Nothing changes in this forum.

[JackRT]

So what? It's still the most reasonable inference from that evidence and much much more. What evidence would make annother inference more reasonable?

The bottom line in all of science is "does it work?" Although it is impossible to prove a theory, it is entirely possible to disprove one --- all that is needed is evidence that contradicts the theory. This has happened many times in science --- how many have ever heard of Darwin's other theory? In the case of his theory of evolution the evidence is still solid even after more than 150 years.

It is really too bad that theology doesn't work in the same way.

 

[bhsmte]

Then you are out of luck. All science has is confirming evidence, not proof.

And that is his psychological out, he can tell himself, evolution can not be proven. Never mind, all the other scientific theories he takes advantage of, each and every day of his life are not proven either, but simply supported with evidence and evolution happens to be one of the most well evidenced.

Think it could have something to do with protecting his personal faith belief?

 

[JackRT]

And that is his psychological out, he can tell himself, evolution can not be proven. Never mind, all the other scientific theories he takes advantage of, each and every day of his life are not proven either, but simply supported with evidence and evolution happens to be one of the most well evidenced.

Think it could have something to do with protecting his personal faith belief?

Ya think??

 

[Speedwell]

And that is his psychological out, he can tell himself, evolution can not be proven. Never mind, all the other scientific theories he takes advantage of, each and every day of his life are not proven either, but simply supported with evidence and evolution happens to be one of the most well evidenced.

Think it could have something to do with protecting his personal faith belief?

That, and just plain incredulity. How is it that us evos, especially Christian evos, are willing to chuck the absolute accurate proven truth of Genesis for the merely confirmed provisional truth of science?

 

[bhsmte]

That, and just plain incredulity. How is it that us evos, especially Christian evos, are willing to chuck the absolute accurate proven truth of Genesis for the merely confirmed provisional truth of science?

It's all about their defense mechanisms, which are all developed to defend their belief.

Just like when they say; prove that a God does not exist. They already know one can't prove a negative, so they are just playing games, to try and provide comfort for themselves.

 

[Ophiolite]

Do you actually read all the posts where I explain how that is absolutely not true? What an arrogant comment you make. You act as if your word is to be taken as fact without question.

I'm asking for proof because I should expect it on any claim I disagree with. Just because you have this conveniently wrapped up as something people should believe without proof, doesn't mean that is correct and it's certainly not going to fly for many of us.



Then stop stalling by asking me if I have this or that. Tell you what, assume whatever you like on the questions, assume I did something wrong or whatever nonsense you are trying to prove with the line of questioning, ok? Now that you've done that, did any of what you concluded from the answers given you, in any way give you reason at all not to answer my simple request?

Yours is a classic stall/find a way to blame the opposition for your lack of action.

Someone needs to get on the stick here before I get bored/feel I've wasted too much time, and withdraw the opportunity, an opportunity I would think you'd be chomping at the bit to take advantage of.

Astounding, self-satisfied, delusional, obnoxious, provocative drivel. Where's the Ignore button.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Astounding, self-satisfied, delusional, obnoxious, provocative drivel. Where's the Ignore button.

lol

If ya' can't beat em', degrade them.

I'll take that to mean you cannot/will not answer my question.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Unless you start educating yourself on why science does not deal with proof you can wallow in your ignorance I guess.

Cop out, science is all about proving things out.

But you all keep trying to convince us proof is not needed for evolution, it's something we should just believe..

Hilarious

 

[Speedwell]

lol

If ya' can't beat em', degrade them.

I'll take that to mean you cannot/will not answer my question.

No, we cannot. "Proof" of the theory of evolution does not exist. Only confirming evidence.

 

[Speedwell]

Cop out, science is all about proving things out.

No, it is not. Finding confirming evidence is what science is all about.

But you all keep trying to convince us proof is not needed for evolution, it's something we should just believe..

Hilarious

Why should "proof" be required for the theory of evolution when it is not required for any other scientific theory?

 

[Kenny'sID]

Then you are out of luck. All science has is confirming evidence, not proof.

You're right, you can't prove it, so seems to me, YOU are the one out of luck.

 

[Kenny'sID]

No, we cannot. "Proof" of the theory of evolution does not exist. Only confirming evidence.

You probably should have paid attention to just what the question was in that post.

 

[Speedwell]

You're right, you can't prove it, so seems to me, YOU are the one out of luck.

In what way? No one who understands science ever expects a scientific theory to be "proven." The theory of evolution is confirmed by all of the evidence discovered to date, and disconfirmed by none of it. If you could find disconfirming evidence, evidence which contradicts the theory, then we would be "out of luck." The theory would have to be modified or abandoned. Go for it. You'd be in good company with thousands of Nobel Laureate wannabes who haven't found any yet, either.

 

[sfs]

Cop out, science is all about proving things out.

You must have done a lot of science, then, to be so confident about it. What scientific field have you published in?

 

[Speedwell]

You probably should have paid attention to just what the question was in that post.

I took it to be a reiteration of your demand for "proof."

 

[Speedwell]

But you all keep trying to convince us proof is not needed for evolution, it's something we should just believe..

Not without confirming evidence. No one should "just believe" a scientific theory without confirming evidence.

 

[Kenny'sID]

No, it is not. Finding confirming evidence is what science is all about.

Why should "proof" be required for the theory of evolution when it is not required for any other scientific theory?

You'll just have to do a search on where I made it clear with the putting ones hand in a fire as a science experiment does provide proof.

Please don't make me actually say what that proves.

Honestly, it's hilarious how you all continue to try to back something that is obviously wrong. I mean I've seen some real doozy cop-outs here, but this one take the cake.

What's worse is you all still haven't picked up on the fact my mind will never be changed on this one. Not to mention this is in direct response to you all not being able to prove evolution.

Extremely desperate move to tell someone they should be expected to believe something is fact and without proof. I have to wonder how many people buy that little deception.

Honestly, I'd be embarrassed to present it as an excuse, or believe it is one.

 

[Speedwell]

You'll just have to do a search on where I made it clear with the putting ones hand in a fire as a science experiment does provide proof.

No, it provides confirming evidence, not proof.

Extremely desperate move to tell someone they should be expected to believe something is fact and without proof. I have to wonder how many people buy that little deception.

It would be, if that's what we were doing. What we are doing is telling you that we accept the theory of evolution as a valid theory because it has confirming evidence.

What's worse is you all still haven't picked up on the fact my mind will never be changed on this one.

We know that. Nobody cares. Nobody cares what you believe as long as it stays out of public school science classes.

 

[Kenny'sID]

No one who understands science ever expects a scientific theory to be "proven."

And?

Is that supposed to convince me it's a viable concept to not expect proof?

You really need to get past this one, you're wasting our time now.

 

[Speedwell]

And?

Is that supposed to convince me it's a viable concept to not expect proof?

We don't expect proof, we expect evidence. But you already said you wanted proof instead of evidence. You're the one who's wasting time because there isn't any proof, only evidence.