If evolution is not valid science, somebody should tell the scientists.

[notto]

Evolution is theory, just different degrees of it....it's bursts of 'ideas' that have gained momentum and popularity, and consequently taken root as 'facts' and moved into the realm of accepted 'beliefs'....which almost kinda' sounds like a sort of 'religion', doesn't it?

No, not really.

The theory of evolution provides a testable explanation for observed phenomena and explains a set of facts and data. It is not a 'belief'. It has nothing to do with popularity.

Evolution has happened - that is a fact. We have direct observable evidence that shows us that life in the past was much different than life today and that the changes took place over time and fit into a nested hierarchy of common descent.

The theory of evolution applies observable mechanisms to explain this observed fact.

Not anything like religion. It is science.

Just as the theory of gravity attempts to determine the physical mechanisms that cause the observations associated with gravity, the theory of evolution attempts to use physical mechansims to explain the observed data associated with biodiversity.

 

[brinny]

Hmmm...I just keep picturin' this guy...and he don't look nuthin' like me.....

sorry bub (to the chimp)

 

[notto]

Hmmm...I just keep picturin' this guy...and he don't look nuthin' like me.....

sorry bub (to the chimp)

That you seem to think that evolution suggests that you should look like a chimp suggests that you really don't understand evolution.

Hint: We didn't evolve from chimps.

Of course we do have several things in common with other apes.

Such as hair all over our bodies and the quite noticable facial hair patterns and wiskers as shown in the picture you have provided.

 

[brinny]

I apologize. Everything I've heard about evolution appeared to be based on incredulously arrived at 'conclusions' that boggled me mind..

In other words it didn't make no sense..

 

[notto]

I apologize. Everything I've heard about evolution appeared to be based on incredulously arrived at 'conclusions' that boggled me mind..

In other words it didn't make no sense..

What have you read? What sources are you using? Can you describe what you think the theory of evolution says and what evidence was provided in your own words.

My guess is that you aren't familiar with the entire theory and the evidence that supports it. Otherwise, you wouldn' suggest that it is anything like a religion or use a picture of a chimp to make up your incredulously arrived at conclusions about its validity.

 

[brinny]

No, not really.

The theory of evolution provides a testable explanation for observed phenomena and explains a set of facts and data. It is not a 'belief'. It has nothing to do with popularity.

Evolution has happened - that is a fact. We have direct observable evidence that shows us that life in the past was much different than life today and that the changes took place over time and fit into a nested hierarchy of common descent.

The theory of evolution applies observable mechanisms to explain this observed fact.

Not anything like religion. It is science.

Just as the theory of gravity attempts to determine the physical mechanisms that cause the observations associated with gravity, the theory of evolution attempts to use physical mechansims to explain the observed data associated with biodiversity.

Theory?

Again...

Evolution is theory, just different degrees of it....it's bursts of 'ideas' that have gained momentum and popularity, and consequently taken root as 'facts'

Tested or not, it's still defined as theory.

And theory is what?

 

[notto]

Theory?

Thats as good as it gets in scienCe. Just like the theory of gravity, nuclear theory, the theory of relativity, optical theory, etc.

A theory is an explaination of observed facts. Singling out the word theory as a way to suggest that something isn't valid is only showing that you don't understand the scientific definition or use of the word.

Do you doubt the theory of relativity? How about cell theory or atomic theory?

Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena

 

[notto]

And theory is what?

Nothing like religion and not based on popularity.

 

[brinny]

Theory is defined as........

 

[Willtor]

A scientific theory is a model that has been developed to relate certain observed phenomena. It is used to make predictions (of the future, or at least future observations). Evolution fits this description. Evolution, in my field, is more of an engineering framework. We use evolution to generate solutions to certain otherwise intractable problems.

 

[notto]

Theory is defined as........

Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Nothing like religion, is not based on popularity, and can be tested and uses observable mechanisms to explain observations.

The theory of evolution meets the requirements as much as any other science.

Your beef would seem to be with all of science, not just evolution. You should look into doubting the theory of relativity because if you think evolution doesn't make sense, then relativity will blow your mind.

 

[brinny]

Put simply, theory is a way to explain, to the best of our finite ability, observations, repeated phenomenon, our world, and where in the world we came from, and why we are here?

 

[brinny]

Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Nothing like religion, is not based on popularity, and can be tested and uses observable mechanisms to explain observations.

The theory of evolution meets the requirements as much as any other science.

Your beef would seem to be with all of science, not just evolution. You should look into doubting the theory of relativity because if you think evolution doesn't make sense, then relativity will blow your mind.

Hahahaa no beef...just thinkin'

theory of evolution meets the requirements

what requirements?

 

[notto]

Put simply, theory is a way to explain, to the best of our finite ability, observations, repeated phenomenon, our world, and where in the world we came from, and why we are here?

Scientific theories don't attempt to explain the why we are here bit in any prescriptive, moral, or philosophical sense. That is left to religion.

Other than that, yes. They are tested explanations of phenomena that use observable mechanisms to do so.

Now, let's go back and look at your original claim:

it's bursts of 'ideas' that have gained momentum and popularity, and consequently taken root as 'facts' and moved into the realm of accepted 'beliefs'.

This confuses theory with fact, doesn't mention that theories are tested and based on observable evidence, and suggestst that it is similar to a religious belief.

Hopefully now you can see why this is an incorrect use of the word theory and why a scientific theory is much different than a religious belief.

 

[brinny]

It boils down very simply to

tested explanations of phenomena

yet, as time marches on we find out how our 'tested expanations of phenomena' crumble because they're generated from our flawed thinking.....kinda' scary ain't it?

 

[brinny]

Science in the hands of finite man is scary....

 

[notto]

It boils down very simply to



yet, as time marches on we find out how our 'tested expanations of phenomena' crumble because they're generated from our flawed thinking.....kinda' scary ain't it?

Actually, that is what leads to scientific success. That is a strength of the scientific method. That is what leads to cures for disease, better understanding of weather, more efficiency in fuel processing, etc.

Can you name a tested explanation that has crumbled because it was generated from our flawed thinking? What specifically did you have in mind? What flawed thinking was it based on? What prior testing was done? How was the testing verified? You can provide an example, right?

Not scary at all if you understand it. What is the alternative? Not test explanations? Just stop investigation? Not change in light of new evidence? Sounds like religion to me.

 

[notto]

Science in the hands of finite man is scary....

Then get off the internet. It is a result of scary science.

When is the last time you went to the doctor? Did this finite man help you with the science you find scary? Would you rather be treated with ideas from 300 years ago?

 

[brinny]

Oops, I wasn't specific enough. What I find scary is the liberties that finite little human beings will strive to take in ever-increasing ways to 'experiment' with the lives of others and disregard in their pompousness the irretrievable aftermath.

It's not 'science' that scares me. It's the 'scientists' that take such liberties. Did I not make myself clear? I apologize.

 

[notto]

Oops, I wasn't specific enough. What I find scary is the liberties that finite little human beings will strive to take in ever-increasing ways to 'experiment' with the lives of others and disregard in their pompousness the irretrievable aftermath.

It's not 'science' that scares me. It's the 'scientists' that take such liberties. Did I not make myself clear? I apologize.

Examples? What scientists have taken such liberties? What was the aftermath?