

Nova, evolution follows and has followed every single principle of science, just like any other theory. It is purely based on scientific understanding. If something is found wrong with it, it will be gone or changed. As we speak, there is no evidence against the current theory.

Lol. There is PLENTY of evidence against Evolution. It has no scientific support. The transitional fossils are pure baloney. If they were really transitional, how did they get food for millions of years? Not only that, but wings, legs, arms, lungs, eyes, etc. only work when completed. Have you ever tried picking up a pencil with half a wing, half an arm?

To date, NO evidence supports Evolution.

Even talk origins admits this.

www.talkorigins.org.

Go to the FAQ section and look at why there are no transitional fossils.

 

[Novaknight1]

Yes because Evolution theory is based off an observable process.

No it's not. It's based on VARIATION, which is a different story altogether from Evolution.

 

[Battie]

Lol. There is PLENTY of evidence against Evolution. It has no scientific support. The transitional fossils are pure baloney. If they were really transitional, how did they get food for millions of years? Not only that, but wings, legs, arms, lungs, eyes, etc. only work when completed. Have you ever tried picking up a pencil with half a wing, half an arm?

To date, NO evidence supports Evolution.

Even talk origins admits this.

www.talkorigins.org.

Go to the FAQ section and look at why there are no transitional fossils.

It doesn't say that there are *no* transitional fossils. It just says that they are uncommon. It also goes on to discuss the abundance of other forms.

I'm not sure how rare equates to non-existent.

 

[Novaknight1]

Evolution is Science. As far as I understand it, (and I am new to learning about it) the arguments are over how evolution occurs (ed) not if it occurs (ed).

Evolution's not science. Evolution is posing as science.

http://www.matthewmcgee.org/creation.html

As to the arguements being how it happened, that is pure propaganda.

 

[Blackmarch]

No it's not. It's based on VARIATION, which is a different story altogether from Evolution.

Then if the case were such it would render the OP moot.

So please differentiate Evolution theory from Evolution then.
Didn't Darwin came up with evolution theory, in part by noticing selective breeding techniques in his day?

Science is a process of formulating hypothoses/theories of why things do what they do, then through testing and observing, if the theory holds then it stays, if it's some what off, it needs to be changed, if it is totally off you get rid of it and start over with a different one.

 

[Herman Hedning]

I thought this was supposed to be a debate

But I don't see anything different from Novaknight1's usual jumping around between topics and bandying baseless assumptions. Oh well

 

[Blackmarch]

I thought this was supposed to be a debate

But I don't see anything different from Novaknight1's usual jumping around between topics and bandying baseless assumptions. Oh well

Then please add something to the debate other than describing someone's personality.