How can you prove Evolution is pure fact, and not at all a theory?

Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by lyricalpriest, Feb 18, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    the fact that creatures on earth share a common ancestry has been proven to the same extent that you can prove a murderer is guilty even if there was nobody there to see the crime.

    it is a theory because it tries to make sense of a range of facts, so the question is malformed if it's meant to be a challenge towards evolution. people refuse to get it through their heads that something being a scientific theory isn't a mark against it.
    test
  2. ChromeDepot

    ChromeDepot Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Messages:
    198
    Duane Gish is a clown. Stop using his arguments.
    test
  3. ChromeDepot

    ChromeDepot Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Messages:
    198
    On the real though Payback, I love discussing this shit with you.

    In high school I was really trying to fuck this religious girl. The first time we hung it was at a bible study she frequented. My arguments made a lot of those kids salty but I had fun. It's basically the same with you...without the desire to want to, you know, fuck you.

    (pauuuuuuse)
    test
  4. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    so in other words you think that you can choose an impossibly hard question to answer, cite an answer that you've pulled from your ass/holy book with nothing credible backing it up, and then assert that until someone else comes up with something better your answer is true by default.
    test
  5. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    “Lucy” is the popular name given to the famous fossil skeleton found in 1974 in Ethiopia by American anthropologist Donald Johanson. To many people, Lucy is regarded as a certain link between ape-like creatures and man—thus supposedly proving evolution. But is Lucy really a pre-human ancestor?
    According to Richard Leakey, who along with Johanson is probably the best-known fossil-anthropologist in the world, Lucy’s skull is so incomplete that most of it is “imagination made of plaster of paris”.1 Leakey even said in 1983 that no firm conclusion could be drawn about what species Lucy belonged to.
    In reinforcement of the fact that Lucy is not a creature “in between” ape and man, Dr Charles Oxnard, Professor of Anatomy and Human Biology at the University of Western Australia, said in 1987 of the australopithecines (the group to which Lucy is said to have belonged):
    “The various australopithecines are, indeed, more different from both African apes and humans in most features than these latter are from each other. Part of the basis of this acceptance has been the fact that even opposing investigators have found these large differences as they too, used techniques and research designs that were less biased by prior notions as to what the fossils might have been”.2
    Oxnard’s firm conclusion? “The australopithecines are unique.”2
    Neither Lucy nor any other australopithecine is therefore intermediate between humans and African apes. Nor are they similar enough to humans to be any sort of ancestor of ours.
    Lucy and the australopithecines show nothing about human evolution, and should not be promoted as having any sort of “missing link” status. The creationist alternative, that humans, apes and other creatures were created that way in the beginning, remains the only explanation consistent with all the evidence.
    test
  6. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    i don't get salty. And I've encountered anything u may come up with previously. Any saltiness u may perceive of me having would more so be from having to go through the exact same unsubstantiated
    Garbage from yet another person that thinks they got it all figured out.

    The progression is not from believer to atheist, quite literally it's the other way around. That just means youre not there yet.
    test
  7. J Keeper

    J Keeper Super Jesus

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    14,113
    You guys know that a theory is just an explanation of fact, and that it has nothing to do with validity.

    You could theorize that noodles get soft when they're boiled because it melts away the demon semen.

    Theories are only as valid as the science that supports them. And saying something is, "just a theory," kinda makes it known that you don't even understand the levels of scientific knowing to discuss them.
    test
  8. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Amen. But not even a fact is unchanging facts change all the time.
    whenever we discover something new we change something old that was supposed to be a fact.

    truth is the only unchanging point.
    if something is true than its true no matter what.
    test
  9. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Not true. and ill tell u why. and show u where ur mistaken with ur understanding of the existance of God.

    God is ever -existant.
    what is the name he gave moses. I AM
    meaning he IS. everything came out of him so nothing that is made could have created him.

    He always has been and always will be (the alpha and omega)

    He is eternal, he is outside of our universe.
    ur looking at God through the lense of time.
    but time didnt exist prior to the big bang.
    time came into existance with the universe.
    so He isnt bound by our univeral understanding of time.

    And when u have no time u also have no begining,
    As well as no end. those points are only valid within the reality of time.

    time was made for us to be able to gauge progression.
    test
  10. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    And no i havent even begun to touch on design. ur contriving an arguement based on an assumption
    Of what i think.

    Something from nothing is not the same as intelligent design.
    something from nothing was an appeal to ur scientific method
    the idea the something can never come from nothing should be something u agree with.
    test
  11. ChromeDepot

    ChromeDepot Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Messages:
    198
    These are cut and pasted from a creationist website with the relevant pieces missing. The main gist was that Lucy was not "human-like" because they claimed that australopithecines were knuckle-walkers and not directly upright. We have the pelvis and leg of the specimen which show evidence of bipedal locomotion. Whether or not Lucy was bipedal just isn't debated within the scientific community; it's accepted as fact.

    The Oxnard study has been disproved and discounted ad nauseum over the years. It's the type of argument that creationists constantly bring up.

    1. Find one scientist who disagrees with the majority's findings
    2. Cite said study repeatedly as "evidence"
    3. Rinse and repeat
    test
  12. lyricalpriest

    lyricalpriest Rap Games Dawson Creek

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2000
    Messages:
    24,097
    quoted for truth.. God is much more complex then what religious people try to define him as. doin no justice and causing the intellectual community to shy from the hypocrisy found in infallible texts ...the bible tells us to not idolize any god before the ONE true god. and what do we do? give god names, add a few symbols like a cross or a moon and we tell our selfs we are not creating idols. and we are good religious people instead of tryna figure out how the everything works we just wanna dance and praise and wait for unicorns to save us from zombie apocalypse.. scientist have tried to figure out the beautiful creation of god and all religion can do is condemn and ignore any legitimate claims .. b/c it doesn't fit in their formula of what they base their faith on. science community and religious community are at war with eachother b/c the "devil" knows that if we combine our research and understanding, that we'd break the bondage of sinful natures, bc we realize the deep connections we have w/ eachother and everyhing around us
    test
  13. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Heh.
    Try up to half or more of the scientific community
    test
  14. ChromeDepot

    ChromeDepot Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2011
    Messages:
    198
    Three or four scientists =/= half? That's quite a stretch.

    The main proponent of irreducible complexity is Behe, and his views were disregarded by a socially conservative Republican judge in the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial as:

    Do I really need to expound on that any further? A freaking court trial found that Behe's views (the ones that that video was describing) were counter to mainstream scientists.
    test
  15. AliceHouse

    AliceHouse The House Always Wins

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,275
    [​IMG]

    Is there an actual discussion in this thread or are we just going to throw other people's works at each other?
    test
  16. lyricalpriest

    lyricalpriest Rap Games Dawson Creek

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2000
    Messages:
    24,097
    ^ that guy is amazing and very astute
    test
  17. AliceHouse

    AliceHouse The House Always Wins

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,275
    Are you a reddit?
    test
  18. J Keeper

    J Keeper Super Jesus

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    14,113
    Fuck reddit and everyone associated with that bullshit.

    Except spacedicks.
    test
  19. AliceHouse

    AliceHouse The House Always Wins

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,275
    You mean /r/spaceclop, right?
    test
  20. Ass Napkin Ed

    Ass Napkin Ed DC - 19th & Benning Rd

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2013
    Messages:
    1,654
    People are throwing around the word - 'theory' here as if its something untrue
    yet when we are talking about evolution we are speaking of 'Scientific Theory'
    and scientific theory is factual evidence - confirmed over and over by observation and experiments/tests.
    Its a Fact - things are evolving in front of your eyes every second
    in the 1800's there was Pony Express delivering mail that took months
    in the 21st century an Email takes less than 3 seconds

    Communication among Humans has 'Evolved' in the last 250 years among Human Beings - in scientific theory
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)