Warcraft II Forum

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: ~ToRa~ on May 01, 2017, 01:26:13 PM

Title: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 01, 2017, 01:26:13 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ4GH1O23ko (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ4GH1O23ko)
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Igognito on May 02, 2017, 01:34:28 PM
Well one of the speakers gave him the answer.

The change of "Kind" as the reporter wants it only happens gradually over huge time spans.
As a result we can only observe parts of the chain of evolution.

So a fish that became a mammal first did a huge amounts of changes to other fish until it slowly appeared as a mammal.

And that we can not directly observe it, as we are talking about great numbers of different species.
We can though observe and prove evolution at a smaller scale. And by Occam's razor the simplest theory that fits the model and proves the hypothesis is the most probable.

Thus statistically speaking, Evolution has a higher probability of being right than any other hypothesis or religion because more data fit on that hypothesis than on any other (for now).

Also scientists do not believe in Darwin's evolution theory. They have proved it in the small scale and they statistically argue that is the most probable theory for explaining the biodiversity of the planet.

Cheers
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 02, 2017, 02:29:34 PM
Its still an unprovable theory that requires some level of "faith."

Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: mousEtopher on May 02, 2017, 07:52:00 PM
Every theory is unprovable because science never deals in absolutes, all scientific conclusions are theories based on observable evidence, correlations & probability, which are always subject to review & revision in the case of new information. A "belief" in any scientific theory indicates a high degree of confidence in the likelihood that it is true on the basis of collected evidence, even if it cannot be known with 100% certainty. "Faith" can be differentiated as belief in the absence of any evidence either for or against. This guy's point is semantical only & ignores or is unaware of basic tenets of science & the scientific method.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 03, 2017, 02:20:35 AM
The scientific method clearly signals out "observations" in its steps.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Now I ask you please give me an example of observable evidence of darwinian evolution.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Igognito on May 03, 2017, 11:09:04 AM
The scientific method clearly signals out "observations" in its steps.
[url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method[/url] ([url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method[/url])

Now I ask you please give me an example of observable evidence of darwinian evolution.


Lol, even in the video they speakers gave plenty of observed examples for the Evolution Theory. You can choose to ignore the examples to the premises that no fish grew legs in one generation mutation.
But it is an observable fact that species evolve.

I think the easiest way to help you understand the mistake of the reporter is the human tail!

Do you know that we used to have a full tail? Have a look here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiality))
All those characteristics are evidence of evolution.
That we can not find the full chain from a fish to human it does not refute it.
And based with the evidence we currently have it is still the most probable theory!

And of course there is a probability that it is wrong. But faith has nothing to do with it.
If someone suggests a more probable theory and gives the appropriate observations, then the scientific world will adopt it.

It is exactly the same with the big bang theory.
We have observations that indicate the big bang theory.
And under those premises the most probable theory is the big bang theory.
Another theory could be this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBd3FMBsY7Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBd3FMBsY7Q)
But which is more probable?

Some questions, science answers them with a confidence! Over time by collecting more observations and performing more experiments we can increase or decrease that confidence.
But in practice we can never reach a 100% confidence.

Faith comes with a 0% confidence and 100% belief
When for something we have no evidence, we say we believe it is like that!
Having 0 evidence does not necessarily makes the belief wrong.
For example: We have no evidence that Heaven or Hell exist. Some people believe at the existence of heaven and hell, while others do not.
Statistically, speaking we have no indication of who is right. In terms of quantum physics it is a 50%-50% chance that the heaven & hell at the same time exist and do not exist.

Is now we could scientifically observe that a place exists (other than earth) that directly is affected by the death of humans then we would have an observation for the existence of heaven or hell. That would mean that the confidence of the hypothesis would increase by a chance!

lol, I enjoy this type of discussions!

Cheers
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: RipE[Eur0] on May 03, 2017, 07:06:27 PM
faith and believe, r the wrong words when talkin about evolution. those r the opposite/religious peoples words. forget those words when talkin about any science. when u say those words always the "enemies" catch it and use it. it is just the same as "nazi-card"
just to make ppl quiet. nazi! racist! u believe! u have faith!

Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: woofy on May 09, 2017, 05:07:07 AM
oh dear.

why didn't they just respond with "google it?"

https://www.quora.com/Can-you-give-an-observable-evidence-in-regards-to-Darwinian-Evolution-not-adaptation-not-speciation-but-a-change-of-kinds (https://www.quora.com/Can-you-give-an-observable-evidence-in-regards-to-Darwinian-Evolution-not-adaptation-not-speciation-but-a-change-of-kinds)
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 09, 2017, 10:16:38 AM
oh dear.

why didn't they just respond with "google it?"

https://www.quora.com/Can-you-give-an-observable-evidence-in-regards-to-Darwinian-Evolution-not-adaptation-not-speciation-but-a-change-of-kinds (https://www.quora.com/Can-you-give-an-observable-evidence-in-regards-to-Darwinian-Evolution-not-adaptation-not-speciation-but-a-change-of-kinds)

Its not observable because it the theory says it happened over 65 million years ago.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Sentinel1 on May 10, 2017, 02:57:16 PM
Probably not going to get involved in this as its the type of thing I wasted my time with ten years ago, but just wanted to pop in and say Tora you have zero understanding of evolution and you're dumb as shit.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 10, 2017, 07:40:48 PM
^^Lol say you love me Azazal
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: tora is a simp bitch for billionaires on May 15, 2017, 12:49:17 PM
why does the video have an isis flag watermark in the left corner
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: tora is a simp bitch for billionaires on May 15, 2017, 12:52:04 PM
oh dear.

why didn't they just respond with "google it?"

https://www.quora.com/Can-you-give-an-observable-evidence-in-regards-to-Darwinian-Evolution-not-adaptation-not-speciation-but-a-change-of-kinds (https://www.quora.com/Can-you-give-an-observable-evidence-in-regards-to-Darwinian-Evolution-not-adaptation-not-speciation-but-a-change-of-kinds)

Its not observable because it the theory says it happened over 65 million years ago.


does vestigiality exist? is your tailbone a byproduct of evolution or not?
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 20, 2017, 10:15:47 PM
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 20, 2017, 10:18:36 PM
does vestigiality exist? is your tailbone a byproduct of evolution or not?

So what, your saying human evolved from fish?
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 21, 2017, 02:09:50 AM

Damn. I was hoping someone would explain why I have nipples  ;D


.... nvm .... Look, as far as DTOE goes:  usually with science we like to be able to perform an experiment to test a hypothesis. It's very easy to design an experiment to test DTOE - Just take a 100% sterile environment with enough space and some water and stuff in it and the right amount of radiation (i.e. another earth-type planet but with no life), then you just throw in one microbe and wait for a while - probably 100,000 years would be long enough to start seeing solid results, but 10 or 20 million years would be better ...... and its also going to take us about the same amount of time to carry the microbe to the new planet.

On the other hand, if you want results a bit sooner than that, then the best you can do is to clearly define your theory then look for pre-existing results that support it - which in this case is virtually every scientific observation made in every related field (genetics, biology, anthropology etc.) by every scientist in the world.

If you don't believe in science, then please turn off your computer now as it is clearly powered by voodoo and that shit is nasty  ;D

The TOE is just one of those obvious things like gravity. The difference is we don't understand gravity, we can just observe the effect it has without understanding how it works. BUT we DO have the entire mechanism for evolution understood - DNA sequencing is now commonplace and multiple complete genomes are mapped allowing us to observe the changes - its a no-brainer.

The only reason people have trouble with it, is because they see it as conflicting with their faith. TO ME THIS SEEMS TO BE SIMPLY A LACK OF FAITH. If there is an intelligent creator then this is obviously the method he/she used to create us - the evidence is EVERYWHERE.

    Surely your faith in GOD should be strong enough to survive the scientific method?
 
Why would anyone believe that the TOE should be incompatible with faith?

Because a MAN told you it is?

Don't believe the man, ask GOD.

( GOD is not a fool  ^-^ )
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 21, 2017, 09:57:18 AM
If you don't believe in science, then please turn off your computer now as it is clearly powered by voodoo and that shit is nasty 

lol what does a computer have to do with Darwinian Evolution.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 21, 2017, 01:17:54 PM
If you don't believe in science, then please turn off your computer now as it is clearly powered by voodoo and that shit is nasty 

lol what does a computer have to do with Darwinian Evolution.

Oh. I thought that was obvious:

They are both products of the scientific method, but are at opposite ends of the time scale:

 - Things that happen with electronics happen on a scale of micro or nano-seconds, they happen so fast that computers can do more calculations than humans can really even comprehend properly, but we can see the results instantly, so there is no denying that they work.

 - Things that happen with evolution happen on a scale of years (lots of them) so it's less accessable for people to visualise. BUT ... to the universe a thousand years is just the blink of an eye so there can still be countless millions of changes to DNA sequences, which brings about evolution.

Denial produces nothing and achieves nothing (unless you count extremist terrorism as an achievment), but modern technology is proof that the scientific method of thinking actually WORKS. It creates things. Your car. Your computer. Your dogs microchip.

People will accept all of these things but then go into denial about something that is a result of exactly the same methodology as soon as some TV evangelist or what-not tells them that GOD says otherwise.

Sorry, but the guy on the TV is a dick, and my GOD is not a freakin idiot.

 :critter: Maybe your GOD is kinda simple, but my GOD is way smart enough to have created evolution.

Evolution DOES NOT disprove GOD, it only proves that some MEN who thought they knew everything about GOD were wrong.

Go look up "pride" in your favorite scripture, my GOD will get a good lol out of it. ;)

Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 21, 2017, 03:20:16 PM
^^lol

Ultimately you can't prove something this is only testable over millions of years.
Theory doesn't = proof.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 21, 2017, 06:41:18 PM
^^lol

Ultimately you can't prove something this is only testable over millions of years.
Theory doesn't = proof.


Not without the capacity to think, anyway.

Spare me the trite quotes from the deniers handbook. If you're not interested in having a discussion, don't ask questions on a discussion board.

As science already has about 1000000 runs on the board, I think the burden of proof definately rests with the "Adam and Eve" camp. Prove that ;D ROTF
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 21, 2017, 07:16:22 PM
You keep bringing up religion lol. Where did I post anything about religion?
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 21, 2017, 07:19:54 PM
All I'm saying is evolution is not provable thus it is a theory and thus is a belief. You can throw all the scientific research u want at it but at the end of the day you can't prove humans evolved from a monkey or whatever.
There is no observable evidence of any species turning from one kind into another. Like a cat turning into a dog etc.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: tora is a simp bitch for billionaires on May 21, 2017, 08:23:03 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/bbHMkfd.png)
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 22, 2017, 03:33:34 AM
You keep bringing up religion lol. Where did I post anything about religion?

I didn't suggest that you brought it up. I am also happy to admit that I simply assumed that religion was behind your opinions.

I am happy to admit this because I am not afraid of the truth - denial is for the weak-minded.

I assumed (and still do assume) that is the case, for the rather simple reason that I have never in my life heard of anyone suffering from that particular brand of denial who wasn't doing it based on a combination of religion, peer group pressure and ignorance. The rest of the world doesn't bother denying such obvious stuff.

.... you can't prove humans evolved from a monkey or whatever. .... There is no observable evidence of any species turning from one kind into another. Like a cat turning into a dog etc.

This is the ignorance bit. Please try to understand something before you parrot someone else's opinions about it.

Humans did not evolve from monkeys.
Cats do not turn into dogs.


(https://i.imgur.com/bbHMkfd.png)

Evolution has been proved, because the mechanism has been proved. It does not take millions of years to prove that:

   a) DNA replication occasionally suffers from random flaws.
   b) Changes in DNA will affect the physiology of the organism that it produces.
   c) Organisms who's physiology is better suited to their environment will be more successfull at replicating their DNA

That's really all you need to prove, everything else is just a logical extension of those FACTS. Just as I dont have to actually throw myself into the sun to prove I will be burnt, just knowing it's hot, and that hot things will burn me is sufficiant.

Do you believe that the sun exists? How do you know it's not a big light bulb hanging from the sky? If its really a huge ball of burning plasma then you can never get near it without being vaporised... does this mean we can't prove it? Are you sure Australia exists? Have you ever been there? Why dont you deny the existance of the sun? ..... Answer: because the MAN you listen to didn't tell you that you had to deny that. So very sad  :-\  My friend I have more proof that evolution is real, than I have proof that YOU are real.

Last attempt at intelligent discussion:
Tell me how is it that in a few thousand years we have bred both rotweillers and toy poodles from wolves?... or don't you believe in dog breeding either? Sure humans have sped up the process a bit by selecting breeding partners, but exactly how did the DNA of a wolf turn into the DNA of a toy poodle? GOD was bored that day? or did Noah have a pair of toy poodles that he fed on peanut-butter? Why does the flu virus constantly mutate. How did the bird-flu epidemic happen?

Do you know what DNA is? Do you believe it exists? If not for evolution why and how does it exist? If you don't believe in it, do you still cheer when they execute a mass-murderer who was convicted based on DNA evidence? Why do I have nipples? Why do you believe the word of GOD comes out of the mouths of ignorant men when it is so clearly all around us, and beautiful to behold?

  ... now go look that stuff up in "the denial handbook" and post what it says. ;) Peace out homie.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 22, 2017, 04:30:32 AM
Tell me how is it that in a few thousand years we have bred both rotweillers and toy poodles from wolves

You can breed different species of dogs. However you cannot breed an entirely new species. Saying that "we bred one dog into a new dog," isn't proof. You can't prove something that isn't observable. You cannot breed one species into an entirely new species.

I must say evolutionists defend their beliefs with the same zeal as christians do their beliefs lol.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Igognito on May 22, 2017, 05:08:54 PM
So @~ToRa~, you clearly think that Evolution is not what made us Humans.

What you suggest then? There are plenty of theories:

Adam & Eva theory by Judaism, Christianity & Muslims
A theory which I do not know from Hinduism
Alien theory by Conspiracy theorists and Battlestar Galactica
and many more...

Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: shesycompany on May 22, 2017, 08:30:59 PM
well laws is defiantly weird can it come from a non conscious?
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 22, 2017, 10:53:51 PM
Tell me how is it that in a few thousand years we have bred both rotweillers and toy poodles from wolves

You can breed different species of dogs. However you cannot breed an entirely new species. Saying that "we bred one dog into a new dog," isn't proof. You can't prove something that isn't observable. You cannot breed one species into an entirely new species.

The definition of a 'species' is a subjective human construct. It is childish to assume that two things are the same because we use the same english word to describe them. Is a rat the same as a mouse? How about a rabbit? or a squirrel?

As we have established that DNA changes and therefore the organisms that is constructs changes, you can't just declare some change to be "out of bounds" because of some imaginary line the divides one creature from another.

Its an aweful coincidence that so many creatures have 2 eyes, one mouth, and a nose in the middle don't you think? How amazing that the poodle, the rotweiller and myself all share this same configuration.... and come to think of it we all have 2 ears and a brain in a skull, and a spine and 4 limbs that are similarly jointed .... and nipples! Wow. What are the odds?

... and BTW If GOD created us in his image why would he make a monkey - which would surely just be a mockery of his own image?

I must say evolutionists defend their beliefs with the same zeal as christians do their beliefs lol.

Yes, my friend. I believe that you are one of the more valuable, and indeed intelligent members of our community.

If your friends convinced you that you could fly, I would do my best to talk you out of stepping off a cliff. However if I failed, the reality of the fall would require no defence and would also further demonstrate that which Mr.Darwin so eloquently described for us.

      You could refuse to believe it the whole way down, but Darwin would still be right in the end. ;)
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 22, 2017, 11:16:47 PM
@ingognito I say let people believe what they want to believe. Some people believe in religion, some believe in evolution and science, some believe in random things etc.

Who are you, or me, or anyone for that matter to tell someone else what to believe in based upon their own beliefs.

Problem I have with hard core evolutionists is that they are very rigid in their belief that evolution is "fact" and thus not a belief. You point out to them that evolution can't really be proven and it is still only theory they go nuts. As evidenced here on this thread.

Side note:
I don't really disbelieve in evolution. Could humans and all organisms have evolved from one another over millions of years, in short yes. However I do recognize said theory of evolution is just that. A theory and thus a belief. I have friends who are 100% believers in all things science and I have friends who follow their religious books and the adam & eve belief. (I even know people who believe in Annunaki lizards lol.)

You should re read my posts never said anything about religion in any of them lol.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 23, 2017, 04:12:48 AM
You cannot breed one species into an entirely new species.
Could humans and all organisms have evolved from one another over millions of years, in short yes.

These two contradictory statements show that you don't even understand it... and no, using the word "breed" does not change anything. External selection only speeds up the process.

Religious extremism is a curse on this planet. If I started a thread saying that all women should keep their heads covered, not be allowed to drive or vote or be educated, and that if any schools taught girls we should send suicide bombers into them, then continued to refute any opinion to the contrary - but then said, "Oh but I didn't mention religion", I don't think anyone would be fooled.

In the same way I have never met or even heard of anyone who trys to cast doubt on evolution who isn't a religious extremist. Yes, that is an extremist belief, not a mainstream one, albeit the thin end of the wedge. You are probably more comfortable with the term "fundamentalist" .... tomato-tomato.
 
To be honest I'd respect you more if you stood up for your beliefs, instead of this pseudo fence-sitting, it's a bit weak really.... that's just my opinion - but hey, this is "General Discussion" after all.  ;)
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 23, 2017, 09:31:39 AM
^^Example of an intolerant evolutionist.

@Lambchops I'm willing to bet you've never traveled outside of the  Australia/American/Euro zone. The more you travel the more beliefs you will come across.   
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Igognito on May 23, 2017, 10:20:31 AM
Lol,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/# (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/05/22/europe-birthplace-mankind-not-africa-scientists-find/#)

You are all from Greece :-P

By the way @~ToRa~, I tried to explain it before but A theory is not something you believe in. People that support the Evolution Theory do not believe in the evolution theory (this is purely an issue of semantics)

A scientific theory is a Theory or better a Hypothesis which scientists try to prove.
Some Theories we will never prove them even if the are correct (That is proven by the Incompleteness Theorem of Godel)

Just for the semantics, take a note to the following:
Theorem is proven.
Theory is indicated by the evidence but not hard mathematically proven.

Gravity is a Theory!!!! not a Theorem. In general most aspects of physics are Laws or theories not Theorems. Theorems are in Math.

What means that Gravity is a Theory? It means that we can not 100% prove that the model we have is correct!
Newton presented a model that fits the experimental data and we are still using that! Well scientists have extended it over time but that is a detail.

To simply put it for you: To say you believe in the Theory of the Evolution is wrong by the semantics.
The Theory of Evolution by Darwin (with all modifications that have been added by later scientists) is currently the best model we have for explaining the bio diversity of the planet and the appearance of Humans.
All experimental evidence point to that and by the scientific methodology the Theory of Evolution is widely accepted.

This means nothing about the existence of god or not. Of course, it does mean that God did not took clay to form us as we are now!
If we presume that god (by the Adam & Eva PoV) created us to his own image, we have evolved further than that. Our creation was much more hairy with tails and fangs and big nasty teeth.
And even before that we have indication that we where lizards that come from the sea! (This are indications, as we miss links) But up to a few million years we can trace our origin and see that we where like Chimpanzees.

So the point I'm trying to make to you. Is that it is not an issue of Belief. The theory comes with experimental evidence to back it down. The scientific world accepts the evidence and has establish it as is Newtons Theory for Gravity established.

Maybe one day a better theory will appear that will cover better the data. Then the Evolution theory will be obsolete.

For now, just look at it as a mechanism of nature like gravity. Because that is exactly what Darwin was talking about. All species on the planet Evolve based on a model! Darwin gave the best model to describe that mechanism!

Regarding your personal belief, most probably it does not even contradict the Evolution Theory. Even the wildest religious theories do not contradict the Evolution theory.
You just must realize that there is a parallel mechanism in play and humans from generation to generation mutate!

Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 24, 2017, 12:18:42 AM
^^Example of an intolerant evolutionist.
Please don't start name-calling. I am neither intolerant nor an "evolutionist".

However implausable I find your beliefs, my response as demonstrated by this thread is to provide information and logical argument, with a minimum of opinion.

You stared a thread about evolution, clearly with the direct intention of arguing against it. You did not start a thread about your own beliefs and attempt to explain why they are true. Your entire premise was one of negativity towards thinking that contradicts your beliefs.

If I created a thread called "Creationism" then posted "Now I ask you please give me an example of observable evidence of creationism", then continued to refute and LOL at any replies - that might be considered antisocial, perhaps even intolerant, but in this instance you have invited comment and I would invite you to read actually consider what I have written before you decide to start name-calling, and then even if you still think it's a good idea, to refrain from it.

Furthermore I would like to point out that "evolutionist" is a propoganda term invented by religious extremists in an attempt to project the image that views contradictory to their doctrine belong to a small sub-set of the community, when in fact the reverse is true. i.e. Christians are a minority sub-set of humans, and fundementalist Christians are a minority sub-set of Christians.

If you want to quote extremist propoganda in general discussion that is your choice, but please don't direct it personally towards me.

@Lambchops I'm willing to bet you've never traveled outside of the  Australia/American/Euro zone.

(a) incorrect
(b) irellivant

The more you travel the more beliefs you will come across.

People in every country on earth understand science and logic .... it's the norm. That is why science works, because it is all about truth. Anybody from any culture can propose anything as long as they have the evidence to back it up, and anybody can provide logical argument and evidence to either support or refute it. It is understood and participated in all over the world. What world do you live in?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HERE IS THE CRUX OF THIS ARGUMENT: THERE IS NO ARGUMENT

Take, for example, string theory. There are a lot of people who think it is correct, however it is not proven AND there are also a lot of other valid theories out there (see HERE (https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9803024) for example).

There are no genuine alternative theories to evolution and nobody even presenting alternatives. People have been conducting research based on it for many years, and nobody has said, "uh... I think this research is based on a flawed premise". There is only people who just don't WANT to believe it.

The massive evidence for evolution has been presented, discussed and accepted by the community. That's a done deal, and plain common-sense I might add. If you don't like someone else's explaination you have to come up with evidence to refute it, and preferably also a counter-proposal. You have neither of these things because they don't exist.

Name-calling won't help your case. You have no case.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 24, 2017, 02:29:46 AM
@Lambchops you write very angry lol. Do your veins pop out your head while you type?

@ingognito
To simply put it for you: To say you believe in the Theory of the Evolution is wrong by the semantics.
The Theory of Evolution by Darwin (with all modifications that have been added by later scientists) is currently the best model we have for explaining the bio diversity of the planet and the appearance of Humans.
All experimental evidence point to that and by the scientific methodology the Theory of Evolution is widely accepted.

When you say widely accepted whom are you referring to?

Gravity is a completely different topic then the one we are discussing here. Your right, gravity it is a theory like evolution.
Scientist's use it as a way to explain an apple falling from a tree, the rotation of the planets, the distances between galaxies, formation of black holes, etc. It's a very broad theory when you read deep into it.

Fossil records do not prove humans evolving from chimpanzees. Most fossil records that are found are "bone fragments." Scientists can make guesses and theorize on how early humans looked based on bone fragments. However it is still all theory.

Regarding my personal beliefs I already said I don't disbelieve in evolution. However I recognize that it is just a scientific belief which is subject to change by scientists.
The point is not to attack you and say that evolution is a false hood and you need to start following a religion.
The point is to show that evolution and many other scientific theories are "beliefs." They are subject to change based upon new evidence and observations. Much of it hasn't been proven and can't be proven.       
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 24, 2017, 02:46:18 AM
Lambchops you write very angry lol. Do your veins pop out your head
while you type?

lol? Logical argument = anger?? You wish. It was you who resorted to name-calling because you had no valid reply. Weak. Very disappointing.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 24, 2017, 03:11:04 AM
^^In truth haven't really read most of your works. Too much bold and italics.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Igognito on May 24, 2017, 09:01:23 AM
As I'm not an expert on the field of Evolution and neither do I care to become one I will only point out that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution has more than 300 references!

Gravity has only 45 references....

I think that is enough to state that the Evolution Theory is widely accepted from the scientific society.

Tora, if you haven't figured out yet my point is that you can not use the Term Believe for a Theory! People that support a Theory do not believe in it. (they might believe at its correctness)

Whether Evolution is correct or not is a different question which I can not answer. I can tell you that the scientific evidence indicate that the Evolution Theory is the most probable explanation for the biodiversity of the planet.

Whether we come from a family of apes or not, that is a very specific question that scientists still try to find the missing links.
Fossils are good evidence by the way. Having bones as fossils gives a lot of information.

A personal linguistic advice:

Regarding my personal beliefs I already said I don't disbelieve in evolution. However I recognize that it is just a scientific belief which is subject to change by scientists.

If you rephrase the above as:
Regarding my personal opinion I already said I don't reject evolution. However I recognize that it is just a scientific theory which is subject to change by scientists.

then your statement would be semantically correct.

The point is not to attack you and say that evolution is a false hood and you need to start following a religion.
No one ever said you said something like that. Also no one actually is trying to make you accept the Evolution Theory.
I'm just trying to point out that there is an error in the semantics of your argument.

The point is to show that evolution and many other scientific theories are "beliefs." They are subject to change based upon new evidence and observations. Much of it hasn't been proven and can't be proven.       

Yes it is clear, that your opinion is that Evolution is a belief. But what I'm arguing is that it is a Theory and not a belief. Theories by definition lack completeness and are revised as new data are processed. That does not change the fact that it is a Theory. People do not believe in Theories, Might though believe in the correctness of a theory in the lack of evidence.

To back down your point of view in a scientific way:

We have collected enough information for Evolution Theory in general to be considered correct. But we lack evolution links for the origins of specific species, such as Humans, as it is hard to observe the changes over a span of millions of years.

in other words: Evolution Theory is experimentally confirmed. For specific species, we lack information for their full evolution chain.

Thus to put it in your words: Yes, Evolution Theory in general is proven but people still need to have a belief that Humans originated from Apes and before that Lizards and before that fishes as we still miss links for that.

The semantics of your words play a big role in this topic. You can not refute Evolution Theory as there is scientific evidence. You can though claim that we are not certain about the origins of Human as we lack some links there. (Still the existing evidence put the Ape etc. as the most probable ancestors)

Cheerios!
ohh and guys this is a calm fun conversation nothing to get passionate about it.
A good opportunity to try your skills in arguing! In practice we are using the dialectic approach to a topic! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic)
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Certified MENSA Genius Brain (smart) on May 24, 2017, 10:16:09 AM
^^In truth haven't really read most of your works. Too much bold and italics.
lol what a troll

I havent posted in this thread because i figured it's not worth the time arguing about it, but after seeing that post that goes double haha.

denying evolution is like saying the earth is flat.  you can say it if you want, idc.  it just makes you look like a crank
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 27, 2017, 04:42:44 AM
^^In truth haven't really read most of your works. Too much bold and italics.


Ahh that explains a lot... so font changes means someone is angry in your world? Carefull there - you don't want to fall off the edge of it ;D

Do you mind me asking how exactly you were intending to receive this "example of observable evidence" without reading the replies? .....were you waiting for a burning bush with a youtube link attached to it perhaps? ;)


(http://ss.war2.ru/ss/9322.gif)

Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 27, 2017, 06:47:56 AM
@Lambchops you write very angry lol. Do your veins pop out your head while you type?

And ingog I will respond to ur reply just haven't gotten a chance to type a reply.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: woofy on May 28, 2017, 06:59:56 AM
sooooooo, if something takes millions/billions of years to happen, it mustn't have happened and the only solution is god. gotcha
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: tora is a simp bitch for billionaires on May 28, 2017, 10:05:41 AM
he said evolution not real because not observable, i asked what are vestiges then, he then asked a question about fish.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on May 28, 2017, 10:52:53 AM
You keep bringing up religion lol. Where did I post anything about religion?
All I'm saying is evolution is not provable thus it is a theory and thus is a belief. You can throw all the scientific research u want at it but at the end of the day you can't prove humans evolved from a monkey or whatever.
There is no observable evidence of any species turning from one kind into another. Like a cat turning into a dog etc.
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Lambchops on May 29, 2017, 01:28:24 AM
Humans did not evolve from monkeys.
Cats do not turn into dogs.

Evolution has been proved, because the mechanism has been proved. It does not take millions of years to prove that:

   a) DNA replication occasionally suffers from random flaws.
   b) Changes in DNA will affect the physiology of the organism that it produces.
   c) Organisms who's physiology is better suited to their environment will be more successfull at replicating their DNA

That's really all you need to prove, everything else is just a logical extension of those FACTS. Just as I dont have to actually throw myself into the sun to prove I will be burnt, just knowing it's hot, and that hot things will burn me is sufficiant.

(https://i.imgur.com/bbHMkfd.png)
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: ~ToRa~ on June 10, 2017, 01:19:55 PM
Title: Re: Theory of evolution
Post by: Igognito on June 10, 2017, 03:44:35 PM
Lol Tora,

that video has so many mistakes that you can only call it a farce!

The speaker even goes as far as to mix the 2nd law of thermodynamics (which speak about entropy) to claim that Evolution is wrong.

By the way just because that is hilarious I will explain why that claim in the video is wrong.

First of all, the 2nd law of thermodynamics say: that the entropy of a closed system can only remain the same or increase. (That in simple words is that a closed system only downgrades)
The video wants to say that evolution theory is wrong because by the 2nd law of thermodynamics you can not create something greater.

2 errors on the video claim:
1st) The law only applies for a closed system. (Otherwise we would never be able to build anything)
2nd) Evolution never claims that a mutation is of higher "energy/matter" worth! Thus actually evolution does not violate at all the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Cheerios