Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Michael_Michaelangelo
First the speed of light isn't constant and now our ancestors may not have all been as ape-like as we once thought? Is there nothing left we can rely on with any degree of certainty?

With this kind of constant, drastic "evolution" of theory you have to admire those who continue to place all of their faith in science. God bless 'em!

3 posted on 07/02/2004 8:07:19 AM PDT by sheltonmac ("Duty is ours; consequences are God's." -Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: sheltonmac

Spoor don't know scat.


4 posted on 07/02/2004 8:13:14 AM PDT by wizr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac
Is there nothing left we can rely on with any degree of certainty?

I was wondering the same thing! Then I saw this article this morning and felt all warm and fuzzy again:

Fundamental physics constants stay put

5 posted on 07/02/2004 8:16:24 AM PDT by Michael_Michaelangelo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac

Is there nothing left we can rely on with any degree of certainty?

Taxes.


6 posted on 07/02/2004 8:45:55 AM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac
...you have to admire those who continue to place all of their faith in science...

He says, tapping out a message on his science-created machine.

The best part about science is that nothing is set in stone, nothing is preordained. We never have the final answer because there is always more evidence out there that could point us in a different direction. That makes science difficult but so very interesting.

It's totally boring and a waste of a human mind when you have all the answers handed to you on a silver platter and need not worry about any of those answers having to change. That's too easy.
9 posted on 07/02/2004 8:54:58 AM PDT by BikerNYC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac
Is there nothing left we can rely on with any degree of certainty?

Now that you mention it, yes...

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters... Genesis 1ff

13 posted on 07/02/2004 9:36:55 AM PDT by Gritty ("Without God there could be no American form of government nor way of life-Dwight D. Eisenhower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac

Is there something you think this disproves? The theory of natural selection is that up to a dizzying number of variants co-exist, and that the best fitted one survives. This does take time, and the variants will coexist. The debate I'm hearing is whether or not scientists have been correct in squeezing the several variants into one species, not whether no member of the species is ancestral to man.

If you're thinking there's a chink made in the theory of evolution, you should know that "ape-men" have never been presented as a proof of evolution. To the exact opposite, the need for a "missing link" has almost been mythologized. What this shows is that there were a plethora of organisms in that scary grey zone between human appearance and animals, whereas even evolutionary biologists have been stuck in a paradigm of expecting human lineage to somehow be pristine of the fuzziness that exists in the rest of phylogeny.

By the way, I believe the "spark" of humanity will not be something detectable in paleobiology: Adam looked no different than the mud he was created from, except that he had the breath of God within him.


20 posted on 07/02/2004 11:17:37 AM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac
Is there nothing left we can rely on

Yes, you can rely on super-naturalists to migrate to any science thread.

25 posted on 07/02/2004 11:37:03 AM PDT by ASA Vet (tourette's syndrome is just a $&#$*!% excuse for bad *%$#**& language skills.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac
First the speed of light isn't constant and now our ancestors may not have all been as ape-like as we once thought? Is there nothing left we can rely on with any degree of certainty?

In science? No. Every scientist knows that part of the deal is that any theory can be overturned, altered, amended, revised etc. based on new evidence. The TOE is no exception.

27 posted on 07/02/2004 11:39:21 AM PDT by Modernman ("I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members" -Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac
First the speed of light isn't constant

Unlikely.

and now our ancestors may not have all been as ape-like as we once thought?

Where do you see *that* in the above article? You might want to reread it.

Is there nothing left we can rely on with any degree of certainty?

Yes -- you can rely on science giving the best analysis of the mountains of currently available evidence, as science will always adjust itself to match what the evidence indicates. Usually these are small adjustments, as in the above article (contrary to those here who try to falsely portray it as some sort of "we were all wrong before"). Even once in a very long while there are large adjustments, but even these are usually extensions to existing theory, not replacements. For example, Relativity extended Newtonian physics to the realm of velocities close to the speed of light, but Newtonian physics was not "overturned" -- it's still perfectly valid for the vast majority of physical analysis.

On the other hand, we have the supernaturalists who say, "if all the evidence indicates something other than what we have in this ancient book, we will ignore the evidence."

With this kind of constant, drastic "evolution" of theory you have to admire those who continue to place all of their faith in science.

Your impressions of "constant, drastic" change in the theory of evolution is grossly unfounded. All of the principles that Darwin laid out for his theory in 1859 are still standing. What has changed is details like whether species X descended from species A or B, where A and B are themsleves very closely related.

God bless 'em!

Why thank you.

30 posted on 07/02/2004 12:13:14 PM PDT by Ichneumon ("...she might as well have been a space alien." - Bill Clinton, on Hillary, "My Life", p. 182)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

To: sheltonmac
With this kind of constant, drastic "evolution" of theory you have to admire those who continue to place all of their faith in science.

Those of us in science know that we NEVER have all the answers. We also tend to avoid coming right out and saying something without adding qualifiers. For instance, I might say "The resultant increase in reporter activity COULD result from reason X; an ALTERNATIVE explanation is that..."

My first published paper contradicted the results of a fairly prominent scientist in my field. In fact, scientists contradict each other all the time.

Faith isn't a topic that comes up a lot in scientific circles. Unless, of course, it is the scientist praying, "Please, God, let this experiment work."

51 posted on 07/02/2004 6:17:50 PM PDT by exDemMom (Think like a liberal? Oxymoron!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson