|
On September 20 2004 17:43 XvObiVx wrote: Show nested quote +On September 20 2004 09:10 SickofLife wrote:
Evolution, nor Creationism are theories, they are beliefs. A theory can be scientifcally proven; however, neither of the previously mentioned can be proven.
Wow, have you taken biology yet? Really, in 9th grade I learned this. Evolution, whether you like it or not, has been proven. When you read about Charles Darwin, and his finches in particular, you learn that evolution has taken place. Evolution occurred when a bird species was isolated to a group of islands. These islands would have different kinds of seeds to feed off of, and if those nuts were walnuts, the birds with the most powerful and largest beaks would get food the easiest. Thus, small beaked birds would die out, leaving the birds with the largest beaks. And it'd go on for generations, where the genes for large beaks would be brought together again and again. So they had evolved from a normal-sized beak to a larger.
Its a theory as it HASNT been proven fully. Thats why its a theory which has a lot of evidence to support it but its not fully proved. There are still many gaps that need to be filled in before it becomes a Law.
|
It's all just a matter of definition what a 'theory' is.
If you think that a theory is something that is absolutely, 100% sure, you're stupid.
In fact, by definition there can't be a theory that is logically 100% correct. You can always come with some silly 'what if'-question.
Theories always have some falsifiability (the what-if-question) attached to them, that's what makes them scientifically accepted. The more falsifiable a theory is, the more aspects it has, that you can test, deepen out and clarify.
It's easy to see that the evolution theory has more aspects about which something can be said then the creation theory, so the evo-theory is more scientifically then the creation theory for sure.
With creationist theory, the problem is, there is hardly any aspect that a critic can test, check or criticize. The answer is always: you gotta believe in it. But evolutionists try to convince with explanations, with tests and with maleorderbride's silly calcium skeletons. Now that's what you call proof and that's what makes it a theory
|
Hehe Slaughter, nice post-crossing
BTW, the natural-law subject is something that isn't without problems either, but I think this is already enough intellectual chitchat for mr. SickofLife
|
erm. a law predicts.. it doesnt explain. the theory is the explanation. evolution happens. evolutionary theory tries to explain how it happens and predict/model how it works etc. the theory changes all the time. there's diff theories on small points here and there etc........
|
In the United States one can grow up a bum and become president.
|
On September 22 2004 14:22 maleorderbride wrote: Show nested quote +On September 20 2004 12:21 ahk-gosu wrote: On September 20 2004 01:15 Malmis wrote:
"Better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven."
pshh not true. whoever made this quote is going to hell. and no he isnt going to rule hell  I really really hope that was a joke. The fucking devil said that, loosely translated, in the bible. Non servitum. Literally I will not serve, but that is the origins of that phrase.
*It was in a story by Dante (inferno?), not the bible, I'm pretty sure.
|
On September 20 2004 09:10 SickofLife wrote:
Evolution, nor Creationism are theories, they are beliefs. A theory can be scientifcally proven; however, neither of the previously mentioned can be proven.
"Military intelligence... two words combined that can't make sense." - Dave Mustaine (Hangar 18)
What have you been reading my friend? Probably nothing.
Evolution is the process by which a certain species changes over time. Man didnt always walk erect, we have PROOF of that in discovered skeletons, but now we DO walk erect. Thats a change. We have EVOLVED from walking with bent backs to walking with straight ones. Thats PROOF of evolution.
And only one of thousands. If you were to pick up some books, you would see COUNTLESS examples and proofs of evolution.
Evolution is not a belief, it is a scientific fact that has been proven beyond doubt. Read some books my friend, before you start making statements that make no sense.
|
hey maynard, where are you from?
|
A hypothesis is a "guess" made. It becomes a theory when sufficient proof has been provided. A theory is NOT a best guess, its much more than that. A theory, essentially, will hold true in nearly all cases unless specifically proven otherwise. To simplify:
Guess = Hypothesis
You work on it, prove it = Theory
Law = You work on the theory enough to show it has NO exceptions
So a theory, for the most part, will be true, unlees its an EXCEPTION we're considering. To call it a "best guess" is just plain dumb. The guy who gave the example of the finches was right.
|
hey gandalf u been watching apes.... we never "evolved" from anything
|
On September 22 2004 15:44 Slaughter)BiO wrote: Show nested quote +On September 20 2004 17:43 XvObiVx wrote: On September 20 2004 09:10 SickofLife wrote:
Evolution, nor Creationism are theories, they are beliefs. A theory can be scientifcally proven; however, neither of the previously mentioned can be proven.
Wow, have you taken biology yet? Really, in 9th grade I learned this. Evolution, whether you like it or not, has been proven. When you read about Charles Darwin, and his finches in particular, you learn that evolution has taken place. Evolution occurred when a bird species was isolated to a group of islands. These islands would have different kinds of seeds to feed off of, and if those nuts were walnuts, the birds with the most powerful and largest beaks would get food the easiest. Thus, small beaked birds would die out, leaving the birds with the largest beaks. And it'd go on for generations, where the genes for large beaks would be brought together again and again. So they had evolved from a normal-sized beak to a larger. Its a theory as it HASNT been proven fully. Thats why its a theory which has a lot of evidence to support it but its not fully proved. There are still many gaps that need to be filled in before it becomes a Law.
The line between laws and theories isnt that sharp. You'll find laws will have exceptions too.
It will be IMPOSSIBLE to elevate the theory of evolution to the status of a law. Why? Because to do so, we will have to prove the working of the evolutionary theory in ALL evolution. Something that has been going on since the first glimmer of life on this planet. Is it really possible to prove the evolution of EVERY SINGLE species this planet has EVER seen? Of course not! Even on earth TODAY, we are not familiar with all the species of life. Which is why it will always remain a theory.
|
On September 22 2004 16:07 Gandalf wrote:
A hypothesis is a "guess" made. It becomes a theory when sufficient proof has been provided. A theory is NOT a best guess, its much more than that. A theory, essentially, will hold true in nearly all cases unless specifically proven otherwise. To simplify:
Guess = Hypothesis
You work on it, prove it = Theory
Law = You work on the theory enough to show it has NO exceptions
So a theory, for the most part, will be true, unlees its an EXCEPTION we're considering. To call it a "best guess" is just plain dumb. The guy who gave the example of the finches was right.
But Gandalf, of course you know that a law only works in a specific scientific framework. Because, after a law has been established, more and more problems will arise with that law will appear, after a while they will become to big to keep the law believable.
At that moment, the whole framework will collapse, there is a state of hyper-science, and after a while, everything will be settled and answered within a new timeframe. That's why we aren't completely Galilean and Newtonian anymore
mmm, maybe a bit offtopic this whole story, I'd better go to bed
|
On September 22 2004 16:08 SS-guy wrote:
hey gandalf u been watching apes.... we never "evolved" from anything
Theres essentially two different schools of thought.
One, that we evolved from ape like ancestors. Enough proof of this has been found to at least warrant a theory.
Two, that we were created as is, or the "religious" school of thought.
We're not here to discuss which is right and which is wrong, but rather the falsability or the provability of either.
So yes, it IS possible we evolved from apes, there is enough scientific data to at least warrant that assumption.
What have you been watching? Dexter? Your ape like intelligence provides further proof.
|
On September 22 2004 16:15 Veigh wrote: Show nested quote +On September 22 2004 16:07 Gandalf wrote:
A hypothesis is a "guess" made. It becomes a theory when sufficient proof has been provided. A theory is NOT a best guess, its much more than that. A theory, essentially, will hold true in nearly all cases unless specifically proven otherwise. To simplify:
Guess = Hypothesis
You work on it, prove it = Theory
Law = You work on the theory enough to show it has NO exceptions
So a theory, for the most part, will be true, unlees its an EXCEPTION we're considering. To call it a "best guess" is just plain dumb. The guy who gave the example of the finches was right. But Gandalf, of course you know that a law only works in a specific scientific framework. Because, after a law has been established, more and more problems will arise with that law will appear, after a while they will become to big to keep the law believable. At that moment, the whole framework will collapse, there is a state of hyper-science, and after a while, everything will be settled and answered within a new timeframe. That's why we aren't completely Galilean and Newtonian anymore mmm, maybe a bit offtopic this whole story, I'd better go to bed
I was going to state something similar, but you beat me to it.
You're right, its infinitely difficult and tricky to elevate something to the level of law, simply because of the improbablity that EVERYTHING has been checked and proven. What if, the day after, a new objection were to be raise? Would we then revert it to theory status? And keep this conversion/reversion going on?
Which is why the word that sticks to the side of a concept, either "theory" or "law", should not be delved into too deeply. We need to comprehend the mechanics of any theory or law, and use our own intelligence to derive conclusions.
|
True, I never liked logic and methodology anyway
|
i just thought of this during media arts class
"Pop. culture is the way that media molds society to be what it is today."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
