Same old debate: creation x evolution

Originally posted by JS357
Not quite even then. If the second LOT and biological evolution theory were in conflict, neither would have priority over the other excepting for those scientists who have an interest in preserving one over the other (such as physicists).

Actually the real problem is that biological evolution theory is not a single claim like the second law. It is a whole body of knowledge (about half of the science of Biology). So what you are saying is almost like saying, if Newtons Laws of motion contradict Chemistry then one or the other would have to go. But which part of Chemistry? You can't exactly contradict every single bit of Chemistry.
The second law on the other hand could be shown to be wrong, just as Newtons Laws of Motion are known to be not the full story.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i see the second law of thermodynamics is used a lot by people who have no idea about science. and they are right in a way.


the second law of thermodynamics would disprove evolution IF AND ONLY IF the planet were a closed system. which is not.

The only thing that matters concering evilution is that it does not happen.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The only thing that matters concering evilution is that it does not happen.

In your case, not yet. Try to be more patient.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
awesome, several people cling to the term "theory" not realizing that in science it is a different concept 😀

Theory in most people's minds means a decent idea not yet proven, but in the "science" mind it means "fact", right?

Originally posted by divegeester
Theory in most people's minds means a decent idea not yet proven, but in the "science" mind it means "fact", right?

http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

Originally posted by HandyAndy
In your case, not yet. Try to be more patient.

I can't be that patient because this old body of mine can't wait millions or billions of years for proof.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

I already know what science thinks "theory" means. Thanks.

Here's what the Oxford dictionary think it's means

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/theory

Tut tut, just a thumbs down.

Originally posted by divegeester
I already know what science thinks "theory" means. Thanks.

Here's what the Oxford dictionary think it's means

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/theory

It's not what science 'thinks' theory means.
It's what theory DOES mean in science.

As in any technical/professional field they have to develop their own
specialised language for clearly and accurately conveying ideas and
information within that field.
English is [delightfully] open to different [double/treble] meanings and
interpretation which is fantastic if you are a poet or storyteller or comedian.
It's not so great if you're an engineer or scientist wanting to convey accurate
and precise meanings with no ambiguity.

Theory HAS a very specific and clear meaning in science.

We don't think it has this meaning, it HAS this meaning.

Because that is the meaning ALL scientists use and understand when they
use the word in a professional context.

There are specific technical dictionaries for different branches of science
that have the proper scientific meanings in them. The OED won't help you
if you want to know how scientists define things, because it's not written
for scientists. I have several sitting in my bookcases.

Originally posted by divegeester
Tut tut, just a thumbs down.

The reply takes longer to write.

Originally posted by googlefudge
It's not what science 'thinks' theory means.
It's what theory DOES mean in science.

As in any technical/professional field they have to develop their own
specialised language for clearly and accurately conveying ideas and
information within that field.
English is [delightfully] open to different [double/treble] meanings and
interpretation whic ...[text shortened]... efine things, because it's not written
for scientists. I have several sitting in my bookcases.

I know what "ALL scientists" think it means, but clearly it doesn't mean that to everyone else such as the authors of the oxford dictionary.

Originally posted by googlefudge
The reply takes longer to write.

Spend longer thinking and typing and less time thumbing could help. That's my theory anyway.

Lol.

Originally posted by divegeester
I know what "ALL scientists" think it means, but clearly it doesn't mean that to everyone else such as the authors of the oxford dictionary.

Words can and do have multiple different meanings.

In science the word 'theory' means something different from what it means in
everyday parlance.

However Evolution by Natural Selection is a scientific theory and thus the scientific
meaning of the word applies.

Originally posted by divegeester
Spend longer thinking and typing and less time thumbing could help. That's my theory anyway.

Not really. Your posts are too stupid to require much effort to trash.