Dean stands up to Anti-Christian bigots
"WaIIy" wrote ... Please supply some information that evolution is not a "theory". Evolution is both a fact and a scientific theory. It is a fact that evolution occurs. The theory of evolution explains the mechanisms involved which are still under some debate. For much more and better information I recommend http://www.talkorigins.org/ -rick- |
Dean stands up to Anti-Christian bigots
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 05:23:12 GMT, WaIIy
wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 04:50:34 GMT, "abracadabra" wrote: To avoid offending ignorant people Gore pretended he didn't know if he believed in evolution. Please supply some information that evolution is not a "theory". thanks Because it happens all the time and we can watch it occur whenever we want, it's a fact not a theory. Extrapolating what's happening right now back in time to before we were around to observe it is the theory part. But in order for the theory not to be valid back then you have to assuming that the rules which govern nature and physics changed at some point to invalidate evolution. I guess if such a change in the rules occured, it could have been by divine order, right? Steve |
Dean stands up to Anti-Christian bigots
"Steven Shelikoff" wrote ... WaIIy wrote: It's a theory, Steve. That's why it's called the Theory of Evolution. See, that wasn't hard, was it? You can call it whatever you want. Evolution is a fact, not a theory, proven all the time. The "theory of evolution" to which you're specifically referring is a tiny subset of the science of evolution. It involves the origins of man and whether we evolved from other species into homo sapiens vs. whether we were created by a higher power as a species exactly as we are today, i.e., the "theory of creation." Steve The following is from the talk.origins FAQ.... http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html I hope it helps clarify terminology at least. -rick- -- Evolution is a Fact and a Theory by Laurence Moran Copyright © 1993-2002 [Last Update: January 22, 1993] When non-biologists talk about biological evolution they often confuse two different aspects of the definition. On the one hand there is the question of whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older ancestral organisms or whether modern species are continuing to change over time. On the other hand there are questions about the mechanism of the observed changes... how did evolution occur? Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they are less certain of the exact mechanism of evolution; there are several theories of the mechanism of evolution. Stephen J. Gould has put this as well as anyone else: In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was." Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered. Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution. - Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981 Gould is stating the prevailing view of the scientific community. In other words, the experts on evolution consider it to be a fact. This is not an idea that originated with Gould as the following quotations indicate: Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution. Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms. - Theodosius Dobzhansky "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution", American Biology Teacher vol. 35 (March 1973) reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism, J. Peter Zetterberg ed., ORYX Press, Phoenix AZ 1983 |
Dean stands up to Anti-Christian bigots
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 04:41:49 GMT, WaIIy
wrote: On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 17:50:40 GMT, (Steven Shelikoff) wrote: You can call it whatever you want. Evolution is a fact, not a theory, Odd, I haven't seen the phrase "Fact of Evolution" except from your posts. That's because you haven't looked hard enough. Catch phrases don't tell the whole story. Take a look at the link posted in the previous message from -rick-. Steve |
Dean stands up to Anti-Christian bigots
"WaIIy" wrote in message
... On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 17:50:40 GMT, (Steven Shelikoff) wrote: You can call it whatever you want. Evolution is a fact, not a theory, Odd, I haven't seen the phrase "Fact of Evolution" except from your posts. From last week's news: A group of scientists has found that entire groups of humans are "hot burners" - people who process energy at a higher rate than other people. The pattern seems to follow groups which migrated from our origins in hot climates, to colder places like Siberia (initially). It's unlikely they left for Siberia because they felt too hot in Africa. ("Cripes it's hot....we gotta move"). Rather, it seems they migrated and then adjusted. These scientists are now trying to determine the molecular mechanism for this example of evolution because it could shed light on diseases like diabetes. I suppose you think god watched these people migrate and did them a favor by adjusting their physical makeups, right? |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:29 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com