God vs. Science, REALlITY CHECK (88)
trish123: Creationists argue that evolution is "only a theory and cannot be proven."
As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. A clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts.
A fact is something that is supported by unmistakeable evidence. For example, the Grand Canyon cuts through layers of different kinds of rock, such as the Coconino sandstone, Hermit shale, and Redwall limestone. These rock layers often contain fossils that are found only in certain layers. Those are the facts.
It is a fact is that fossil skulls have been found that are intermediate in appearance between humans and modern apes. It is a fact that fossils have been found that are clearly intermediate in appearance between dinosaurs and birds.
Facts may be interpreted in different ways by different individuals, but that doesn't change the facts themselves.
Theories may be good, bad, or indifferent. They may be well established by the factual evidence, or they may lack credibility. Before a theory is given any credence in the scientific community, it must be subjected to "peer review." This means that the proposed theory must be published in a legitimate scientific journal in order to provide the opportunity for other scientists to evaluate the relevant factual information and publish their conclusions.
Creationists refuse to subject their "theories" to peer reviews, because they know they don't fit the facts. The creationist mindset is distorted by the concept of "good science" (creationism) vs. "bad science" (anything not in agreement with creationism).
Creation "scientists" are biblical fundamentalists who can not accept anything contrary to their sectarian religioius beliefs. fsteiger.com
As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. A clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts.
A fact is something that is supported by unmistakeable evidence. For example, the Grand Canyon cuts through layers of different kinds of rock, such as the Coconino sandstone, Hermit shale, and Redwall limestone. These rock layers often contain fossils that are found only in certain layers. Those are the facts.
It is a fact is that fossil skulls have been found that are intermediate in appearance between humans and modern apes. It is a fact that fossils have been found that are clearly intermediate in appearance between dinosaurs and birds.
Facts may be interpreted in different ways by different individuals, but that doesn't change the facts themselves.
Theories may be good, bad, or indifferent. They may be well established by the factual evidence, or they may lack credibility. Before a theory is given any credence in the scientific community, it must be subjected to "peer review." This means that the proposed theory must be published in a legitimate scientific journal in order to provide the opportunity for other scientists to evaluate the relevant factual information and publish their conclusions.
Creationists refuse to subject their "theories" to peer reviews, because they know they don't fit the facts. The creationist mindset is distorted by the concept of "good science" (creationism) vs. "bad science" (anything not in agreement with creationism).
Creation "scientists" are biblical fundamentalists who can not accept anything contrary to their sectarian religioius beliefs. fsteiger.com
And not once did you call anyone "ignorant"!!
Love ya, Trish!!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Tater: nay they won't, simply because they are as close minded about what they beleive, as we are open minded enough to know the truth... especially when we see the truth each and everyday about what is happening in the world and how it relates to things written in the Bible....Let me tell you this, The cards are falling just as the Bible says they will.... Only someone with their eyes shut cannot see the truth... JMO
Or they were able to master Logic 101?
------ This thread is Archived ------
StressFree: You have any other links or thoughts of your own to preach the truth? That link was bogus...
------ This thread is Archived ------
arranroot: Lets get ready to rumble
------ This thread is Archived ------
cenobite: "After all, nobody was around millions of years ago to watch the stirring of the primordial soup, or to see the first fish crawl out onto land, or to see the first winged creature take to the air in powered flight."
Just the same way scientists are'nt actually present at distant stars to find out what they are made out of,yet know ;the same way they aren't at the centre of the earth,yet know about it's composition;the same way Archimedes was never outside of Italy ,yet knew the size of the world ; the same way archaeologists and historians were'nt in Ancient Rome, yet have a good idea what happened there....
Just the same way scientists are'nt actually present at distant stars to find out what they are made out of,yet know ;the same way they aren't at the centre of the earth,yet know about it's composition;the same way Archimedes was never outside of Italy ,yet knew the size of the world ; the same way archaeologists and historians were'nt in Ancient Rome, yet have a good idea what happened there....
But do we really? Without actually being there, I mean.
For myself, I'm skeptical about anything that occurs outside Badger, SD.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Ambrose2007: But do we really? Without actually being there, I mean.
For myself, I'm skeptical about anything that occurs outside Badger, SD.
For myself, I'm skeptical about anything that occurs outside Badger, SD.
I was born and raised here in IL. but just because you don't think it may be true, doesn't make it not true.....Everyone has their opinions and noone can change, what we beleive to be true, unless we allow it ourselves.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Facts may be interpreted in different ways by different individuals, but that doesn't change the facts themselves.
They only thing is, alot of people who evaluate the facts, use very little common sense, that is why we ended up with the Theory of evolution... which have No facts... JMO
------ This thread is Archived ------
Abram: ""Do those people who call themselves scientists really know what they are talking about?" After all, nobody was around millions of years ago to watch the stirring of the primordial soup, or to see the first fish crawl out onto land, or to see the first winged creature take to the air in powered flight. The story of evolution is a pretty one, but is it supported by the facts?
RNA & DNA
Far from being a logical, scientific, provable explanation of the origin and development of life on earth, Evolution appears to be a belief system held to with as much religious faith as any other creed, with the added difficulty of being contrary to known facts. To believe in evolution, a "scientist" must throw out the scientific method, suspend his common sense, and twist or ignore the facts. That so many continue to do so, and belittle those who dare to challenge their belief, shows the strength of their faith. Far from being open-minded seekers of truth, evolutionists appear to be closed-minded, dogmatic "defenders of the faith". Did life "just happen"? What do you think?"
RNA & DNA
Far from being a logical, scientific, provable explanation of the origin and development of life on earth, Evolution appears to be a belief system held to with as much religious faith as any other creed, with the added difficulty of being contrary to known facts. To believe in evolution, a "scientist" must throw out the scientific method, suspend his common sense, and twist or ignore the facts. That so many continue to do so, and belittle those who dare to challenge their belief, shows the strength of their faith. Far from being open-minded seekers of truth, evolutionists appear to be closed-minded, dogmatic "defenders of the faith". Did life "just happen"? What do you think?"
You know what is really stupid.
You're using THE very science which you say is flawed to prove creationism which you know is flawed
now get back in the test tube and try again
------ This thread is Archived ------
Abram: ""Do those people who call themselves scientists really know what they are talking about?" After all, nobody was around millions of years ago to watch the stirring of the primordial soup, or to see the first fish crawl out onto land, or to see the first winged creature take to the air in powered flight. The story of evolution is a pretty one, but is it supported by the facts?
RNA & DNA
There are two forms, called ribonucleic acid (RNA) and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Viruses contain only one or the other, but cells contain both. While RNA controls protein production, DNA is the main component in chromosomes, which provide the blueprint or pattern of heredity. Every time a cell divides into two, the RNA in the cell body and the DNA in the nucleus must be exactly copied, with one copy going with each cell. DNA is an incredibly complex molecule, resembling a long ladder that has been twisted into a spiral. The sides of the ladder are made up of compounds called phosphates and sugars , while the "rungs" are composed of two of four possible bases in all the possible combinations. The exact make-up and order of "rungs" varies from one kind of living thing to another. Each DNA "ladder" has about 20,000 "rungs", and each chromosome contains many thousands of DNA molecules. RNA has a similar structure, but the sugar is different, and one of the four bases is also different.
Since it is the chromosomal DNA (and in some cases RNA) that provides the blueprint for each cell and individual, if any of the thousands of rungs gets damaged, or if different combinations get substituted in the copy, that cell will be defective. Contrary to popular belief, most changes in the DNA structure (mutations) at best weaken, and at worst kill the cell. Only a very few are neutral, and beneficial changes are virtually non-existent. To produce a healthy, fully-functional individual, each copy of DNA and RNA must be identical to the original, down to the last "rung".
THE POINT
That such complexity could arise from "primordial soup" by random-chance chemical reactions is statistically, bio-chemically, and thermodynamically impossible. 1) There are too many connections in a DNA molecule to ever occur by chance, no matter how long you allow. 2) When biochemists have managed to produce simple amino acids in simulated "soup", it was by carefully controlling the conditions; there was nothing "random" or "chance" about the process, and the leap from simple amino acids to a DNA molecule is astronomical . 3) The second law of thermodynamics says that order moves toward disorder, and complex moves toward simple (not the other way around), unless acted upon by a higher force . Lightning bolts (the supposed driving force behind the chemical reactions) are actually great randomizers. The notion that anything as complex as a DNA molecule could arise by accident is therefore a non-scientific absurdity!
IN CONCLUSION
Far from being a logical, scientific, provable explanation of the origin and development of life on earth, Evolution appears to be a belief system held to with as much religious faith as any other creed, with the added difficulty of being contrary to known facts. To believe in evolution, a "scientist" must throw out the scientific method, suspend his common sense, and twist or ignore the facts. That so many continue to do so, and belittle those who dare to challenge their belief, shows the strength of their faith. Far from being open-minded seekers of truth, evolutionists appear to be closed-minded, dogmatic "defenders of the faith". Did life "just happen"? What do you think?"
It is usual to give Credit to the Author of the Article .RNA & DNA
There are two forms, called ribonucleic acid (RNA) and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Viruses contain only one or the other, but cells contain both. While RNA controls protein production, DNA is the main component in chromosomes, which provide the blueprint or pattern of heredity. Every time a cell divides into two, the RNA in the cell body and the DNA in the nucleus must be exactly copied, with one copy going with each cell. DNA is an incredibly complex molecule, resembling a long ladder that has been twisted into a spiral. The sides of the ladder are made up of compounds called phosphates and sugars , while the "rungs" are composed of two of four possible bases in all the possible combinations. The exact make-up and order of "rungs" varies from one kind of living thing to another. Each DNA "ladder" has about 20,000 "rungs", and each chromosome contains many thousands of DNA molecules. RNA has a similar structure, but the sugar is different, and one of the four bases is also different.
Since it is the chromosomal DNA (and in some cases RNA) that provides the blueprint for each cell and individual, if any of the thousands of rungs gets damaged, or if different combinations get substituted in the copy, that cell will be defective. Contrary to popular belief, most changes in the DNA structure (mutations) at best weaken, and at worst kill the cell. Only a very few are neutral, and beneficial changes are virtually non-existent. To produce a healthy, fully-functional individual, each copy of DNA and RNA must be identical to the original, down to the last "rung".
THE POINT
That such complexity could arise from "primordial soup" by random-chance chemical reactions is statistically, bio-chemically, and thermodynamically impossible. 1) There are too many connections in a DNA molecule to ever occur by chance, no matter how long you allow. 2) When biochemists have managed to produce simple amino acids in simulated "soup", it was by carefully controlling the conditions; there was nothing "random" or "chance" about the process, and the leap from simple amino acids to a DNA molecule is astronomical . 3) The second law of thermodynamics says that order moves toward disorder, and complex moves toward simple (not the other way around), unless acted upon by a higher force . Lightning bolts (the supposed driving force behind the chemical reactions) are actually great randomizers. The notion that anything as complex as a DNA molecule could arise by accident is therefore a non-scientific absurdity!
IN CONCLUSION
Far from being a logical, scientific, provable explanation of the origin and development of life on earth, Evolution appears to be a belief system held to with as much religious faith as any other creed, with the added difficulty of being contrary to known facts. To believe in evolution, a "scientist" must throw out the scientific method, suspend his common sense, and twist or ignore the facts. That so many continue to do so, and belittle those who dare to challenge their belief, shows the strength of their faith. Far from being open-minded seekers of truth, evolutionists appear to be closed-minded, dogmatic "defenders of the faith". Did life "just happen"? What do you think?"
------ This thread is Archived ------
rusty_knight: Isn't there?
I thought they kept coming up with 'the missing link' then wondering what was missing between that and the one before!
Why is there need for a Missing Link,with a Common Ancestor?I thought they kept coming up with 'the missing link' then wondering what was missing between that and the one before!
------ This thread is Archived ------
crotalus_p: Sorry but there is currently no missing link
Crotalus is the missing link........... at last we may rest in peace!
------ This thread is Archived ------
shipoker58: Evolution is theory!!
Well, there are quite a number of different definitions of "theory" - everything from being more or less synonymous with "conjecture" to "a scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena," so it's probably not the best word for drawing a distinction between different evaluative methodologies.
The difference between creationism and scientific theories such as evolution lies mainly in their methodolgoy - that is, how they evaluate evidence. Creationism's "theory" is of the conjectural type, and rests almost solely on a priori type deductions/inductions, with little or no testing or consideration of counter-evidence; evolution theory rests heavily on empirical data. and employs various forms of testing of extrapolations from that data. The nature of a scientific methodology allows for tests that will refute or counter its central claims. A conjectural-type theory is generally not developed to the point where it even permits this kind of testing. When a theory allows for its own falsification, that is what people mean when they say it's "falsifiable" (I'm thinking that a lot of people here - particularly those of religious persuasion - aren't familiar with that concept). I'm sure that once grasped it is readily apparent why such falsifiability is important: a belief should be testable ideally in order for us to verify its truth. A theory which does not employ scientific methodologies is not enjoy equal standing with one that doesn't. There really isn't any way around that truth.
When one employs a priori reasoning as evidence for a belief, it is critical that such reasoning be logically correct. There are some basic errors in the OP's quoted piece that are well-known to devotees of such logic. If anyone's interested, I would be happy to point them out in some detail.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I am continually confused with the issue - until I peel a bannana and realize I really like it ! 
------ This thread is Archived ------
Conrad73: Why is there need for a Missing Link,with a Common Ancestor?
Conrad - is that really your pic or are you really a silver-back, alpha male, vegetarian peace-loving guerilla?
Should I call David Attenborough on my 'hot line' so that he can sit at your feet?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Tater: I was born and raised here in IL. but just because you don't think it may be true, doesn't make it not true.....
thats double speak comng from your subconscious Tater... Have a good look. It actually says (removing the double negatives because as you know double negatives cancel each other out)
"Just because you dont think" ...... makes it true" --- support for your god based on "not thinking"
seriously, "thinking" is very much the issue and your subconscious is aware of it. Its trying to wake you up, if you'll just think as it is instructing you to do.
In response to:
Everyone has their opinions and noone can change, what we beleive to be true, unless we allow it ourselves.
Everyone has their opinions and noone can change, what we beleive to be true, unless we allow it ourselves.
Everyone has their 'knowledge', in this case, some are clearly lacking in knowledge when they form an opinion.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I thought Creationism was merely a religously inspired act of political rebellion to get round the system so that kids in schools in the USA could ask questions like:
'Where are we from? Is there any purpose to Life? Why? Is there such a thing as a just war?' etc...
The answers to any of these questions is, of course:
'I have no idea, and if I did I couldn't tell you as I'd lose my job because we live in a Satanic, godless country'
Sometimes the truth hurts.................
'Where are we from? Is there any purpose to Life? Why? Is there such a thing as a just war?' etc...
The answers to any of these questions is, of course:
'I have no idea, and if I did I couldn't tell you as I'd lose my job because we live in a Satanic, godless country'
Sometimes the truth hurts.................
------ This thread is Archived ------
crotalus_p: No evolution is a scientific theory , there is a big difference ship
E=mc2 .. that's energy = mass, times the speed of light squared.
Translation:
Evolution = mind crazy X 2, that's empty = head, times the speed the your on squared!
------ This thread is Archived ------
I have a few very simple questions for those who believe in god.
It's very simple you only have to answer YES or NO.
Is god all powerful in other words there is nothing he can't do?
Did god create the earth and moon and the sun and stars in other words the universe?
If god created these things, he had to create them out of nothing because nothing existed before he created all this right?
If you answered YES to these 3 questions I have 2 more questions that need answers. YES or NO wont do this time, you will have to explain without using the word "faith"
1, If god is all powerful, if he created the universe out of nothing, why did he need a lump of clay to create Adam?
2, If god created Adam out of a lump of clay, why couldn't he create Eve out of another lump of clay?
It's very simple you only have to answer YES or NO.
Is god all powerful in other words there is nothing he can't do?
Did god create the earth and moon and the sun and stars in other words the universe?
If god created these things, he had to create them out of nothing because nothing existed before he created all this right?
If you answered YES to these 3 questions I have 2 more questions that need answers. YES or NO wont do this time, you will have to explain without using the word "faith"
1, If god is all powerful, if he created the universe out of nothing, why did he need a lump of clay to create Adam?
2, If god created Adam out of a lump of clay, why couldn't he create Eve out of another lump of clay?
------ This thread is Archived ------
autumbreeze: E=mc2 .. that's energy = mass, times the speed of light squared.
Translation:
Evolution = mind crazy X 2, that's empty = head, times the speed the your on squared!
Translation:
Evolution = mind crazy X 2, that's empty = head, times the speed the your on squared!
you dont not wanna stop not thinking no more... \oh ...not no squared too
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Salami, Salami, Baloney
How far is too far?
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
Icebergs Still Around
Nature
rarotonga
everything is changing
Common Issues with the BMW X1
1830's Music
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
As used in science, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.
Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. A clear distinction needs to be made between facts (things which can be observed and/or measured) and theories (explanations which correlate and interpret the facts.
A fact is something that is supported by unmistakeable evidence. For example, the Grand Canyon cuts through layers of different kinds of rock, such as the Coconino sandstone, Hermit shale, and Redwall limestone. These rock layers often contain fossils that are found only in certain layers. Those are the facts.
It is a fact is that fossil skulls have been found that are intermediate in appearance between humans and modern apes. It is a fact that fossils have been found that are clearly intermediate in appearance between dinosaurs and birds.
Facts may be interpreted in different ways by different individuals, but that doesn't change the facts themselves.
Theories may be good, bad, or indifferent. They may be well established by the factual evidence, or they may lack credibility. Before a theory is given any credence in the scientific community, it must be subjected to "peer review." This means that the proposed theory must be published in a legitimate scientific journal in order to provide the opportunity for other scientists to evaluate the relevant factual information and publish their conclusions.
Creationists refuse to subject their "theories" to peer reviews, because they know they don't fit the facts. The creationist mindset is distorted by the concept of "good science" (creationism) vs. "bad science" (anything not in agreement with creationism).
Creation "scientists" are biblical fundamentalists who can not accept anything contrary to their sectarian religioius beliefs.
fsteiger.com