Originally posted by NosracAre we to judge any other human being?
What did religion teach you about science?
Here's a question (for those science/evolution minded):
Are we to judge any other human being?
It's a 'yes' or 'no' question.
Good luck with your religious/scientific answer
It's a 'yes' or 'no' question.
Yes. I think. The question is very awkwardly written and I am not sure I understand it.
Originally posted by NosracThe theory exists. It's self evident, just as Christianity exists and is self evident. Now, are you asking us to prove that it correctly describes nature?
Once again (man, how many times have I typed the same
words?) PROVE that the THEORY of evolution exists.
Darwin couldn't. He knew it was only a THEORY.
Originally posted by NosracProof as it relates to a scientific theory simply means does the theory satisfy the existing evidence and does it provide verifiable predictions? In the case of evolution the answer is yes, therefore the theory is 'proved'.
Once again (man, how many times have I typed the same
words?) PROVE that the THEORY of evolution exists.
Darwin couldn't. He knew it was only a THEORY.
But, like any scientific theory it coiuld be replaced by another theory if at any stage evidence appears that forces us to answer no to the first question.
I agree with you Carson, I'm getting sick of saying the same thing too - so please read what I've written here, and think about it a little before you start in again with all this crap about 'it's only a theory', 'the bible proves it wrong', 'the lord is my saviour', 'repent sinner', and so on ... you get the gist.
Originally posted by NosracThis has nothing to do with evolutionary theory - please start a new thread for it.
What did religion teach you about science?
Here's a question (for those science/evolution minded):
Are we to judge any other human being?
It's a 'yes' or 'no' question.
Good luck with your religious/scientific answer
Originally posted by NosracYou're not the first person I've told this to, and you won't be the last methinks. Stop thinking you know what the word "theory" means and go and look it up. Then read the answer. When you understand it, come back.
Once again (man, how many times have I typed the same
words?) PROVE that the THEORY of evolution exists.
Darwin couldn't. He knew it was only a THEORY.
1 edit
Originally posted by HalitosePersonally, I'd go with something approximating this.....
And your definition of "theory" would be...???
A theory is the highest level of scientific explanation. Whilst laws describe physical and chemical processes, and hypotheses are speculative, testable, statements about a plausible way in which a given process works, a theory must explain all available data in a unified manner, without contradictions. No single experiment can generate a theory. A theory is based upon repeated experimentation by a range of experimentors probing every facet of said theory to test for flaws. Furthermore a theory should be able to make predictions about the future of the system which it describes.
[edit; whilst I personally wrote this, it is a standard definition of theory.]
Originally posted by scottishinnzOkay... So basically you define a theory as a cohesive explanation of phenomena, which is grounded in observable and repeatable scientific data and formulates accurate predictions. Am I correct in my précis of your stance?
Personally, I'd go with something approximating this.....
A theory is the highest level of scientific explanation. Whilst laws describe physical and chemical processes, and hypotheses are speculative, testable, statements about a plausible way in which a given process works, a theory must explain all available data in a unified manner, without contr ...[text shortened]... it describes.
[edit; whilst I personally wrote this, it is a standard definition of theory.]
Originally posted by HalitoseI see you're poised to strike with your Repeatable Zap Gun. I feel obliged to pre-empt you.
Okay... So basically you define a theory as a cohesive explanation of phenomena, which is grounded in observable and repeatable scientific data and formulates accurate predictions. Am I correct in my précis of your stance?
Here are more than 100 repeatable experiments relating to evolution:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Display&dopt=pubmed_pubmed&from_uid=12185484