For those Ignorant regarding evolution.

[charrison]

Originally posted by: The Scientist
For those of you who are ignorant regarding evolution www.talkorigins.org is a good place to educate yourselves.

Now, eveolution is what we know, it's a theory, but it is a scientific theory along with other theories like the theory of gravity.

So let me start by explaining what a scientific theory is.

A scientific theory is the explanation of the available evidence, if new evidence are supplied then the theory either changes or ceases to exist, it is falsifiable, that means, to all you numbnuts out there, that if contradicting evidence is discovered the theory changes or a new theory replaces the old one, this is what makes the theory of evolution robust.

ID is basically a calculation, an equation used to disprove evolution using statistical equations, the same equations can be used to prove that you won't get wet if you go outside when it rains since the probability of exactly those water molecules falling on your head is beyond probable according to the ID equation, the same goes for you being born, it's also beyond the probablility of those equations.

IOW, if you want to belive ID, you have to accept that you do not exist.

Now on to the last but not least point, while ID involves the origin the theory of evolution does NOT, so the claim that one could replace the other is ridiculous at best.

And yes, we do know that evolution is true, i use it every day in my work.

Let me first say, that I believe evolution is the correct theory at this point and that most of the proponents of ID are nuts.

That being said, there are still many unanswered questions on how we got from primordial soup to our current state. The theory of evolution does not prove or disprove the existance of god or divine guidance in evolutionary travel.

Because of that, I find that your statement of truth a bit misleading.

 

[Deudalus]

Hehehe, oh man, the setup is so delicious, if it wasn't because this is cquarks smash hit to take i'd do it.

This man has NO idea of Einstein, Newton, the laws of thermodynamics, the laws of physics or the theory of evolution, he is throwing out statements that are mere guesses and he misses his target by 96^32 miles.

Einstein:

[A law] is more impressive the greater the simplicity of its premises, the more different are the kinds of things it relates, and the more extended its range of applicability. Therefore, the deep impression which classical thermodynamics made on me. It is the only physical theory of universal content, which I am convinced, that within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts will never be overthrown.

Albert Einstein, quoted in M.J. Klein, Thermodynamics in Einstein's Universe, in Science, 157 (1967), p. 509.


The law that entropy always increases -- the second law of thermodynamics -- holds I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much worse for Maxwell equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation - well these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of Thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation.

Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, in The Nature of the Physical World. Maxmillan, New York, 1948, p. 74.


And the trump card:

"In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" (after Lisa constructs a perpetual motion machine whose energy increases with time) ? Homer Simpson

 

[Deudalus]

Let me first say, that I believe evolution is the correct theory at this point and that most of the proponents of ID are nuts.

That being said, there are still many unanswered questions on how we got from primordial soup to our current state. The theory of evolution does not prove or disprove the existance of god or divine guidance in evolutionary travel.

Because of that, I find that your statement of truth a bit misleading.

My point exactly.

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: The Scientist
For those of you who are ignorant regarding evolution www.talkorigins.org is a good place to educate yourselves.

Now, eveolution is what we know, it's a theory, but it is a scientific theory along with other theories like the theory of gravity.

So let me start by explaining what a scientific theory is.

A scientific theory is the explanation of the available evidence, if new evidence are supplied then the theory either changes or ceases to exist, it is falsifiable, that means, to all you numbnuts out there, that if contradicting evidence is discovered the theory changes or a new theory replaces the old one, this is what makes the theory of evolution robust.

ID is basically a calculation, an equation used to disprove evolution using statistical equations, the same equations can be used to prove that you won't get wet if you go outside when it rains since the probability of exactly those water molecules falling on your head is beyond probable according to the ID equation, the same goes for you being born, it's also beyond the probablility of those equations.

IOW, if you want to belive ID, you have to accept that you do not exist.

Now on to the last but not least point, while ID involves the origin the theory of evolution does NOT, so the claim that one could replace the other is ridiculous at best.

And yes, we do know that evolution is true, i use it every day in my work.

Let me first say, that I believe evolution is the correct theory at this point and that most of the proponents of ID are nuts.

That being said, there are still many unanswered questions on how we got from primordial soup to our current state. The theory of evolution does not prove or disprove the existance of god or divine guidance in evolutionary travel.

Because of that, I find that your statement of truth a bit misleading.

I see, so when we use evolution to predict the virus evolvments then we should expect for it to be wrong, at least one time of the thousands of times i've done it, correct, well guess what, it's never incorrect, it is trut as much as gravity is truth, i respect your doubts but that is probably because you know the gist of it but not the practice, the practice would be what i do, if i am wrong about this, the next flu virus is going to have a much severer impact in europe than the earlier ones, which i did use evolution to predict too, now, this sounds like i am doing this on my own, of course that isn't the case, but i am in an integral part of this.

I'm sure there are loads of things you know better than me, this, i know better than you, either you trust me or you look it up, you are very welcome to do so and you'll find that i am correct.

Evolution is true, there is NO doubt about that. We have to realize this, this is the truth, this is what we KNOW, it's as true as gravity and there is NO opposing scientific theory, no falsifying evidence, NO evidence to the contrary and MANY evidence pointing towards it.

This is truth, as we know it.

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Deudalus

Hehehe, oh man, the setup is so delicious, if it wasn't because this is cquarks smash hit to take i'd do it.

This man has NO idea of Einstein, Newton, the laws of thermodynamics, the laws of physics or the theory of evolution, he is throwing out statements that are mere guesses and he misses his target by 96^32 miles.

Einstein:

[A law] is more impressive the greater the simplicity of its premises, the more different are the kinds of things it relates, and the more extended its range of applicability. Therefore, the deep impression which classical thermodynamics made on me. It is the only physical theory of universal content, which I am convinced, that within the framework of applicability of its basic concepts will never be overthrown.

Albert Einstein, quoted in M.J. Klein, Thermodynamics in Einstein's Universe, in Science, 157 (1967), p. 509.


The law that entropy always increases -- the second law of thermodynamics -- holds I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations - then so much worse for Maxwell equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation - well these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of Thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation.

Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, in The Nature of the Physical World. Maxmillan, New York, 1948, p. 74.


And the trump card:

"In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" (after Lisa constructs a perpetual motion machine whose energy increases with time) ? Homer Simpson

Any idiot (obviously) can quote scientific laws, now use it to prove something to me.

 

[Deudalus]

I see, so when we use evolution to predict the virus evolvments then we should expect for it to be wrong, at least one time of the thousands of times i've done it, correct, well guess what, it's never incorrect, it is trut as much as gravity is truth, i respect your doubts but that is probably because you know the gist of it but not the practice, the practice would be what i do, if i am wrong about this, the next flu virus is going to have a much severer impact in europe than the earlier ones, which i did use evolution to predict too, now, this sounds like i am doing this on my own, of course that isn't the case, but i am in an integral part of this.

I'm sure there are loads of things you know better than me, this, i know better than you, either you trust me or you look it up, you are very welcome to do so and you'll find that i am correct.

Evolution is true, there is NO doubt about that. We have to realize this, this is the truth, this is what we KNOW, it's as true as gravity and there is NO opposing scientific theory, no falsifying evidence, NO evidence to the contrary and MANY evidence pointing towards it.

This is truth, as we know it.

Pardon me if I don't buy it.

I'm sorry but the only actual attempt to give scientific evidence thus far to back up an opinion has been from me and dullard.

All you have really done is make statements that "omg you don't agree but I am a scientists and you know nothing."

Well then, show your knowledge.

Give me something to at least prove you are a scientists.

Give me something scientific to back up your assertion not just your opinion.


As far as this thread goes if it gets much more name-droppy and boastful on your part then I'll simply have to retort with "well I'm God and I know better than you because I created all" now prove me wrong. :roll:

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Deudalus

I see, so when we use evolution to predict the virus evolvments then we should expect for it to be wrong, at least one time of the thousands of times i've done it, correct, well guess what, it's never incorrect, it is trut as much as gravity is truth, i respect your doubts but that is probably because you know the gist of it but not the practice, the practice would be what i do, if i am wrong about this, the next flu virus is going to have a much severer impact in europe than the earlier ones, which i did use evolution to predict too, now, this sounds like i am doing this on my own, of course that isn't the case, but i am in an integral part of this.

I'm sure there are loads of things you know better than me, this, i know better than you, either you trust me or you look it up, you are very welcome to do so and you'll find that i am correct.

Evolution is true, there is NO doubt about that. We have to realize this, this is the truth, this is what we KNOW, it's as true as gravity and there is NO opposing scientific theory, no falsifying evidence, NO evidence to the contrary and MANY evidence pointing towards it.

This is truth, as we know it.

Pardon me if I don't buy it.

I'm sorry but the only actual attempt to give scientific evidence thus far to back up an opinion has been from me and dullard.

All you have really done is make statements that "omg you don't agree but I am a scientists and you know nothing."

Well then, show your knowledge.

Give me something to at least prove you are a scientists.

Give me something scientific to back up your assertion not just your opinion.


As far as this thread goes if it gets much more name-droppy and boastful on your part then I'll simply have to retort with "well I'm God and I know better than you because I created all" now prove me wrong. :roll:

*shakes head*

Ecucating the complete morons is hard, i tried and failed. You want to stay a moron and refuse to listen, fine by me, but i'll refer to this post in the future.

 

[The Scientist]

AGAIN, for you morons who do NOT get it, www.talkorigins.com have all the evidence, do you want me to repost it for your ignorance again and again and again?

How about you just stup being a stupid imbecil and educate yourself and leave the argument alone?

 

[Tab]

I have my own question that doesn't involve spewing insults at the OPs...

Now, we're commonly told that evolution is just a theory, not a fact. Then we've got other guys who are saying, the evolution is a fact as it's been witnessed, recorded and what not.

How can it be both a fact and a theory?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: The Scientist
For those of you who are ignorant regarding evolution www.talkorigins.org is a good place to educate yourselves.

Now, eveolution is what we know, it's a theory, but it is a scientific theory along with other theories like the theory of gravity.

So let me start by explaining what a scientific theory is.

A scientific theory is the explanation of the available evidence, if new evidence are supplied then the theory either changes or ceases to exist, it is falsifiable, that means, to all you numbnuts out there, that if contradicting evidence is discovered the theory changes or a new theory replaces the old one, this is what makes the theory of evolution robust.

FWIW, you appear to be arguing that the theory of evolution is just as robust as the theory of gravity... and nothing else without discussing the actual merits of the theory itself.
I am NOT arguing or disputing the theory of evolution, just the illogical (and rather absurdly condescending) presentation of your argument. The words "ignorant" and "numbnuts," along with the obvious recitation of what a theory is, combined with your unsubstantiated self-appeal to authority, really give your post all the appearance of a flamebait troll.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Tab
I have my own question that doesn't involve spewing insults at the OPs...

Considering that the OP began spewing insults first, right in his thread title and then in his every post thereafter, I really don't have any sympathy for him if others start spewing insults back.

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: The Scientist
For those of you who are ignorant regarding evolution www.talkorigins.org is a good place to educate yourselves.

Now, eveolution is what we know, it's a theory, but it is a scientific theory along with other theories like the theory of gravity.

So let me start by explaining what a scientific theory is.

A scientific theory is the explanation of the available evidence, if new evidence are supplied then the theory either changes or ceases to exist, it is falsifiable, that means, to all you numbnuts out there, that if contradicting evidence is discovered the theory changes or a new theory replaces the old one, this is what makes the theory of evolution robust.

FWIW, you appear to be arguing that the theory of evolution is just as robust as the theory of gravity... and nothing else without discussing the actual merits of the theory itself.
I am NOT arguing or disputing the theory of evolution, just the illogical (and rather absurdly condescending) presentation of your argument. The words "ignorant" and "numbnuts," along with the obvious recitation of what a theory is, combined with your unsubstantiated self-appeal to authority, really give your post all the appearance of a flamebait troll.

Things got out of hand and i got carried away, it happens and yeah, it irritates me just as it would irritate a programmer to hear someone argue an idea that doesn't work and never stopping with his meainingless debate about how it does work his way too when obviously, it doesn't.

If anyone is willing to discuss it on an intellectual level where we can reason with the amount of evicence for and against it i'm quite willing to have that debate.

This would, of course, leave out anything else than the more obvious opposing ideas and be presented as such in a sound debate.

Vic, i think this thread has to start over for the reasonable debate to begin, It was not my intention to neither flamebait nor troll this forum.

Just to present a bit of knowledge that stands on it's own for anyone who feels like looking it up, if you read my OP, you'll see that it does just that.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Tab
I have my own question that doesn't involve spewing insults at the OPs...

Considering that the OP began spewing insults first, right in his thread title and then in his every post thereafter, I really don't have any sympathy for him if others start spewing insults back.

You already said it yourself, there isn't much good in this forum. Would you like me to pour more gasoline on the fire? IMHO, he sounds just like you, an elitist.

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Tab
I have my own question that doesn't involve spewing insults at the OPs...

Now, we're commonly told that evolution is just a theory, not a fact. Then we've got other guys who are saying, the evolution is a fact as it's been witnessed, recorded and what not.

How can it be both a fact and a theory?

Read the OP, the theory of evolution is an explanation of the evidence found, the evidence are also part of evolution and as such they are facts, the theory is an explanation of the findings.

In that, these facts stand on their own, the theory describes these facts, the end result is something that is considered AS robust and in some cases MORE robust than the theory and fact of gravity.

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Tab
I have my own question that doesn't involve spewing insults at the OPs...

Considering that the OP began spewing insults first, right in his thread title and then in his every post thereafter, I really don't have any sympathy for him if others start spewing insults back.

You already said it yourself, there isn't much good in this forum. Would you like me to pour more gasoline on the fire? IMHO, he sounds just like you, an elitist.

That was not my intention, perhaps i am among the elite on this subject in this forum but i'm sure you are and act like it on a different subject somewhere else?

Don't be so quick to judge Tab, before you know it, you're the one on trial.

 

[Stunt]

"Topic Title: For those Ignorant regarding evolution.
Topic Summary: It's what i do."

You have a job where you are actively ignorant to evolution?...:laugh:

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: Deudalus

If everything becomes disorganized over time, how does high entropy water become low entropy ice without divine intervention? Likewise, how does an acorn become an oak tree?

An acorn would actually be deemed as more complex than the oak tree though not as immense I would imagine. If that is false then by all means prove otherwise. But just because something grows does not mean it becomes more complex, it is simply getting larger.

If you are truly trying to discredit the second law of thermodynamics then you can argue with Einstein, Newton, and all of the other great scientists of the past and today who consider it fact.

You will be hard pressed to even find an evolution proponent that will take your line here. They are all continuing to argue that evolution does not break the 2nd law of thermodynamics, not that it is false which is apparently what you are trying to argue.

I've got a PhD in physics; I understand thermodynamics and have not suggested that the second law is invalid in my posts. I've just offered you some questions to help you understand the consequences of your view of thermodynamics.

In the oak tree example, the acorn cells have differentiated into a wide variety of tissues and a large scale structure has formed, making it more complex than the acorn. However, let's return to the water freezing into ice problem, as it's a simpler example.

You start with disordered liquid water at 0C, which then freezes, forming a highly ordered hexagonal crystal lattice. How can you explain this if ordered systems always become disordered? Is there something about the second law that you've forgotten that allows this to happen or does water freezing require divine intervention?

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Stunt
"Topic Title: For those Ignorant regarding evolution.
Topic Summary: It's what i do."

You have a job where you are actively ignorant to evolution?...:laugh:

LMAO! Yeah, besides being kinda smart, i'm kinda stupid.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: The Scientist

Originally posted by: Stunt
"Topic Title: For those Ignorant regarding evolution.
Topic Summary: It's what i do."

You have a job where you are actively ignorant to evolution?...:laugh:

LMAO! Yeah, besides being kinda smart, i'm kinda stupid.

LOL! :laugh::thumbsup:

Point taken on your response to your post. And Tab is actually right, I have a tendency to get a bit hot-headed myself.

BTW, I do appreciate your comment, "Evolution, per definition (which you are obviously to daft to get) could not have CREATED life. That's another theory, not related to evolution."
My biggest complaint about threads regarding evolution is that so many people confuse evolution with abiogenesis, apparently ignorant (or are they?) that they are 2 separate theories. I'm not a big fan of comparing evolution to gravity either, as the latter is much more readily obvious than the former (which to my mind makes the comparison a kind of strawman, implying that those who do not accept evolution also deny gravity). Otherwise, theories of how we got here are really of little importance to me compared to the reality that we are here. But then again, evolution is not a part of my profession.

 

[Tab]

I don't have a problem with elitists, hell I'll admit I've acted like an elitist multiple times. I just have a problem when we just get hot-headed and don't present agruments.

Can someone address my question.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Tab
I don't have a problem with elitists, hell I'll admit I've acted like an elitist multiple times. I just have a problem when we just get hot-headed and don't present agruments.

Can someone address my question.

What? At $3/gal. you best be buying that gasoline yourself!

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: The Scientist

Originally posted by: Stunt
"Topic Title: For those Ignorant regarding evolution.
Topic Summary: It's what i do."

You have a job where you are actively ignorant to evolution?...:laugh:

LMAO! Yeah, besides being kinda smart, i'm kinda stupid.

LOL! :laugh::thumbsup:

Point taken on your response to your post. And Tab is actually right, I have a tendency to get a bit hot-headed myself.

BTW, I do appreciate your comment, "Evolution, per definition (which you are obviously to daft to get) could not have CREATED life. That's another theory, not related to evolution."
My biggest complaint about threads regarding evolution is that so many people confuse evolution with abiogenesis, apparently ignorant (or are they?) that they are 2 separate theories. I'm not a big fan of comparing evolution to gravity either, as the latter is much more readily obvious than the former (which to my mind makes the comparison a kind of strawman, implying that those who do not accept evolution also deny gravity). Otherwise, theories of how we got here are really of little importance to me compared to the reality that we are here. But then again, evolution is not a part of my profession.

I know the comparison limps on only one leg, but when people fail to recognize the validity of a scientific theory as opposed to a philosophical theory it's IMO a valid comparison, both are scientific theories and both have enough evidence to back them up to be considered as valid in the scientific community, one is to the other as a barn is to a piece of belly button lint though so it's not very comparable in that way.

Evolution, as we know it and use it is a fact of reality, you can either deny reality or accept it, but that is the only two choices you have from my point of view, this is what i do, i study the viruses and yes, this fall, just as last fall, we have the vaccines ready, this is very costly though and even people with premium insurances in the US won't get this, all elderly and sick in EU and every other nation i am aware of (this includes all or eastern Europe and Russia, all of asia including NC) are getting it.

I'm not saying anyone HAS to believe in it, since i don't want the scientologists to stop waiting for that UFO or the christians stop waiting for the EU to be the next empire and for the antichrist to rise withing (you'd be surprised how many, you really would), but as of this moment on, and the past reality, this is what we are dealing with, evolution is truth, to the best of our knowledge, and i can promise you Vic, if i'd ever get hold of a better version, i'll tell you first.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Tab
I don't have a problem with elitists, hell I'll admit I've acted like an elitist multiple times. I just have a problem when we just get hot-headed and don't present agruments.

Can someone address my question.

What? At $3/gal. you best be buying that gasoline yourself!

:evil:

 

[The Scientist]

Originally posted by: Tab
I don't have a problem with elitists, hell I'll admit I've acted like an elitist multiple times. I just have a problem when we just get hot-headed and don't present agruments.

Can someone address my question.

You had a question?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: The Scientist

Originally posted by: Tab
I don't have a problem with elitists, hell I'll admit I've acted like an elitist multiple times. I just have a problem when we just get hot-headed and don't present agruments.

Can someone address my question.

You had a question?

Didn't notice you answered it, opps.