User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 6 of 147 FirstFirst ... 23456789101656106 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 48 of 1176

Thread: Where does everyone stand in regards to...

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Evolution is a theory, not a fact.
    let me just paste this from http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/...re1/index.html
    talking about evolution:
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ] If you are skeptical by nature, unfamiliar with the terminology of science, and unaware of the overwhelming evidence, you might even be tempted to say that it's "just" a theory. In the same sense, relativity as described by Albert Einstein is "just" a theory. The notion that Earth orbits around the sun rather than vice versa, offered by Copernicus in 1543, is a theory. Continental drift is a theory. The existence, structure, and dynamics of atoms? Atomic theory. Even electricity is a theoretical construct, involving electrons, which are tiny units of charged mass that no one has ever seen. Each of these theories is an explanation that has been confirmed to such a degree, by observation and experiment, that knowledgeable experts accept it as fact. That's what scientists mean when they talk about a theory: not a dreamy and unreliable speculation, but an explanatory statement that fits the evidence. They embrace such an explanation confidently but provisionally—taking it as their best available view of reality, at least until some severely conflicting data or some better explanation might come along.
    let me emphasize "that knowledgeable experts accept it as fact."
    so really evolution being "just" a theory doesn't mean anything bad. But it being a SCIENTIFIC theory means a lot.
    Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish-Euripides
    wikipedia rocks! (except for species info)(CPers-add your vast knowledge of CPs to wikipedia&#33
    A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it
    Get all the fools on your side and you can be elected to anything

  2. #42
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ... Calling into question a proofs accuracy can open up a multitude of other possible questions that might need to be verified to change an observers opinion. To simply prove something is not enough, because the cause and effects caused by proving said thing will only open up more possible questions, such as, what is its effect on (?) have you oberved this many times and has it been independantly verified? is there another possible explination. If cause C was removed, what would the effect be on the outcome? - a infinent and neverending number of questions of a initial proof could be asked, and might be asked if the questioneer disliked the possible outcome of the initial peice of evidence.

    The mind selectivly chooses what happens to be stored in our memory. If, over time, one wants the something to have happened that they might have seen bad enough, the person will actually be able to recall the events as they wanted it to be, in vivid detail. This can lead to memory distoritions in wich proof can, in said dunjects mind, be effectively debunked due to ones presonal experiences, real or imagined. this phenomena is compounded when they are told by someone else what they saw when their own memories of the event are sketchy at best, thus one can think they know exactly what happened, when details that they think they they have observed are not actually true. This process cannot occur at all if the person chooses to remain steadfast on a subject so much that they feel no need to recall memories to prove it to they selves; they already know.

    (sorry if im a bit difficult to interpert, themind shift from wrigdting a comprehensive and informetive article on Taxus cuspidata to philosiphy is a difficult one for me)
    that makes no logic

  3. #43
    Let's positive thinking! seedjar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Olympia, Washington
    Posts
    4,064
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (TheAlphaWolf @ Dec. 27 2004,8:00)]
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]thusly there's no solid proof of anything.
    ok?.... I really don't know what to say about that... Then should we just give up and do nothing? the fact that there's no solid proof of anything isn't relevant when debating about evolution/creationism because ... well... how can it be?
    You can't prove you're not just a dream... or that you're a brain in a jar being fed stimuli.
    You take what you have (proof) and you base your beliefs on it. With the proof we have, evolution happens and creationism has no scientific proof.
    My point here is that what we call proof within the realm of science is really just a form of faith, backed up by experience. It's faith that things are consistent enough to be treated as proof. We can use this proof when discussing issues of science, but not religion, because while religion depends on faith (a different faith from the faith in proofs) it (often) does not have anything to do with experience. We could say that religion or creationism is unscientific, but it's very different to say that religion is wrong because it is unscientific. What would lead us to believe that things which are scientific are neccessarily correct? I believe that science is useful, but usefulness is not correctness. We can have beliefs without proof, it just so happens that it's usually more productive to have beliefs which are based on proofs.
    ~Joe
    o//~ Livin' like a bug ain't easy / My old clothes don't seem to fit me /
    I got little tiny bug feet / I don't really know what bugs eat /
    Don't want no one steppin' on me / Now I'm sympathizin' with fleas /
    Livin' like a bug ain't easy / Livin' like a bug ain't easy... o//~

  4. #44
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    therefore, there's no proof that what we observe really happens
    that makes no logic

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NY, New York
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]science is useful, but usefulness is not correctness
    so it wouldent be useful if its not correct, its just filling your head with lies, from what i know, in science theres alot more evidence and proof than the bible can ever give, the bible talks about a great flood thats flooded the world, yet there are tsunami's going all the time, it talks about next the world will be ended by fire, yet there are forest fires and all sorts of fires all the time, so if a investigator was to tell you, it started by a ciggrret a,d he or she actually shows you the remains of the ciggerate, would you still think it was a sign of the bible? as a matter of fact, there was a tsunami in asia a few days ago, would you belive the world is ending, or it was indeed the earthquake?

  6. #46
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]so it wouldent be useful if its not correct
    False facts, expecially when your convinced they actually happened, can be very usefull to your puropuse

    Altrade those examples on natural disasters do not prove anything because they cannot be compared to eachother.
    that makes no logic

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,706
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] (seedjar @ Dec. 27 2004,11:11)]My point here is that what we call proof within the realm of science is really just a form of faith, backed up by experience.
    Science isn't a form of faith, backed up by experience or facts. Science is a form of facts backed up by faith that you're facts are all correct (if you even think faith is needed when facts are hardcore). Science has no basis in faith, and of course in thinking that you would think that creationism and science can coinside.. but they can't.
    They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards, you hear satanic messages. Thats nothing, cause if you play it forwards, it installs Windows.

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NY, New York
    Posts
    342
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by [b
    Quote[/b] ]Altrade those examples on natural disasters do not prove anything because they cannot be compared to eachother.
    you can compare it to the "predictions" of the bible..

Page 6 of 147 FirstFirst ... 23456789101656106 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •