Replies

Gravity is observable and therefore empiriacally verifiable. Evolution is not.

I do have to say I appreciate your walking into this one. Why you guys don't learn is beyond me.

I said the Theory of Gravity -- not the experience of Gravity. You need to learn what a scientific theory is before you can really participate in this discussion. (hint: seeing something fall down is a data point within the overall theory and "proves" nothing).

A) Since science requires observation and verification and no one can or has ever observed or verified evolution, evolution is not scientific.

Not true. Seen a graviton lately? Can you "prove" the make up of Jupiter based on our camera and telescopic analysis? How about sub-quantum threads?

No offense, you don't know what science is.

B) Evolutionists themselves state that evolution is a religion.

Not true. This is a canard that is played by icr and other political groups.

C) Evolutionists start with the presupposition that evolution is “scientific fact”.

Not true. Evolution is a Scientific Theory. Again, your lack of knowledge about the subject at hand is making you look a bit foolish.

Please see PH's links for more information about this subject.

I won't waste my or your time addressing your icr cut-and-paste. Until you understand what is being discussed, you aren't qualified to speak on it.

Please, friend. Educate yourself.

Evolutionists do indeed start with the presupposition that evolution is “scientific fact”. This results in conclusions which are often times contradictory to the observed world. Evolutionists frequently refuse to come to rational conclusions, or even follow evidence where it leads on the basis that to do so would result in a contradiction of their previous metaphysical conclusions.

“Evolution is a fact, not a theory.”
Carl Sagan

“The first point to make about Darwin’s theory is that it is no longer a theory, but a fact…”
Julian Huxley

…The term THEORY is no longer appropriate except when referring to the various models that attempt to explain HOW life evolves... it is important to understand that the current questions about how life evolves in no way implies any disagreement over the fact of evolution.
- Neil A. Campbell, Biology 2nd ed., 1990, Benjamin/Cummings, p.434

Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory - natural selection - to explain the mechanism of evolution.
- Stephen J. Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981

Whether or not you decide to respond to the huge problem has evolution has with spontaneous generation or the huge problem evolution has with even the mathematical improbability of random generation of a single protein is your own perogative....but you should ask yourself: What are the consequences if I am wrong abou this and the world was actually created....???

"I said the Theory of Gravity -- not the experience of Gravity. You need to learn what a scientific theory is before you can really participate in this discussion. (hint: seeing something fall down is a data point within the overall theory and "proves" nothing)."

Gravity is NOT a Theory...Gravity is a scientific law.

This basic enough to be insulting, that is not the intent.

The law of universal gravitation states that: every particle in the universe attracts every other particle with a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. If the particles have masses m1 and m2 and are separated by a distance r (from their centers of gravity), the magnitude of this gravitational force is: (insert basic formula here)

The fact that the law of gravity is law verifiable via observation and repeatable experiments (seeing something fall down is indeed a repeatable experiment), and evolution is NOT verifiable via observation and repeatable experiments is the point. One ultimately has to accept evolution on the basis of faith. Given the mathematical improbability, it is irrational faith.

"I said the Theory of Gravity -- not the experience of Gravity. You need to learn what a scientific theory is before you can really participate in this discussion."

Amusing, but quite nonsensical.

FP pointed out that we all are aware of the existance of gravity, thus need no theory to know that it is fact. Evolution, on the other hand, has yet to present us with a single piece of palpable evidence that fails to better support all other competing ideas.

"Please see PH's links for more information about this subject."

Please don't waste your time; nothing in PH's links amounts to anything more than opinions, and rationalizations, combined in such a way as to create very deceptive Propaganda.