We Shouldn't Always Believe What the "Leading Experts" Tell Us about Evolution

[Dos Equis]

Wow, in the mists of all the intellectual elitists snobbery crap there seems to be a whole lots of contradicting stuff on something that's supposed to be such a FACT.   

Props to you loco for going to extra mile to research it.

I still believe evolution still exists in some form or another, while it may not be entirely what the "scientists" think it is at the moment.

lol at "intellectual elitists snobbery crap."     I like it. 

Well done loco.

Who let the dogs out?!   

[loco]

lol at "intellectual elitists snobbery crap."     I like it. 

Well done loco.

Who let the dogs out?!   

 

[Dos Equis]

LOL!   

[Deicide]

Wow, in the mists of all the intellectual elitists snobbery crap there seems to be a whole lots of contradicting stuff on something that's supposed to be such a FACT.   

Props to you loco for going to extra mile to research it.

I still believe evolution still exists in some form or another, while it may not be entirely what the "scientists" think it is at the moment.

Mate, when you have your Phd is a scientific field, do go ahead and make such comments, if not, refain from them...

[OzmO]

Mate, when you have your Phd is a scientific field, do go ahead and make such comments, if not, refain from them...

I'll make what ever fcuking bloody comments I want to make.  Thank you.   

And if your precious "theory of evolution" was that scientifically sound there wouldn't so many contradictions and debate to the extent of non-scientists like my self or loco and such being able to question it.

Fact of the matter is, science over the last hundreds of years or so has made plenty of assumptions it considered near fact only to be proved wrong by some discovery or invention.

So for me to question science is perfectly kosher especially when it comes to a theory about something that has NEVER been observed according to our resident experts  .   


P.S.  When your grammar is above middle school level feel free to respond.       I know it was just a typo!

 

[NeoSeminole]

And if your precious "theory of evolution" was that scientifically sound there wouldn't so many contradictions and debate to the extent of non-scientists like my self or loco and such being able to question it.

I assure you these so-called "contradictions" reflect your ignorance on the subject matter rather than expose any weaknesses in evolutionary theory.

[Deicide]

I'll make what ever fcuking bloody comments I want to make.  Thank you.   

And if your precious "theory of evolution" was that scientifically sound there wouldn't so many contradictions and debate to the extent of non-scientists like my self or loco and such being able to question it.

Fact of the matter is, science over the last hundreds of years or so has made plenty of assumptions it considered near fact only to be proved wrong by some discovery or invention.

So for me to question science is perfectly kosher especially when it comes to a theory about something that has NEVER been observed according to our resident experts  .   


P.S.  When your grammar is above middle school level feel free to respond.       I know it was just a typo!

 

Indeed it was a typo.

Regardless, the entire science of modern biology and its offshoots as well as other disciplines such as medicine, are based on evolution. And they have it all wrong after all...

[OzmO]

I assure you these so-called "contradictions" reflect your ignorance on the subject matter rather than expose any weaknesses in evolutionary theory.

Assure away to your ape heart's desire.

It's not me making the contradictions but instead fellow "scientists with PHD's"   

I wonder if those scientists were so weak they had to result to insults in a debate like yourself.

 

[OzmO]

Indeed it was a typo.

Regardless, the entire science of modern biology and its offshoots as well as other disciplines such as medicine, are based on evolution. And they have it all wrong after all...

I agree with you.  But look at how medicine has developed over the last 500 years.  There were many things they considered solid fact only to be proved wrong by a discovery or invention.  That's why i said what i said about: " it may not be entirely what the "scientists" think it is at the moment."

[NeoSeminole]

It's not me making the contradictions but instead fellow "scientists with PHD's"

such as?

[Deicide]

Assure away to your ape heart's desire.

It's not me making the contradictions but instead fellow "scientists with PHD's"   

I wonder if those scientists were so weak they had to result to insults in a debate like yourself.

 

Of course there is some disagreement on specifics, most prominently punctuated equilibrium and the Cambrian Explosion, but they are arguing how it happened, not that it DID not happen. Savy?

[OzmO]

such as?

So ALL scientists are in agreement with ALL aspects of the theory of evolution and ALL believe it to be fact?

[OzmO]

Of course there is some disagreement on specifics, most prominently punctuated equilibrium and the Cambrian Explosion, but they are arguing how it happened, not that it DID not happen. Savy?

I understand based on the evidence why evolution is considered factual.  But based on evidence only, as not being complete, becuase it hasn't been observed and the chance of new discoveries opens the possibility that some predictions/assumptions are wrong as this kind of thing has happened through out recorded scientific history.  Otherwise, evolution would be as a factual as the earth revolving around the sun.

[Deicide]

I understand based on the evidence why evolution is considered factual.  But based on evidence only, as not being complete, becuase it hasn't been observed and the chance of new discoveries opens the possibility that some predictions/assumptions are wrong as this kind of thing has happened through out recorded scientific history.  Otherwise, evolution would be as a factual as the earth revolving around the sun.

...What...exactly do you claim happened...if I might ask...?

[OzmO]

...What...exactly do you claim happened...if I might ask...?

I have nothing to claim.  I'm not making the point i'm making becuase i have some "godly religious answer" I'm only saying that we don't know 100% for sure about evolution.

I'm very much non-religious.

[Deicide]

I have nothing to claim.  I'm not making the point i'm making becuase i have some "godly religious answer" I'm only saying that we don't know 100% for sure about evolution.

I'm very much non-religious.

We don't know every itsy bitsy detail but we know the 90% gist of it...

Or we can teach people Adam and Eve and other fairy tales...would be much better right?

[OzmO]

We don't know every itsy bitsy detail but we know the 90% gist of it...

Or we can teach people Adam and Eve and other fairy tales...would be much better right?

I don't think creationism should be taught in school, not even as an alternative....unless it's billed as a "belief"

And i'm not against teaching evolution in schools as long as it's not billed as fact.

[NeoSeminole]

So ALL scientists are in agreement with ALL aspects of the theory of evolution and ALL believe it to be fact?

I'm sorry, but I don't see any names in your post. Monster backing up your claim.

[NeoSeminole]

I'm only saying that we don't know 100% for sure about evolution.

you do realize this pretty much applies to everything? There is such a thing as proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

[OzmO]

I'm sorry, but I don't see any names in your post. Monster backing up your claim.

yeah w/e   

Monster avoidance of the question.

[OzmO]

you do realize this pretty much applies to everything? There is such a thing as proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

If evolution was at that point there wouldn't be the debate.

But i do agree, it's about as close as it can get at the moment.

[Deicide]

If evolution was at that point there wouldn't be the debate.

But i do agree, it's about as close as it can get at the moment.

There is no debate as to the fact of evolution, just how it happened in some cases.

[Deicide]

I don't think creationism should be taught in school, not even as an alternative....unless it's billed as a "belief"

And i'm not against teaching evolution in schools as long as it's not billed as fact.

So evolution should be put on par with the holy book of fairy tales?

[columbusdude82]

I don't think creationism should be taught in school, not even as an alternative....unless it's billed as a "belief"

And i'm not against teaching evolution in schools as long as it's not billed as fact.

Presumably you are qualified to decide what can and can't be taught in science classes in school because you have a PhD in molecular biology? Or perhaps you are a tenured professor in nuclear physics?

Before passing judgment on scientific ideas that are the product of centuries of hard labor on the part of humanity's greatest minds, perhaps you should acquaint yourself a bit with those ideas.

No, reading posts on Getbig doesn't count

[OzmO]

So evolution should be put on par with the holy book of fairy tales?

No, not at all.