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

To: mlc9852
I've always found it interesting that Darwin himself recanted his own theory near the end of his life and embraced the possibility of God and an afterlife.

I also find it interesting that evolution is still "theory" which means it hasn't been proved conclusively and yet any other theory is dismissed. Funny how only one "theory" is considered science and any other theory is not.
52 posted on 12/21/2005 6:48:23 AM PST by Sweetjustusnow (Oust the IslamoCommies here and abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: Sweetjustusnow
I've always found it interesting that Darwin himself recanted his own theory near the end of his life and embraced the possibility of God and an afterlife.

ROFL....see Reply 21 on this thread, RE: Creationists lying.

The deathbed recantation by Darwin is a complete fabrication. Never happened.

58 posted on 12/21/2005 6:51:18 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: Sweetjustusnow
I've always found it interesting that Darwin himself recanted his own theory near the end of his life and embraced the possibility of God and an afterlife.

Ummm...In a word - no.

I also find it interesting that evolution is still "theory" which means it hasn't been proved conclusively and yet any other theory is dismissed. Funny how only one "theory" is considered science and any other theory is not.

Time to dust off what a theory in science is.

Let me post my own example of gravity:

A little history here:

Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation

“Every object in the universe attracts every other object with a force directed along the line of centers for the two objects that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the separation between the two objects.”

F=Gm1m2/r2

Where:

F equals the gravitational force between two objects
m1 equals the mass of the first object
m2 equals the mass of the second object
R equals the distance between the objects
G equals the universal constant of gravitation = (6.6726 )* 10-11 N*m2/kg2 (which is still being refined and tested today)

(BTW this is a simple form of the equation and is only applied to point sources. Usually it is expressed as a vector equation)

Even though it works well for most practical purposes, this formulation has problems.

A few of the problems are:

It shows the change is gravitational force is transmitted instantaneously (Violates C), assumes an absolute space and time (this contradicts Special Relativity), etc.

Enter Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity

In 1915 Einstein developed a new theory of gravity called General Relativity.

A number of experiments showed this theory explained some of the problems with the classical Newtonian model. However, this theory like all others is still being explored and tested.

From an NSF abstract:

“As with all scientific knowledge, a theory can be refined or even replaced by an alternative theory in light of new and compelling evidence. The geocentric theory that the sun revolves around the earth was replaced by the heliocentric theory of the earth's rotation on its axis and revolution around the sun. However, ideas are not referred to as "theories" in science unless they are supported by bodies of evidence that make their subsequent abandonment very unlikely. When a theory is supported by as much evidence as evolution, it is held with a very high degree of confidence.

In science, the word "hypothesis" conveys the tentativeness inherent in the common use of the word "theory.' A hypothesis is a testable statement about the natural world. Through experiment and observation, hypotheses can be supported or rejected. At the earliest level of understanding, hypotheses can be used to construct more complex inferences and explanations. Like "theory," the word "fact" has a different meaning in science than it does in common usage. A scientific fact is an observation that has been confirmed over and over. However, observations are gathered by our senses, which can never be trusted entirely. Observations also can change with better technologies or with better ways of looking at data. For example, it was held as a scientific fact for many years that human cells have 24 pairs of chromosomes, until improved techniques of microscopy revealed that they actually have 23. Ironically, facts in science often are more susceptible to change than theories, which is one reason why the word "fact" is not much used in science.

Finally, "laws" in science are typically descriptions of how the physical world behaves under certain circumstances. For example, the laws of motion describe how objects move when subjected to certain forces. These laws can be very useful in supporting hypotheses and theories, but like all elements of science they can be altered with new information and observations.

Those who oppose the teaching of evolution often say that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact." This statement confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have.

Here is another nice page of what a theory is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

"In common usage a theory is often viewed as little more than a guess or a hypothesis. But in science and generally in academic usage, a theory is much more than that. A theory is an established paradigm that explains all or many of the data we have and offers valid predictions that can be tested. In science, a theory can never be proven true, because we can never assume we know all there is to know. Instead, theories remain standing until they are disproven, at which point they are thrown out altogether or modified slightly.

Theories start out with empirical observations such as “sometimes water turns into ice.” At some point, there is a need or curiosity to find out why this is, which leads to a theoretical/scientific phase. In scientific theories, this then leads to research, in combination with auxiliary and other hypotheses (see scientific method), which may then eventually lead to a theory. Some scientific theories (such as the theory of gravity) are so widely accepted that they are often seen as laws. This, however, rests on a mistaken assumption of what theories and laws are. Theories and laws are not rungs in a ladder of truth, but different sets of data. A law is a general statement based on observations."

For Laws:

"A well-known example is that of Newton's law of gravity: while it describes the world accurately for most pertinent observations, such as of the movements of astronomical objects in the solar system, it was found to be inaccurate when applied to extremely large masses or velocities. Einstein's theory of general relativity, however, accurately handles gravitational interactions at those extreme conditions, in addition to the range covered by Newton's law. Newton's formula for gravity is still used in most circumstances, as an easier-to-calculate approximation of gravitational law. A similar relationship exists between Maxwell's equations and the theory of quantum electrodynamics; there are several such cases. This suggests the (unanswered) question of whether there are any ultimately true physical laws, or whether they are all just cases where our sensory and rational apparatus have generated mathematically simple approximations, valid within the range of normal human experience, to unobtainable true formulas."

60 posted on 12/21/2005 6:52:05 AM PST by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: Sweetjustusnow
"I've always found it interesting that Darwin himself recanted his own theory near the end of his life and embraced the possibility of God and an afterlife"

Darwin was a life-long Christian. He began his college career as a divinity student, with the goal of becoming a pastor. He never saw his theory as questioning the existance of God and he never recanted his theory on the origin of species.

108 posted on 12/21/2005 7:11:34 AM PST by bessay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: Sweetjustusnow

If you read these threads often enough you will find that scientists do admit that nothing in science can ever be proved but only disproved.


167 posted on 12/21/2005 7:35:36 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: Sweetjustusnow
I also find it interesting that evolution is still "theory" which means it hasn't been proved conclusively and yet any other theory is dismissed.

A scientific theory or law represents an hypothesis, or a group of related hypotheses, which has been confirmed through repeated experimental tests. ID is at best a hypothesis. Evolution has made it all the way through the scientific method to become a theory. I do not believe ID "scientists" have used their hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

I also don't understand why it so hard for some to believe that G_d set the gears of evolution in motion. Both sides can have some very narrow views.

171 posted on 12/21/2005 7:37:12 AM PST by numberonepal (Don't Even Think About Treading On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: Sweetjustusnow
evolution is still "theory" which means it hasn't been proved conclusively and yet any other theory is dismissed. Funny how only one "theory" is considered science and any other theory is not.


But evo is not a cult evo is not a cult...., you are getting very sleepy... your mind is mine... we will pour into your mind all the dogma..,

LOL!

Wolf
272 posted on 12/21/2005 9:02:26 AM PST by RunningWolf (Vet US Army Air Cav 1975)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: Sweetjustusnow
I've always found it interesting that Darwin himself recanted his own theory near the end of his life and embraced the possibility of God and an afterlife.

I also find it interesting that evolution is still "theory" which means it hasn't been proved conclusively and yet any other theory is dismissed. Funny how only one "theory" is considered science and any other theory is not.

Lets define some terms (from a google search):

Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

Hypothesis: a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices"

Guess: an opinion or estimate based on incomplete evidence, or on little or no information

Law: a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics"

Assumption: premise: a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn; "on the assumption that he has been injured we can infer that he will not to play"

Speculation: a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence)

Observation: any information collected with the senses

Data: factual information, especially information organized for analysis or used to reason or make decisions

Fact: when an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact

Belief: any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith

Faith the belief in something for which there is no evidence or logical proof

Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof

Impression: a vague idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying"

Based on this, evolution is a theory. CS and ID are beliefs.


From an NSF abstract:

As with all scientific knowledge, a theory can be refined or even replaced by an alternative theory in light of new and compelling evidence. The geocentric theory that the sun revolves around the earth was replaced by the heliocentric theory of the earth's rotation on its axis and revolution around the sun. However, ideas are not referred to as "theories" in science unless they are supported by bodies of evidence that make their subsequent abandonment very unlikely. When a theory is supported by as much evidence as evolution, it is held with a very high degree of confidence.

In science, the word "hypothesis" conveys the tentativeness inherent in the common use of the word "theory.' A hypothesis is a testable statement about the natural world. Through experiment and observation, hypotheses can be supported or rejected. At the earliest level of understanding, hypotheses can be used to construct more complex inferences and explanations. Like "theory," the word "fact" has a different meaning in science than it does in common usage. A scientific fact is an observation that has been confirmed over and over. However, observations are gathered by our senses, which can never be trusted entirely. Observations also can change with better technologies or with better ways of looking at data. For example, it was held as a scientific fact for many years that human cells have 24 pairs of chromosomes, until improved techniques of microscopy revealed that they actually have 23. Ironically, facts in science often are more susceptible to change than theories, which is one reason why the word "fact" is not much used in science.

Finally, "laws" in science are typically descriptions of how the physical world behaves under certain circumstances. For example, the laws of motion describe how objects move when subjected to certain forces. These laws can be very useful in supporting hypotheses and theories, but like all elements of science they can be altered with new information and observations.

Those who oppose the teaching of evolution often say that evolution should be taught as a "theory, not as a fact." This statement confuses the common use of these words with the scientific use. In science, theories do not turn into facts through the accumulation of evidence. Rather, theories are the end points of science. They are understandings that develop from extensive observation, experimentation, and creative reflection. They incorporate a large body of scientific facts, laws, tested hypotheses, and logical inferences. In this sense, evolution is one of the strongest and most useful scientific theories we have.

Modified from RadioAstronomers's post #27 on another thread.


292 posted on 12/21/2005 9:38:15 AM PST by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]

To: Sweetjustusnow
I've always found it interesting that Darwin himself recanted his own theory near the end of his life and embraced the possibility of God and an afterlife.

Did Darwin recant?

461 posted on 12/21/2005 8:07:52 PM PST by dread78645 (Sorry Mr. Franklin, We couldn't keep it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | 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