Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Eternal Mindset said:So technically, evolution is just a hypothesis; is it not?
That's niceSanguine said:
Give me 1 example of a lab where evolution has taken place.Cassandra said:the process of evolution has been repeated inside and outside of the lab. Would you be so kind as you explain (or point out was source/s) made you think it had not?
According to this, evolution is one of the best supported hypothesis; unless you take into account the observations that work against it instead of for it.gluadys said:Another important foundation of a theory is correct prediction of things not yet observed, but derived logically from the theory.
If we begin with the hypothesis that evolution is true and derive from it an observation that must be true as a consequence, then we can test to see if that observation really is true.
If we find the observation is not true, then we judge that the hypothesis is not true either, since the observation must be true. The hypothesis must be revised or discarded.
If we find the observation is true, it becomes additional supporting evidence for the theory and may suggest further predictions and more tests.
A hypothesis that has been tested multiple times with none of its predictions shown to be false is generally accepted as a well-supported theory. On this basis evolution is one of the best supported theories in science.
How about the mice of Madiera, my favorite example. Portuguese mice stranded on the islands by Medieval sailors have since spawned up to six daughter species with a chromosomal variance of both count and type, such as would not permit them to interbreed with their European cousins anymore.Eternal Mindset said:That's nice
Well, as that said, we can guess from a bunch of facts that something is most likely true. That "educated guess" is called a hypothesis until it can be repeated in a lab.
Give me 1 example of a lab where evolution has taken place.
Eternal Mindset said:That's nice
Well, as that said, we can guess from a bunch of facts that something is most likely true. That "educated guess" is called a hypothesis until it can be repeated in a lab.
Give me 1 example of a lab where evolution has taken place.
lucaspa said:My favorite example is the evolution of carnivorous flies from fruit flies.
On the contrary, the Observed Speciation thread has lots of those. I like this one: 1. G Kilias, SN Alahiotis, and M Pelecanos. A multifactorial genetic investigation of speciation theory using drosophila melanogaster Evolution 34:730-737, 1980. because
1. The "fruit" flies on the bread or meat diets now only eat those foods, so instead of "fruit" flies we now have 'bread' and 'meat' flies.
2. The genetic difference between the new species of flies and the old is 3% of expressed genes. When we look at comparable genes between chimps and humans, it is less than 2%. So these new kinds of flies are farther apart genetically than the kinds chimps and humans!
http://www.christianforums.com/t722770&page=5 post #45
I'll be back.
Eternal Mindset said:According to this, evolution is one of the best supported hypothesis; unless you take into account the observations that work against it instead of for it.
Eternal Mindset said:In order for it to be classified as a theory, scientists must be able to reproduce their findings.
Well, as that said, we can guess from a bunch of facts that something is most likely true. That "educated guess" is called a hypothesis until it can be repeated in a lab.
Eternal Mindset said:Give me 1 example of a lab where evolution has taken place.
Eternal Mindset said:It cannot be a theory...
In order for it to be classified as a theory, scientists must be able to reproduce their findings.
So technically, evolution is just a hypothesis; is it not?
Eternal Mindset said:That's nice
Well, as that said, we can guess from a bunch of facts that something is most likely true. That "educated guess" is called a hypothesis until it can be repeated in a lab.
And your only example, right?Aron-Ra said:How about the mice of Madiera, my favorite example.
No, evolution is not simply a hypothesis. It is an explanation of what has happened to life AFTER life arose from pre-biotic conditions on Earth. This explanation has nearly a couple of centuries worth of evidence to support it. Evolution is not concerned with how or when life arose on Earth in the first place, this is covered under another topic, abiogenesis.Eternal Mindset said:It cannot be a theory...
In order for it to be classified as a theory, scientists must be able to reproduce their findings.
So technically, evolution is just a hypothesis; is it not?
Ideas are not referred to as 'theories' in science unless they are supported by bodies of evidence that make their subsequent abandonment very unlikely. When a theory is supported by as much evidence as evolution, it is held with a very high degree of confidence
In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was."
Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.
Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
[A] theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements: It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations. ...Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis; you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. On the other hand, you can disprove a theory by finding even a single observation that disagrees with the predictions of the theory.
Eternal Mindset said:Well, as that said, we can guess from a bunch of facts that something is most likely true. That "educated guess" is called a hypothesis until it can be repeated in a lab..
FROM:What is the Scientific Method-Its Different Forms
A confusing aspect of science is that not all fields of science arrive at conclusions in the same way.
What is common among all sciences, however, is:
- 1. The physical sciences, like physics and chemistry, use experimental forms of the "scientific method. "The physical sciences do experiments to gather numerical data from which relationships are derived, and conclusions are made.
- 2. The more descriptive sciences, like zoology and anthropology, may use a form of the method that involves gathering of information by visual observation or interviewing.
The difference is in what is considered data, and how data is gathered and processed. (Excerpt reformatted for clarity.)
- 1. the making of hypothesis to explain observations, the gathering of data
- 2. based on this data, the drawing of conclusions that confirm or deny the original hypothesis.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?