Rush mentioned this today also.
Mr. Engber's all too common and classic error is to call evolution a fact. In what sense Mr. Engber? If we are discussing fact vs. opinion, then it is a fact that Mr. Engber's opinion is that evolution is true. It is my opinion that he doesn't know fact from fiction.
Are talking fact vs. fiction? That seems to be his confusion. And it is a common one. Science does deal in facts. It also deals in ideas, theories and laws.
One can argue that evolution is a valid theory. Likewise it can be argued it is a well-supported theory. It might even be tolerable to make a case for calling the general theory of evolution a law.
The problem is that this theory has itself evolved. Which instantiation of this theory is a fact, Mr. Engber?
No, Facts are facts. In science we should reserve the term "scientific fact" to what is directly observable and measurable, not our interpretations and theories to explain this data. We must not conflate the data / facts of science with the theories or even laws which help us understand the facts / data.
This is his logical fallacy. It is so common among evolutionists I think it should be called the "law of fact conflation". That is my opinion.
First time I’ve seen a leftwingtard make a claim that Obama is the antichrist ~ which, btw, is not true. Obama is a simple acolyte of the antichrist!
Rubio is the “Crown Prince” of the tea party?
Isn’t he among the more moderate of the tea party supported candidates?
I fail to be able to connect the age of the earth with any meaningful political discussions....
IF you believe there is a god who used death to bring humans into existence (which is what evolutionists must believe if they believe in a god)and that this god used survival of the fittest methodology to ‘create’ humans, then that god pretty much resembles a terrorist. So if Rubio believes that there is a god and this god used death and survival of the fittest over 7 epochs of millions of years to get humans into existence then who wants to worship this kind of deity? If Rubio was politically and theologically SMART he would have said this - that if evolutionist think there is a god and this god brought us into existence by trial and error or by mutating and then killing off the less fit - then this is not the kind of god I want to believe in nor do I. That would be a very slick political answer to the question of whether he believes in evolution and a good theological shifting of the ground to point out how ridiculous it is to worship that kind of deity. If I believed there was such a trial and error survival of the fittest type of god, I would join forces with those who want to murder this monster if we could find him.
At a recent air pollution conference, I had to listen to some EPA idiot carry on about ‘occult’ emissions. Really sick minds.
Scratch a leftist find a red guard, storm trooper, commissar, whatever. People had better wise up fast.
Left-wing fundamentalists want to paint all conservatives as right-wing fundamentalist literalists. The media is more than willing to help them.
Rubio makes moves in Iowa with 2016 in mind and the liberals are already building his negatives up with “harmless” articles.
Announcing early is dumb.
The age of the earth or the age of the universe? Scientists think the universe is 14.5 billion years old. How they can measure that is a mystery, since the “year” is how long it takes the earth to go around the sun, and there was no sun and no earth at the beginning of the universe.
At this point, all the reporters have left the room, looking for someone else to trap.
And the point of such a question is . . . .?????
No one knows the age of the earth. No written or unwritten fact of record can tell us this.
Evolution, rightly understood, occurs, but cannot tell us how life became generated from non-life.
None of this is subject to a political determiniation.
The fact is that DNA is mutable and is absolutely incapable of staying the same generation to generation - thus evolution is a fact.
The theory of evolution through natural selection explains the fact of evolution, in that there is variation within populations (because of the fact that DNA cannot stay the same), and that some variations lead to greater reproductive success than other variations based upon the environment the population is currently experiencing.
Lamark had a theory that attempted to explain the facts of evolution as well, it wasn't a successful explanation.
Darwin's theory of evolution; i.e. natural selection IS very successful at explaining the facts of biological evolution.
Ok, I get it. Dirt is old, maybe even older than dirt.
Frankly, I am not so much concerned with exactly when Earth/life began, as I am with it’s ‘use by’ date. If someone didn’t put a “use by” date on sour cream packaging, mine might actually turn sour.
Oh, I have a question....
**WHO in the hell gave the damn order to NOT rescue our men in Benghazi?**
I have had it with politicians who will not answer a simple direct question. Religion is a part of politics in this country. The question is valid and goes to his philosophy. I can’t stand it when I can see the wheels turning in their minds saying “now how can I take a middle of the road approach that won’t offend anyone”. Just say what you believe and be prepared to give your reasons for what you believe.
How about stepping back and looking at a more fundamental question than Science: The subject of 8th Grade Math, about which Obama is a TOTAL MORON.
As was evidenced on the Letterman show, whether the US Debt increased by $1 trillion or $7 trillion is pretty much the same thing to President Zero. Add to that, that he sent a “budget” to Congress which NOT A SINGLE DEMOCRAT SENATOR would vote for.
But we can’t criticize the Great One (1) because that would be racist.