The theory (fact) of evolution

Apachegunface said:
Those primitive ideas werent based on evidence though were they? Just man made explanations to satisfy the annoying need we humans have of having to know all the answers. Fundamentalists believe in something that has no prove or evidence, scientists dont 'believe' they make observations given the 'evidence' and by using the scientific method of disproving things by contradictory evidence.
Click to expand...

what evidence is science based on?
Science is based on predictive accuracy.
Many of the more advanced theorys simply have not been observed.
even the ones which have been observed, doesn't mean it is using the scientific method. Just that the results are the same.

Gaidin109 said:
snip
Click to expand...
means nothing to me.
 
RDM said:
I was hoping for a little bit better than "God moves in mysterious ways".
Click to expand...

but you gave me 'evolutions moves in mysterious ways' (which of course it does not according to natural selection) so it's only fair to respond in kind



RDM said:
Give it time, with evolution we are, after all, a work in progress. If we are designed then we are a **** poor design decision.
Click to expand...

surely we've given it quite some time if you consider this is the method by which we have been giving birth generation after generation for millenia as did our monkey ancestors and indeed all mammals (barring one or two (unless of course the platypus is our evolutionary successor))
 
AcidHell2 said:
are you being serious. Because it is a simple solution. Who cares what the retina sees, it is easier to translate that image with software (brain). Than make the eye hugely more complicated. What does seeing the world the right way up on the retina achieve. Sod all, and makes things hugely more complicated.

what a silly argument.
Click to expand...


This is not the only argument, just the one I could vaguely remember from the reading ive done on the subject. There's are hundreds of obvious seemingly stupid design flaws that no 'intelligent designer' would ever make. However, if you follow the line of evolution it is easy to see why these 'design flaws' have occured and are exactly what you would expect if evolution was true, which it is.
 
Apachegunface said:
This is not the only argument, just the one I could vaguely remember from the reading ive done on the subject. There's are hundreds of obvious seemingly stupid design flaws that no 'intelligent designer' would ever make. However, if you follow the line of evolution it is easy to see why these 'design flaws' have occured and are exactly what you would expect if evolution was true, which it is.
Click to expand...

and are all the, same as this, so stupid.
Yet so obvious why, when you engage your brain for 2 seconds.
 
Last edited:
I do find it difficult to believe that a single particle/atom/molecule or whatever it all started from has managed to evolve into something so complex such as the human body. And that it is all just coincidence that we happen to have done so on one of the only inhabitable planets on our solar system.

I also find it hard to believe that 'A creator' is responsible for our coming. Generally I don't like being told what to think and like deciding on my own morals. Unless he's going to step out and say hello I don't believe it.

I can comprehend evolution, but just right from the beginning, from that single whatever is it is a bit mind blowing. I deffinatley don't believe in the latter but find the former a bit over whelming.
 
Last edited:
Apachegunface said:
Those primitive ideas werent based on evidence though were they? Just man made explanations to satisfy the annoying need we humans have of having to know all the answers. Fundamentalists believe in something that has no prove or evidence, scientists dont 'believe' they make observations given the 'evidence' and by using the scientific method of disproving things by contradictory evidence.
Click to expand...

it was based on the evidence available at the time.

perhaps someone will be saying this about evolution in 2000 years time:

The Future said:
Those primitive ideas werent based on evidence though were they? Just man made explanations to satisfy the annoying need we humans have of having to know all the answers.
Click to expand...
 
Apachegunface said:
This is not the only argument, just the one I could vaguely remember from the reading ive done on the subject. There's are hundreds of obvious seemingly stupid design flaws that no 'intelligent designer' would ever make. However, if you follow the line of evolution it is easy to see why these 'design flaws' have occured and are exactly what you would expect if evolution was true, which it is.
Click to expand...


There are thousands of species that have found themselves going down an evolutionary dead-end and becoming extinct as a result.
 
vincent1989 said:
surely we've given it quite some time if you consider this is the method by which we have been giving birth generation after generation for millenia as did our monkey ancestors and indeed all mammals (barring one or two (unless of course the platypus is our evolutionary successor))
Click to expand...

So this is as good as the designer could manage? Not all that great a design.
 
Apachegunface said:
It will never happen - Evolution by natural selection is fact and has been proven for many years on so many levels, it occurs, it is occuring and it will continue to occur.
Click to expand...

Just like general relativity then.
Oh wait, yet we are now looking at string theory to rectify the errors.
 
Apachegunface said:
I'm massively interested in evolution and have read several books on the matter - the most recent being 'The greatest show on earth' by Richard Dawkins.

Does anyone seriously believe that evolution is anything but stonecold fact, I mean as factual as the fact that the sky is blue? Apparently 40% of Americans reject evolution and think that the earth was created around 6,000 years ago, by god. I just don't understand how you could think like this?

Discuss!
Click to expand...

By being American.
 
RDM said:
As a matter of interest what is your prefered theory that manages to fit all the evidence?
Click to expand...

As I said evolution.
Doesn't make it fact though, doesn't mean we have observed all stages, doesn't mean in the future we wont find predictive anomalies and will have to alter the theory.

Science is extremly good for what it is designed for, it does not do what a lot of people want though. Prove and disprove absolutes. Or give us the meaning of life.
 
BennyC said:
I do find it difficult to believe that a single particle/atom/molecule or whatever it all started from has managed to evolve into something so complex such as the human body. And that it is all just coincidence that we happen to have done so on one of the only inhabitable planets on our solar system.

I also find it hard to believe that 'A creator' is responsible for our coming. Generally I don't like being told what to think and like deciding on my own morals. Unless he's going to step out and say hello I don't believe it.

I can comprehend evolution, but just right from the beginning, from that single whatever is it is a bit mind blowing. I deffinatley don't believe in the latter but find the former a bit over whelming.
Click to expand...

The theory of how life started is not evolution, it is abiogensis - something that is still a very debatable area.
 
Apachegunface said:
It will never happen - Evolution by natural selection is fact and has been proven for many years on so many levels, it occurs, it is occuring and it will continue to occur.
Click to expand...


No, its accepted to be probable, it is not a fact. Evolution occcurs, whether that is by natural selection or by Intelligent design or some other process we have yet to discover is still open to debate. Obviously or we wouldn't be having this one.
 
Apachegunface said:
It will never happen - Evolution by natural selection is fact and has been proven for many years on so many levels, it occurs, it is occuring and it will continue to occur.
Click to expand...

Newtonian mavity was taken as true for hundreds of years before being 'fixed' by Einstein and is even now debated as inaccurate at best. don't be so blind as to assume that because it is something held as truth now that it will still be the case 1 year, 10 years, 100 years, 1 thousand years (ad infinitum) down the line, it is narrow minded, it is unthinking and it is stupid.

RDM said:
So this is as good as the designer could manage? Not all that great a design.
Click to expand...

so this is as good as evolution could manage?
 
Apachegunface said:
It will never happen - Evolution by natural selection is fact and has been proven for many years on so many levels, it occurs, it is occuring and it will continue to occur.
Click to expand...

No. It. Isn't. Seriously, learn what science is.

1) There's no such thing as a 'scientific fact'. There are models that are derived via the scientific method and there are assertions which are expermientally verifyable.

2) No scientific model can be described as 'fact'. For it to be a fact, it would have to correlate exactly to objective reality. Since we can't perceive objective reality and we can't test the infinity of the universe, we can never know if a model exactly fits how the universe works and is therefore factual. mavity is not a fact. Quantum mechanics is not a fact. Evolution is not a fact.

Don't get me wrong, evolution is a wonderfully simple elegent idea which fits the majority of the current observations rather well. There's few better than Dawkins who can communicate this idea in a convincing way. However, by calling it a fact, you're betraying the fact that you don't really understand what science is. Therefore I'd suggest you leave that to the professionals ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom