Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:20
Dean wrote:
The Pessimist wrote:
I think all the theories (because let's face it, they are THEORIES as no-one actually KNOWS) are pretty much bullsh*t. Man isn't intelligent enough to work out the answers to these questions, and probably never will be. In fact, I find someone who thinks he knows the answers to be quite pompous, because let's face it: compared to the Earth and all its inhabitants (discovered and undiscovered), any number of people is pretty insignificant and small.
AaarrrrGGH!!
Alex - there is a world of difference between a Scientific Theory and a general theory, please do not confuse the two.
Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:32
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:36
Natural selection isn't the only mechanism of evolution. I think everything now evolved from a common ancestor.
Not all of our scientific theories will account for everything, so they probably won't be entirely the true way things work. They may objectively need tweaking. But that doesn't mean they're wrong. They're mostly right, because they account for most things we know about. We have no good reason to disregard them, especially in the case of neutered ideas, like creationism.
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:38
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
Read Dean's last post, my friend. Creationism isn't a theory; it's a story out of a book. If you honestly think science can't be proven, you are an idiot.
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:41
The Pessimist wrote:
I think all the theories (because let's face it, they are THEORIES as no-one actually KNOWS) are pretty much bullsh*t. Man isn't intelligent enough to work out the answers to these questions, and probably never will be. In fact, I find someone who thinks he knows the answers to be quite pompous, because let's face it: compared to the Earth and all its inhabitants (discovered and undiscovered), any number of people is pretty insignificant and small.
theory:
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts
or phenomena. Most theories that are accepted by scientists have been
repeatedly tested by experiments and can be used to make predictions
about natural phenomena.
(in a previous post I referred to the ambiguity of the word "theory")
Evolution is a theory that is supported by solid evidence. Not just a single fossil or a number of fossils, but our own bodies and those of all other living things provide all the evidence any intelligent person should need to see why evolution is not just speculation or conjecture.
Edited by Mr ProgFreak - November 28 2009 at 14:45
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:43
p0mt3 wrote:
Dean wrote:
The Pessimist wrote:
I think all the theories (because let's face it, they are THEORIES as no-one actually KNOWS) are pretty much bullsh*t. Man isn't intelligent enough to work out the answers to these questions, and probably never will be. In fact, I find someone who thinks he knows the answers to be quite pompous, because let's face it: compared to the Earth and all its inhabitants (discovered and undiscovered), any number of people is pretty insignificant and small.
AaarrrrGGH!!
Alex - there is a world of difference between a Scientific Theory and a general theory, please do not confuse the two.
Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:45
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
Read Dean's last post, my friend. Creationism isn't a theory; it's a story out of a book. If you honestly think science can't be proven, you are an idiot.
evolution can (and i think will be) proven. I just dont feel you are the one to decide.
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:47
Dean wrote:
There are times, (such as these) when I wish we had a different word for a Scientific Theory.
In his book Dawkins decides to use the word "theorem" instead, in order to avoid further confusion. But of course, if people want to misunderstand something, they will find a way.
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:51
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
Read Dean's last post, my friend. Creationism isn't a theory; it's a story out of a book. If you honestly think science can't be proven, you are an idiot.
evolution can (and i think will be) proven. I just dont feel you are the one to decide.
Oh, don't worry. Every scientist in the world has already decided for me, thanks.
'Theory' does not equal 'unproven'. You must not have checked out Dean's link like I suggested. Pity.
You know gravity? The earth's rotation around the sun? The earth being round? Guess what? All of that is 'theory' too! Gee, I sure hope they get 'proven' sometime soon!
Proletariat wrote:
^^^^
that is unless of course, P0mpt3, you have some new evidence i have not yet seen
My sn is spelled 'p0mt3', my friend.
As for your proof, well . . . since I just pointed out how evolution is a theory just like gravity is a theory, why don't you step outside, pick up a pebble, then drop it back onto the ground? Proof enough for you that theory is real?
EDIT: Or you could just watch the video MrProgFreak has posted below this post.
Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:57
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
Read Dean's last post, my friend. Creationism isn't a theory; it's a story out of a book. If you honestly think science can't be proven, you are an idiot.
evolution can (and i think will be) proven. I just dont feel you are the one to decide.
Oh, don't worry. Every scientist in the world has already decided for me, thanks.
'Theory' does not equal 'unproven'. You must not have checked out Dean's link like I suggested. Pity.
You know gravity? The earth's rotation around the sun? The earth being round? Guess what? All of that is 'theory' too! Gee, I sure hope they get 'proven' sometime soon!
please reread my argument
i am not strictly debating the relivence of the evolutionary theory, rather i am choosing to make a statement about the futility of such arguments.
I am not saying that evolution is not or can not be proven but rather that the religious mind will not be convinced.
I infact do accept evolution as being true. 100%, however as you have pointed out there is not good way to test god. so while i dont believe in god, i cant say he does not exist, there is still a possibility, however small it may be
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
Joined: June 13 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 3834
Posted: November 28 2009 at 14:59
OK correct me if I'm wrong please, but science states that every organism on the planet evolved from a single celled Amoebe, and through millions upon millions of year of genetic reconstruction, we ended up with what we have now. Correct? Most religions state that God created the universe and everything in it in the beginning. Correct? All I'm saying is that these are just two possible solutions. Yes, there may be evidence totally supporting evolution, but I'm sure if I went out and framed someone effectively for murder and fraud, the evidence for THAT would prove that the person I framed committed the crime, not me. I guess I'm saying that evidence can be taken in more than one way.
Hell, only evidence we have of us even existing full stop is what our senses are telling us. But what if they are in fact lying to us and red is actually purple, corn smells like rubber and a G#dim chord is actually a single bass note? And we ALL know our senses are capable of lying to us. Look at hallucinagenic drugs and dream sequences (technically caused by a natural hallucinagenic).
I'm just looking at things from a different perspective, and that "proof" as you call it can be taken in different ways.
Joined: March 30 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1882
Posted: November 28 2009 at 15:01
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
Read Dean's last post, my friend. Creationism isn't a theory; it's a story out of a book. If you honestly think science can't be proven, you are an idiot.
evolution can (and i think will be) proven. I just dont feel you are the one to decide.
Oh, don't worry. Every scientist in the world has already decided for me, thanks.
'Theory' does not equal 'unproven'. You must not have checked out Dean's link like I suggested. Pity.
You know gravity? The earth's rotation around the sun? The earth being round? Guess what? All of that is 'theory' too! Gee, I sure hope they get 'proven' sometime soon!
Proletariat wrote:
^^^^
that is unless of course, P0mpt3, you have some new evidence i have not yet seen
My sn is spelled 'p0mt3', my friend.
As for your proof, well . . . since I just pointed out how evolution is a theory just like gravity is a theory, why don't you step outside, pick up a pebble, then drop it back onto the ground? Proof enough for you that theory is real?
proof that theories can be true, not that they all are
sorry for not spelling your name correctly, however it is not a commonly accepted name and i couldn't possibly be expected to know its spelling
i believe in evolution
however i make a distinction between proving somthing is true and being able to convince people of it
therefore i feel that arguments such as this one are counterproductive
my point about you needing proof is that i will only accept someone talking down to me, calling me an idiot, unless they are an expert. if you were an evolutionary biologist i would be easyer to take you seriously
Edited by Proletariat - November 28 2009 at 15:02
who hiccuped endlessly trying to giggle but wound up with a sob
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Posted: November 28 2009 at 15:02
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
Read Dean's last post, my friend. Creationism isn't a theory; it's a story out of a book. If you honestly think science can't be proven, you are an idiot.
evolution can (and i think will be) proven. I just dont feel you are the one to decide.
Oh, don't worry. Every scientist in the world has already decided for me, thanks.
'Theory' does not equal 'unproven'. You must not have checked out Dean's link like I suggested. Pity.
You know gravity? The earth's rotation around the sun? The earth being round? Guess what? All of that is 'theory' too! Gee, I sure hope they get 'proven' sometime soon!
please reread my argument
i am not strictly debating the relivence of the evolutionary theory, rather i am choosing to make a statement about the futility of such arguments.
I am not saying that evolution is not or can not be proven but rather that the religious mind will not be convinced.
I infact do accept evolution as being true. 100%, however as you have pointed out there is not good way to test god. so while i dont believe in god, i cant say he does not exist, there is still a possibility, however small it may be
Wrong. You just got through asking me for proof for evolution, as if it didn't already exist. Then you turn around and say 'oh no, I didn't mean evolution can't be proven, I mean religious minds will not be convicted." Funny, then, how you've been babbling about evolution not being fact and asking for proof this whole time, all while ignoring the true defenition of theory, then you have the audacity to tell ME that I'M not reading posts carefully enough?
Look, if you really are saying that you are an 'Agnostic', then I agree with you completely, as I now consider myself that as well. However, don't make claims that evolution can't be proven, because evolution is evident all around us in nature.
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Posted: November 28 2009 at 15:19
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Proletariat wrote:
wheres the option for "who cares how stuff got here"
That's in the ''sit on our ass and smoke pot'' thread. Go find it. Hurry, hurry.
i think you are confusing apathy with acceptance of the fact that neither you or i are informed enough or intelligent enough to be able to comprehend somthing this complex. rather than throwing one book agains another and one theory against another without comprehensive understanding of either i choose to live (and listen to awsome music)
i certainly understand the joy associated with these debates. I just recognize that the pleasure of winning will not be awarded to any debater who chooses a topic that can not unquestionably be proven one way or the other
Read Dean's last post, my friend. Creationism isn't a theory; it's a story out of a book. If you honestly think science can't be proven, you are an idiot.
evolution can (and i think will be) proven. I just dont feel you are the one to decide.
Oh, don't worry. Every scientist in the world has already decided for me, thanks.
'Theory' does not equal 'unproven'. You must not have checked out Dean's link like I suggested. Pity.
You know gravity? The earth's rotation around the sun? The earth being round? Guess what? All of that is 'theory' too! Gee, I sure hope they get 'proven' sometime soon!
Proletariat wrote:
^^^^
that is unless of course, P0mpt3, you have some new evidence i have not yet seen
My sn is spelled 'p0mt3', my friend.
As for your proof, well . . . since I just pointed out how evolution is a theory just like gravity is a theory, why don't you step outside, pick up a pebble, then drop it back onto the ground? Proof enough for you that theory is real?
proof that theories can be true, not that they all are
sorry for not spelling your name correctly, however it is not a commonly accepted name and i couldn't possibly be expected to know its spelling
i believe in evolution
however i make a distinction between proving somthing is true and being able to convince people of it
therefore i feel that arguments such as this one are counterproductive
my point about you needing proof is that i will only accept someone talking down to me, calling me an idiot, unless they are an expert. if you were an evolutionary biologist i would be easyer to take you seriously
I'm getting sick and tired of you not having any clue as to what actual 'theory' is. Either read up on it like Dean and I keep saying, or stop talking about it.
Of course I expect you to know the spelling of my screenname. You didn't hear it pronounced, you read it on a screen. All it takes is a good pair of eyes, and you can copy what you see in front of you. Simple for most people to do, really. I'm sorry if that was asking too much of you.
And I don't have to be an expert scientist to know when somebody is talking out of their ass. If you think I was talking down to you, I apologize, but I'll call anybody an idiot if they say idiotic things. I've been an idiot myself on many, many occasions, so trust me, it's not a title I'm too proud to not give to myself at times.
Joined: November 08 2008
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 5195
Posted: November 28 2009 at 15:19
^ After reading this book I went from agnostic to atheist ... I still believe that there's more to the universe than we can understand, but I also believe that whatever that might be it's of no importance for us humans. For all intents and purposes, we are bi-pedal mammals with huge brains.
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
Posted: November 28 2009 at 15:23
^ Dawkins himself has said that there may be evidence of a designer of some sort in things. A common thread in everything, almost like a 'signature'.
Einstein said that despitre his knowledge of how it all works, he felt that there must be SOMETHING out there setting it all into motion. ''No doubt'', he said.
I'm definately not an Atheist. I just don't believe in hocus pocus any longer.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.316 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Evolution vs. Creationism
Topic Options
Dean wrote:
