The Evolution of Theory: Defining the Debate

Breakpoint ^ | Feb, 16, 2006 | Allen Dobras

[freedumb2003]

The basic idea of a scientific method is predicated on a belief that the whole universe is put together rationally. Experiments are repeatable.

That is all true. It also means nothing. In fact, I will use your example the next time a CRIDer says that Evolutionists are anti-God. You provide proof of the opposite and for that I thank you.

[microgood]

There is a vast "social Darwinist" literature that cannot be so easily be separated from "scientific Darwinism" as its adherants pretend.

I have lately been reading about evolutionary morality. Basically it is Enlightenment Period rehash with a bit of reductionism thrown in.

[Coyoteman]

So if they found a modern skull that was dated at 2,000,000 years, would your theory still be true?

Is this a hypothetical or do you have evidence of such?

[freedumb2003]

Take for example the beginning of life itself. Those evolution theory eggheads are all full of supposed explanations for why a zebra has stripes and how come a bird chirps but here is the fact they need to always ignore:

You are new to this debate aren't you?

Everything you say is false. Actually Creationism is myth, which is EXACTLY the same as little fairies and leprechauns

The origins of life have been postulated, based on following evidence. The mechanism has been replicated, but we don't have the ability using present technology to model the Earth billions of years ago and then move along that timeline.

We see evidence of varying aspects of evolution from many areas.

You need to read up on the theory before popping up in a thread and essentially lying by posting misrepresentations of TTOE.

[edsheppa]

"... But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts." Kenneth R. Miller

I disagree. What distinguishes a scientific theory is primarily form (it connects a formal deductive system with observable phenomena) but also reach (it explains lots of phenomena often in surprising ways). A theory can be wrong and still scientific (e.g. Newtonian gravity) but it can't be non-predictive and still scientific (e.g. ID as presently proselytized).

There is no obvious reason that ID can't be reconstituted in the proper form of a scientific theory. But it won't be because the purpose of those pushing it is fundamentally religious and, if it were properly formed, it would reduce the "designer" to mechanism - hardly satisfying from a religious point of view.

[microgood]

I'd like to see a cite for that site.

I have to go outside now but I will dig it (or them) up a little later today. I remember because I was surprised how blatant they were being.

[trashcanbred]

Ok... if evolution is all bunk and animals do not evolve, how come you do not see modern day animals all the way back in the fossil record? How come there are no 300 million year old human skulls, or even mammals? There are some animals that seem to be the same very far back, like the shark and the croc, but you really don't see any modern day animals at all.

If you are right and animals do not evolve, then I should be able to see modern plants and animals from 100, 200, and 300 million years ago.

[freedumb2003]

;)

[Berlin_Freeper]

"You need to read up on the theory before popping up in a thread and essentially lying by posting misrepresentations of TTOE."

Oh yea an idiot like you is a true expert, in your own mind.

Your post can be summed up as the usual childish rebuttal: "No you!"

Obviously a few of your buttons got pushed, go whine to your momma all about it while the adults continue the debate here. Thank you.

[microgood]

Is this a hypothetical or do you have evidence of such?

Hypothetical. The poster was equating evolution to a law and that hominid to human evolution was fact. I was just pointing out it was one fossil away from being outright false and therefore should remain a theory.

[05 Mustang GT Rocks]

You evos have a very thin skin when your religion is discussed. Gravity and Math don't have anything to do with whether you have God given rights or not. I'll repeat again, if you don't believe in a Creator, don't bitch when your freedom is taken away. Blind ranting as it may be...
By the way, a lot of evos seem to have a case of logorrhea but no one has yet been able to explain away the Cambrian explosion, the irreducibly complex systems, etc., etc.

[edsheppa]

Neo-Darwinists are being told to deemphasize the randomness of evolution and spin natural selection as the main guiding force.

Ah, the ignorance of creationists is as vast as space. You have it exactly backwards.

[jennyp]

You don't believe that evolution was king in the commie countries? you must be a victim of public education. I grew up in a former commie country and you had to even use special "speak" in biology classes lest you accidently implied that not every living thing evolved. the evos here don't like to hear it but all repeat it every time.

You must have been educated after the heyday of Communist-enforced Lysenkoism, then.

The Darwinian theory enabled the communosts to claim that there was no God. So all of your unalienable rights came from the Communist party and were not so unalienable after all.

When you deny the existance of God, don't complain when somebody comes along and takes all your rights away. You just "evolved".

If our rights come from a supernatural authority figure, then they're no more inalienable than if they come from a human-led government. In both cases they're contingent upon the whims of whoever is in charge: God can change His inscrutable mind at any time, and who are we to judge God or His motives?

No, we get our inalienable rights from the unchangeable facts that we are human beings and that individual rights are necessary for our survival as human beings. These are things that will never change as long as Homo sapiens exists.

[AmericaUnited]

The Darwinian theory enabled the communosts to claim that there was no God.

Are you trying to say that there is a connection between the official religion of Communism, i.e. Atheism, and the fact that Communism is also the most murderous form of government that ever existed? I know, I know... 100 MILLION DEAD PEOPLE in the 20th century alone is not statistically significant.

[PatrickHenry]

Too late to ping the evolution list, but I'll ping to a few.

[trashcanbred]

Sure the cambrian explosion has not been answered yet. You are correct. But I will ask again, if evolution is wrong then why don't we see modern day animal in the fossil record? Why do you not see modern day humans from 10 million years ago, or even 100 million years ago? Why do you not see modern day plant life in the fossil record from 200 million years ago?

If you can answer that (and I mean an answer that makes sense) then I would say evolution has a problem.

[AmericaUnited]

If our rights come from a supernatural authority figure, then they're no more inalienable than if they come from a human-led government.

I guess you're right. The Founding Fathers must have been all IDIOTS! Too bad you were not there to instruct them.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"For instance, look up all the vestigial organs claimed by evolutionists to prove their theory. Most have now been proven to have uses and not be so vestigial at all."

Vestigial does not mean *useless*. It means that the structure isn't performing the same function it did in it's ancestors. That has been definition, ever since Darwin. For instance, the wings of an ostrich are vestigial, because they no longer can be used for flight. The appendix, which in our ancestors was much larger, was used for the digestion of cellulose.

[05 Mustang GT Rocks]

No, we get our inalienable rights from the unchangeable facts that we are human beings and that individual rights are necessary for our survival as human beings. These are things that will never change as long as Homo sapiens exists.

Just look what the human beings did just in the 20th century. Especially, the ones practising the religion of Atheism.
Like the Protest Warriors sign says; "Communism killed only 100 milion people, let's give it another chance."

Anyway, I know better than to waiste my time and energy arguing with evos. Have better things to do...

[trashcanbred]

I have a question that I have never heard an evolutionist bring up before. The question is, if evolution is bunk, then why don't we see all the modern day animals in the fossil record? Why don't we see 40 million year old modern human fossils or 300 million year old horses?